Bronco's board Luck vs. Wilson debate

[bigskydoc]

It would be more interesting and instructional to look at the numbers for the QB's first two complete seasons for comparison.

Screw comparisons to just the first two years in the league. Wilson already compares favorably to the sure-fire Hall of Fame veterans over their entire illustrious careers.

Yes he compares favorably to the entire careers (except for total yards, duh), but it isn't really fair to him to run that comparison.

Just because I mentioned it, here are the stats for the first two complete seasons for these QB's. Rodgers has a huge advantage here as he had several years of sitting behind Farve before taking over the reigns and playing a complete season. Brady didn't start a complete season until his third year. Brees had one year riding the bench and a shortened 3rd season. I also split the rating into years as I think it is more interesting than combining them.



Luck - Completion percentage: 57.0% Yards: 8,196 TD:INT ratio: 1.7 TDs per INT Rating: 76.5 - 87

Manning - Completion percentage: 59.3% Yards: 7,874 TD:INT ratio: 1.2 TDs per INT Rating: 71.2 - 90.7

Dang3rus - Completion percentage: 63.6% Yards: 6,475 TD:INT ratio: 2.74 TDs per INT Rating: 100 - 101.2

Rodgers - Completion percentage: 64.2% Yards: 8,472 TD:INT ratio: 2.9 TDs per INT Rating: 93.8 - 103.2

Brees - Completion percentage: 59.5% Yards: 5,392 TD:INT ratio: 0.9 TDs per INT Rating: 76.9 - 67.5

Brady - Completion percentage: 61.2% Yards: 7,384 TD:INT ratio: 1.96 TDs per INT Rating: 85.7 - 85.9


All in all, it's sort of a dumb exercise. How can you compare QB's in such different systems.

Personally, I believe that Russ is a better QB than Luck and if you put him in a system that asks/ allows the QB to put up gaudy fantasy numbers he would put up those numbers. We have seen him flash individual games like this when asked/ allowed. If you put Luck into Carroll's system, I'm not convinced that he would have the discipline to sacrifice his own ego and stats, just play within the system, and win. I think there would be a lot of friction there. No way to prove it, just a gut feeling.

At this point, you can't separate Wilson's success from Carroll any more than you can separate Brady's success from Belichick. Doesn't mean they aren't both phenomenal QB's, but they have a symbiotic relationship with their coaches, systems, and teams. With the way the system is evolving here in Seattle, it is looking like we are going to see a lot more fantasy numbers from Russ in the (very?) near future, but never at the expense of the ultimate goal, winning.

Who has more wins in the first two years? NOBODY!

- bsd

 

[HansGruber]

We could have a debate probably still today over who was better: Dan Marino or Joe Montana. When I was younger and earlier in their career, I probably would have gone with Marino. After a while, though, the wins and the rings just become too much to argue against.

Heck, you could even say the same thing of Peyton and Brady.

I think the same will happen with Luck and Wilson.

http://forums.denverbroncos.com/showthread.php?232077-Luck-or-Wilson!

Interesting to see other fan's take on this oft mentioned debate. Pretty much plays out like you expect, with pretty much everyone backing Luck. Honestly I would have thought the Bronco's fans would be a little bit higher on Wilson as they saw him shred their D first hand, but it isn't so.

There is one guy supporting Wilson (Seahawks fan?). Maybe I'm just biased but he's been making the best argument.

Side note: are we more open to advanced football metrics than other fanbases? These Donkey fans really don't trust 'em it seems.

But no serious football fan at the time argued Marino. They still don't.

Like Manning and Luck, Marino was terrible in the clutch. And worse in the postseason.

I've never understood the hype behind some of these guys. I guess some folks just have a hard time accepting when they've been sold a bad bill of goods.

I played fantasy football since 1990. All pencil and newspaper back then. A league consisting of a few sportswriters for the Tri City Herald. I can tell you right now, that from a fantasy perspective, Marino and Kelley were statistical monsters.

More so than Elway or Montana. Only when Bret Farve came along, did Marino get overtaken as top dog at the quarterback position. I'm talking about a time when my roster had Robert Smith, Keith Byars, Mark Duper, and Sterling Sharpe. Marino holds the all time record for most points in a game and in a season for that league (disbanded fifteen years ago). I should know as I was commissioner and kept the books (again all pencil, paper, and spreadsheet)

Marino's defense was horrid for the majority of his career. Marino threw for 48 touchdowns in his second season (before the "no contact after five yards" rule). He dismantled (and prevented a perfect season for) the vaunted 85 Bears. In his second season, Wilson threw for 26 and got a ring. I'll take the ring, but I'm not going to take anything away from the great Dan Marino.


Edited: found some old rosters.....disbanded fifteen years ago, not ten.

I guess you weren't really familiar with the Dolphins, then. Marino had a great defense in 83-84 and that's the only reason they got to a Superbowl.

Further, he had some good receivers. But only one person can be blamed for INTs, as much as the fantasy geeks may disagree. Those fall squarely on the QB. And Marino, just like Farvre, Manning and Luck, was really good at throwing INTs in the clutch and in the postseason.

Your reference to him being a great fantasy quarterback and all those yards and TDs is exactly my point. Who gives a crap? He was a choker. I'd rather have a Lombardi.

 

[chris98251]

Question here, Why do we care about a debate on the Broncos board that we have here every couple of weeks anyway?

 

[Seahawk Sailor]

Luck - Completion percentage: 57.0% Yards: 8,196 TD:INT ratio: 1.7 TDs per INT Rating: 76.5 - 87

Manning - Completion percentage: 59.3% Yards: 7,874 TD:INT ratio: 1.2 TDs per INT Rating: 71.2 - 90.7

Dang3rus - Completion percentage: 63.6% Yards: 6,475 TD:INT ratio: 2.74 TDs per INT Rating: 100 - 101.2

Rodgers - Completion percentage: 64.2% Yards: 8,472 TD:INT ratio: 2.9 TDs per INT Rating: 93.8 - 103.2

Brees - Completion percentage: 59.5% Yards: 5,392 TD:INT ratio: 0.9 TDs per INT Rating: 76.9 - 67.5

Brady - Completion percentage: 61.2% Yards: 7,384 TD:INT ratio: 1.96 TDs per INT Rating: 85.7 - 85.9

Yea, that's exactly why I said we didn't need to compare just the first two years--this comparison makes it even more glaringly obvious. Wilson already compares favorably to those guys when you add in the fantastic years they've had as seasoned veterans. To just compare the first two years makes it even more obvious Wilson is an elite quarterback.

And if we're talking about pure yardage, which seems to get thrown around a lot, let's look at the yardage Brees (he of the 5,000+ yard season a while back) his first two years. Nobody seems to think Brees is a short-yardage kind of guy who can only function because of a stellar team around him.

Come on, haters, where are your stats to refute this?

 

[WilsonMVP]

Posted this in another thread

Wilson joined Marino (68) and Manning (52) as the only quarterbacks in NFL history to pass for at least 50 touchdowns in their first two seasons. Luck had 46 and had more Throws (1197) than Marino (860), Manning (1108) and Wilson (800).

I swear if the Colts didnt completely tank the year before and seen as the worst team in the league to get Luck along with the most Hype I have seen for a QB in years coming out of the draft Luck would be seen as merely an average QB.

Compare Lucks #'s to any of the other guys who have been in the league the last 3 years or so.

Lucks first 2 years
682/1,197 57.0% 8,196yards 46TD/27INTs 81.5 QB rating

Why isnt Dalton considered as good as Luck is? Its not like the Bengals were some powerhouse team.

Daltons first 2 years
629/1044 60.2% 7067yards 47TD/29INTS 83.9 rating

Dalton with less throws only had 1 less TD, 2 more ints, and a better completion % and QB rating. Yet Daltons perception of how good a QB is nowhere near luck. Last year, Daltons 3rd year, he had more TDs, yards and QB rating, but had more INTs than Luck.

Kaepernick
382/639 59.8% 5,046yards 31TD/11INT 93.8rating

Kaep had 558 less throws than Luck in basically 3 less games but only had 15less TDs and a WAY better QB rating. Outside of playing Seattle he only has 6 career INTS.


Newton first 2 years:
590/1002 58.8% 7920yards 40TD/29INT 85.3 QB Rating. Also had 22 rushing TDs, Luck had 9, so Newton had more TDs total.

Looking at those Stats how can anyone say Luck is head and shoulders above anybody. He is solidly in the Mix with Dalton, Kaep and Newton IMO.

Also we saw what Nick Foles did last year. If he can have replicate another year like he had last year he is easily in the conversation with Wilson and Luck

 

[rigelian]

I think a good argument could be made for Nick Files, just need to see if defenses hamper him this year.

Almost on cue, an article in Rolling Stone making the case against Andrew Luck. http://www.rollingstone.com/culture/fea ... k-20140902

 

[RolandDeschain]

Side note: are we more open to advanced football metrics than other fanbases? These Donkey fans really don't trust 'em it seems.

Yes, and it probably helps that some of us (myself & Kearly come to mind) regularly espouse the wonders of DVOA from Football Outsiders, the best advanced statistic in professional football.

(I may have sprained a muscle patting myself on the back with this one.)

Almost on cue, an article in Rolling Stone making the case against Andrew Luck. http://www.rollingstone.com/culture/fea ... k-20140902

Great article. Not just because I agree with it, but it points out some of the BS that Colts fans (and fans of many other teams that buy the media hype still to this day about Luck, *cough IndyHawk*) espouse about his greatness.

 

[TXHawk]

Side note: are we more open to advanced football metrics than other fanbases? These Donkey fans really don't trust 'em it seems.

Yes, and it probably helps that some of us (myself & Kearly come to mind) regularly espouse the wonders of DVOA from Football Outsiders, the best advanced statistic in professional football.

I've spent time on that Broncos forum and they weren't nearly so allergic to stats prior to the Super Bowl when it came to Peyton Manning and the Broncos offense. It's only when talking about Andrew Luck and Russell Wilson that traditional stats and advanced metrics no longer apply.

 

[Jacknut16]

Wilson is better prepared and has a better supporting cast. Hence he is going to have an easier time of it for now anyway.
I think Luck has the higher upside, but if Wilson brings home another ring in the next 5 years I would take that in this championship starved city all day long.

I think that Wilson will be among the league best QBs as long as he has the quickness in his legs, which should be for the next 6-8 years.

Andrew Luck has a chance, if Indy does it right to be one of the greatest ever. There is a long way to go before you can have that conversation however.

 

[WilsonMVP]

Fantastic Article..I think these points are all I need to post on any topic regarding luck from now on

There's a stigma that some people are just "Luck bashers" because of jealousy or not understanding the quiet, unspoken intricacies of football, but it's not bashing when you're pointing out the facts. And there wouldn't need to be a counter-punch if there wasn't an initial punch to begin with. You say Luck is elite; I say:

His passer rating of 87.0 ranked 18th last season.
His 6.7 yards per attempt ranked 26th.
His touchdown percentage was tied for 21st.
He ranked 23rd in completion percentage.
Per ProFootballFocus, he had a lower percentage of "air yards" than 25 other quarterbacks, with just 49.7 percent of his passing yards coming from his throws alone. This means that over 50 percent of his total passing yards came after the catch, implying that his receivers did much of the work.
He had 60 throws to targets that were 20 or more yards down field and completed 17 of those attempts. Russell Wilson also had 60 such throws, completing 27 of them.
A lot is made of his poor offensive line, but he was considered "under pressure" on 37.5-percent of his drop backs, good for 10th-highest percentage in the league. A high number, but Wilson was under pressure for 43.8 percent of his drop backs, highest in the NFL. Luck had 327 dropbacks with at least 2.6 seconds in the pocket, fourth-most in the league. He's had plenty of time to throw.
His career passer rating of 81.5 is just 22nd among qualified passers over that time, lower than such stalwarts as Matt Schaub, Carson Palmer, and Ryan Fitzpatrick. In the same period of time, Christian Ponder has even managed a passer rating of 80.1.


Read more: http://www.rollingstone.com/culture/fea ... z3Ce9S5Vi4
Follow us: @rollingstone on Twitter | RollingStone on Facebook

 

[Erebus]

Anyone notice that was written by Kenneth Arthur, a writer for Field Gulls? I'm glad he got a chance to give these facts greater exposure, but unfortunately it's not like the national media agrees.

 

[Anthony!]

Wilson is better prepared and has a better supporting cast. Hence he is going to have an easier time of it for now anyway.
I think Luck has the higher upside, but if Wilson brings home another ring in the next 5 years I would take that in this championship starved city all day long.

I think that Wilson will be among the league best QBs as long as he has the quickness in his legs, which should be for the next 6-8 years.

Andrew Luck has a chance, if Indy does it right to be one of the greatest ever. There is a long way to go before you can have that conversation however.

Wilson is better prepared but does not have a btter supporting cast at all, Luck has a top 10 pass blocking o-line Wilsons was 32nd. Up until this year Luck had better Wrs, this year who knows, He plays in a much easier division and conference, HIS defense was top 10 in scoring. Luck has plenty around him actually more than Wilson, I mean for a QB the most important thing will be pass protection and your WR, SO that excuse is wrong.

 

[Anthony!]

Fantastic Article..I think these points are all I need to post on any topic regarding luck from now on

There's a stigma that some people are just "Luck bashers" because of jealousy or not understanding the quiet, unspoken intricacies of football, but it's not bashing when you're pointing out the facts. And there wouldn't need to be a counter-punch if there wasn't an initial punch to begin with. You say Luck is elite; I say:

His passer rating of 87.0 ranked 18th last season.
His 6.7 yards per attempt ranked 26th.
His touchdown percentage was tied for 21st.
He ranked 23rd in completion percentage.
Per ProFootballFocus, he had a lower percentage of "air yards" than 25 other quarterbacks, with just 49.7 percent of his passing yards coming from his throws alone. This means that over 50 percent of his total passing yards came after the catch, implying that his receivers did much of the work.
He had 60 throws to targets that were 20 or more yards down field and completed 17 of those attempts. Russell Wilson also had 60 such throws, completing 27 of them.
A lot is made of his poor offensive line, but he was considered "under pressure" on 37.5-percent of his drop backs, good for 10th-highest percentage in the league. A high number, but Wilson was under pressure for 43.8 percent of his drop backs, highest in the NFL. Luck had 327 dropbacks with at least 2.6 seconds in the pocket, fourth-most in the league. He's had plenty of time to throw.
His career passer rating of 81.5 is just 22nd among qualified passers over that time, lower than such stalwarts as Matt Schaub, Carson Palmer, and Ryan Fitzpatrick. In the same period of time, Christian Ponder has even managed a passer rating of 80.1.


Read more: http://www.rollingstone.com/culture/fea ... z3Ce9S5Vi4
Follow us: @rollingstone on Twitter | RollingStone on Facebook

That is because the o-lien thing is BS, Indys o-line was ranked top 10 in pass blocking, Wilsons 32nd dead last. People do not even bother checking the actual facts they just say what they want. The facts show Luck had a better pass blocking o-line than Wilson by far,

 

[Jacknut16]

Wilson is better prepared and has a better supporting cast. Hence he is going to have an easier time of it for now anyway.
I think Luck has the higher upside, but if Wilson brings home another ring in the next 5 years I would take that in this championship starved city all day long.

I think that Wilson will be among the league best QBs as long as he has the quickness in his legs, which should be for the next 6-8 years.

Andrew Luck has a chance, if Indy does it right to be one of the greatest ever. There is a long way to go before you can have that conversation however.

Wilson is better prepared but does not have a btter supporting cast at all, Luck has a top 10 pass blocking o-line Wilsons was 32nd. Up until this year Luck had better Wrs, this year who knows, He plays in a much easier division and conference, HIS defense was top 10 in scoring. Luck has plenty around him actually more than Wilson, I mean for a QB the most important thing will be pass protection and your WR, SO that excuse is wrong.

Wilson scrambles out of the pocket more than Luck does, your line cant hold blocks when the QB is going around the Tackles.

Luck also doesn't have Lynch, that is a game changer.

Luck is really all the Colts have and it shows.

I know Wilson will never do anything wrong in your eyes, but Im just trying to keep it real for everyone else.
Just trying to keep it real here.

 

[Anthony!]

Wilson is better prepared and has a better supporting cast. Hence he is going to have an easier time of it for now anyway.
I think Luck has the higher upside, but if Wilson brings home another ring in the next 5 years I would take that in this championship starved city all day long.

I think that Wilson will be among the league best QBs as long as he has the quickness in his legs, which should be for the next 6-8 years.

Andrew Luck has a chance, if Indy does it right to be one of the greatest ever. There is a long way to go before you can have that conversation however.

Wilson is better prepared but does not have a btter supporting cast at all, Luck has a top 10 pass blocking o-line Wilsons was 32nd. Up until this year Luck had better Wrs, this year who knows, He plays in a much easier division and conference, HIS defense was top 10 in scoring. Luck has plenty around him actually more than Wilson, I mean for a QB the most important thing will be pass protection and your WR, SO that excuse is wrong.

Wilson scrambles out of the pocket more than Luck does, your line cant hold blocks when the QB is going around the Tackles.

Luck also doesn't have Lynch, that is a game changer.

Luck is really all the Colts have and it shows.

I know Wilson will never do anything wrong in your eyes, but Im just trying to keep it real for everyone else.
Just trying to keep it real here.

Wilson scrarmbles because his o-line is bad the facts show it. Luck has more than just him he has a HOF wr and another who is top 20 sorry but get your facts straight I know you will do anything and everything to down play Wilson because that is what you do, but get your facts straight one more time,

Luck better pass blocking o-line
Luck better WRs
Luck easier divisions
Luck easier Conference
Wilson better RB
Wilson better defense

Sure seems like Luck has more advantages than Wilson know you facts. Because like the other forum your wrong here too.



S

 

[KiwiHawk]

Just trying to keep it real here.

That would be an easier task for you if you were able to assess either QB without editorial bias.

 

[Sarlacc83]

If ifs were fifths, we'd all be drunk.

 

[chris98251]

Could we say that Wilson did more with less, not sure you can make that argument now but first two seasons.

 

[Phteven]

Just heard on the Colts v Broncos game that "no qb has ever been better in their first 2 years than andrew luck." What???

 

[Anthony!]

Just heard on the Colts v Broncos game that "no qb has ever been better in their first 2 years than andrew luck." What???

Yeah they forgot the stats and facts in that one obviously/