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

[Tech Worlds]

Luck took at team who was zero wins into a perennial playoff contender all by himself. He has no running game to help him in PA situations, he has no defence. He has to drum up the team success all by himself.

While Wilson's statistics may be better, I'd still take Luck.

Don't be dumb. No person does it by himself. Don't be dumb

 

[Hawkpower]

The more important question is "when are morons gonna stop taking Luck > Wilson as a personal attack or crime against humanity?"

Probably when there is actual evidence to back up the claim.

I don't myself take it personally, but nothing wrong with using statistics to illuminate the media's strange fascination with propping up Mr. Luck.

 

[Tical21]

In these scenarios, I always try to close my eyes and visualize these guys on the opposite team. I think Luck would have won a Super Bowl with us, but you can't knock Russell at all, the guy did it. And I think Russell would have done really well in Indy also, but I would not begrudge anybody who thought Russell wouldn't have as many wins in Indy as Luck has. If Indy's GM called us and offered the trade straight up, I'd probably think long and hard, close my eyes, cross my fingers, and take the trade.

 

[Anthony!]

Luck took at team who was zero wins into a perennial playoff contender all by himself. He has no running game to help him in PA situations, he has no defence. He has to drum up the team success all by himself.

While Wilson's statistics may be better, I'd still take Luck.

That is incorrect on all counts lets look at this

in 2010 Indy had 10 wins, in 2011 they had 2 wins in the suck for luck campaign, that everyone including the experts knew was about getting the #1 pick. IN other words they had a lot more talent than their record says they were playing for the #1 pick.

now you know what they did in 2012 and 2013.

But what you obviously do not know is Luck as a HOF wr, he also has another Wr in the top 10 of NFL players. HIs defense was top 10 in scoring last year hmm. His o-line was ranked top 10 in pass blocking. HIs run game avg the same ypa as Seattle's at 4.3, the difference in yards was a by product of 100 more carries. and in fact they had more rushing tds then we did. Oh and Luck plays in the AFC while Rw plays in the NFc and in the toughest division in the NFL . OH and Luck gets to play in a pass orientated offense

So lets look at this

Rw top 10 scoring defense, worse pass blocking o-line, no top Rw, very good run game, plays in the toughest division
Luck top 10 scoring defense, top 10 pass blocking o-line, top WRs, good run game, plays in one of the easiest divisions.

defense advantage Rw but its close
o-line advantage Luck Huge for luck
Wrs advantage luck Huge for luck
run game advantage Rw
competition advantage Luck Huge
Passing offense Luck huge


So Luck has advantage on Rw in 4 of the 6 areas, as I have always said Luck has more around him then people will admit, and that is because if they admit it they have to admit he is not as good as they hooped.

 

[Anthony!]

IIRC, RW had 5 come from behind late game wins last season, without those 5 wins where would the Seahawks be? That's nearly 1/3 of all the regular season games. If that's not "carrying" the team and "putting the team on his back"
what is?

I understand Luck, IIRC had 6 come from behind wins, but the difference is with Luck in several of those games, they were behind because of Lucks interceptions and poor play earlier in those games (even though he was playing against lesser defenses than the Seahawks). Luck is a good QB, but IMO he is very much overrated at this point in his career.

actually luck only had 4-5 last year not 6.

 

[Sgt. Largent]

The more important question is "when are morons gonna stop taking Luck > Wilson as a personal attack or crime against humanity?"

Probably when there is actual evidence to back up the claim.

I don't myself take it personally, but nothing wrong with using statistics to illuminate the media's strange fascination with propping up Mr. Luck.

1. It's John Clayton, dude is wrong like 75% of the time
2. Luck has far less talent around him. No way Wilson wins a SB is he was on the Colts
3. Both are very good QB's, and will be very good QB's for the next 10 years. So it's not hard to conclude that the "experts" will be divided on which QB is better right now.
4. Wilson is rapidly gaining, but if you secretly poll every GM, I betcha 90% of them would still take Luck over Russell right now. THAT'S what Clayton is really saying. Right now at this point in time Luck's important/value/upside is higher than Russell. But like I said that gap of perception is closing at lightning speed.

 

[Anthony!]

In these scenarios, I always try to close my eyes and visualize these guys on the opposite team. I think Luck would have won a Super Bowl with us, but you can't knock Russell at all, the guy did it. And I think Russell would have done really well in Indy also, but I would not begrudge anybody who thought Russell wouldn't have as many wins in Indy as Luck has. If Indy's GM called us and offered the trade straight up, I'd probably think long and hard, close my eyes, cross my fingers, and take the trade.

Glad you not my GM, Imagine if Rw got to play behind the top 10 pass blocking o-line luck does instead of the worst in the NFL, Imagine of Rw got to throw to a HOF wr and another in the top 10 like luck does, imagine if Rw was in a pass first offense like luck is,. If luck were here for last year we do not make the playoffs, he is to turnover prone in big spots.

NO way would I make the trade Rw has proven he is better, and done it with less.

 

[rigelian]

You really can blame the media on this one. The media typically relies on the "experts". The experts in this case being the GMs, coaches, former GMs etc. These experts proclaim that Luck, bar none, was the best QB drafted in a generation. The media reflects that thinking and it will take a long time for a more balanced appraisal to happen. In contrast, Wilson was too short and didn't look like the NFL's notion of an elite QB.

So, if Wilson is outplaying Luck any alternative explanation will be grabbed to protect the old narrative. Luck's team sucks. The Seahawks have an elite RB...etc. Things that don't fit the narrative, like Wilson's offensive line was decimated for most of the year are ignored.

Since Luck is potentially a great QB, the narrative is difficult to displace.

 

[NINEster]

Not going to be answered for at least 2 or 3 more seasons.

 

[Hawkpower]

The more important question is "when are morons gonna stop taking Luck > Wilson as a personal attack or crime against humanity?"

Probably when there is actual evidence to back up the claim.

I don't myself take it personally, but nothing wrong with using statistics to illuminate the media's strange fascination with propping up Mr. Luck.

1. It's John Clayton, dude is wrong like 75% of the time
2. Luck has far less talent around him. No way Wilson wins a SB is he was on the Colts
3. Both are very good QB's, and will be very good QB's for the next 10 years. So it's not hard to conclude that the "experts" will be divided on which QB is better right now.
4. Wilson is rapidly gaining, but if you secretly poll every GM, I betcha 90% of them would still take Luck over Russell right now. THAT'S what Clayton is really saying. Right now at this point in time Luck's important/value/upside is higher than Russell. But like I said that gap of perception is closing at lightning speed.

Luck's PERCEIVED upside is higher, which is the point. Luck is valued higher than Wilson by many not based on actual facts or production, but on the bias of being ranked higher to begin with. Why has RW had to close any "gap" when he has outperformed Luck in most statistical categories? Its like college football where a team starts out ranked #1 in preseason polls. Much easier for them to end the season in the top 5 than a team who starts the season unranked.

Also would love a justification for Luck having FAR LESS TALENT. Indy is a pretty dang good team, and Luck is only part of the reason. Which QB has had a better line to play behind? Which QB has had better receivers?

 

[Sports Hernia]

Not going to be answered for at least 2 or 3 more seasons.

I think we are finding out stuff about the people that doubt Wilson's ability........ Size queens!

 

[drdiags]

I think you will continue to hear that Luck is the best young QB because NFL folks still point to the pocket passer as supreme. And in their minds, Luck has the physical tools to be one of the best of those as well as his deceptive scrambling abilities. In the Sando article NFL coaches and FO types put down Brees as being a system QB that had he played for Saban, would not have had the success he now has with Payton.

Experts point out that Brees and Wilson are affected by their height, even though analysis on how much hasn't been seen by me. The one quote about Wilson not seeing a curl, scrambling and hitting a 40 yd play are what his detractors use to justify their bias.

Love Wilson and really hopes he goes on a roll during his career but each year I suspect some flavor of the "too short" viewpoint is going to play out. Old haters like Polian, Casserly and Brandt will join hands with the neuvo-haters to continue to beat this drum.

Luck is the safer pick for people inside and outside the NFL organizations.

I spent several of my 35 yrs as a Seahawks fan lusting after the perfect QB legend, loved and feared by all. Forget that, give me a winner. He doesn't have to be adored by all nor praised by all. Just keep delivering championships. The popularity contests can be won by the Marinos of the world. I'll take Phil Simms/Brad Johnson and others as long as the Lombardis keep piling up.

Revisionists are already trying to re-tell the story of the Superbowl, trying to take back the achievements of the defense and team. Have fun with that one.

EDIT: BTW, I would not lament it if Luck were the QB of the Seahawks. And I probably would pooh-pooh any talk of Wilson being better. Because that is what homer fans do.

 

[kobebryant]

Nearly every objective cit-able measure that matters when it comes to evaluating QBs says that Wilson is better; and because they are objective measures you do not have to be a Seahawks fan to see it that way.

I really like Andre Luck - he has everything you want. But all arguments in favor of him being better than Wilson are subjective ("while I think..." and "my eyes tell me") and conjecture ("if Luck was on Seattle...").

Anyone who has spent a day in university knows that one line of argumentation is significantly more valid than the other.

The difference in playoff performance alone should be enough.

If we aren't judging QBs on wins, championships, touchdowns, lack of turnovers, clutch play, completion %, and yards per attempt - then what they heck are we evaluating them on?

Part of me attributes it to middle-aged traditionalists not having a box that they can comfortably put a champion 5'10 black qb with 4.5 speed into. And if people stay stuck in their rigid thinking, John Schneider is going to continue giving the NFL an enema.

 

[Sgt. Largent]

Luck's PERCEIVED upside is higher, which is the point. Luck is valued higher than Wilson by many not based on actual facts or production, but on the bias of being ranked higher to begin with. Why has RW had to close any "gap" when he has outperformed Luck in most statistical categories? Its like college football where a team starts out ranked #1 in preseason polls. Much easier for them to end the season in the top 5 than a team who starts the season unranked.

Also would love a justification for Luck having FAR LESS TALENT. Indy is a pretty dang good team, and Luck is only part of the reason. Which QB has had a better line to play behind? Which QB has had better receivers?

Of course it's perceived, it's ALL perception...........that's what opinions are.

As far as talent, the Colts O-Line was ranked 25th, only two slots behind the Hawks.......so it's not like they have a bunch of All Pro's up and down the line. WR's? Their WR corp consisted of T.Y. Hilton and a bunch of nobodies. TE's? The amazing Coby Fleener? C'mon dude.

I'll take Russell 24/7 over Luck, but for people to think it's not even close is ridiculous. You can make a case for both QB's, so to get all worked up over idiots like Clayton puking up tired opinions like this is not worth our time............yet we just can't help ourselves over someone talking shit about our Hawks!

 

[seadoc30]

Luck is a great player and a person. Don't mind RW and Luck being in the same conversation, but what really pisses the crap out of me is when some idiots say Kaep and Newton could be considered better than RW. That is just plain Idiotic!

 

[kearly]

Wilson has been better in the statistical sense. But I think we should remember the 2011 college football season when both Wilson and Luck were playing in very similar offenses on very similar teams with very similar results. If we traded Luck for Wilson straight up, I'm guessing Luck's numbers on our team would look fairly similar to Wilson's.

Luck has had an interception problem in an offense that throws the ball too much and can't run it. But when he was at Stanford with a great defense and awesome rush attack, he barely threw any picks at all.

Even though Wilson is better, I would probably be fine with a Wilson-Luck swap. Luck seems like the most injury proof QB in NFL history, and I think his resilience would help mitigate our OL issues more than Wilson's habits would. There are a few games a year where good defenses with smart coordinators give Wilson a ton of trouble due to his lack of height, and that's another issue Luck wouldn't have to worry about. Wilson has better intangibles and is I think a better pure QB than Luck is, but I feel like both would have the same performance level and Luck would be more consistent and carry less risk.

 

[Largent80]

It is as simple as where they were drafted.

That's all these people see.

 

[Hawkpower]

Luck's PERCEIVED upside is higher, which is the point. Luck is valued higher than Wilson by many not based on actual facts or production, but on the bias of being ranked higher to begin with. Why has RW had to close any "gap" when he has outperformed Luck in most statistical categories? Its like college football where a team starts out ranked #1 in preseason polls. Much easier for them to end the season in the top 5 than a team who starts the season unranked.

Also would love a justification for Luck having FAR LESS TALENT. Indy is a pretty dang good team, and Luck is only part of the reason. Which QB has had a better line to play behind? Which QB has had better receivers?

Of course it's perceived, it's ALL perception...........that's what opinions are.

As far as talent, the Colts O-Line was ranked 25th, only two slots behind the Hawks.......so it's not like they have a bunch of All Pro's up and down the line. WR's? Their WR corp consisted of T.Y. Hilton and a bunch of nobodies. TE's? The amazing Coby Fleener? C'mon dude.

I'll take Russell 24/7 over Luck, but for people to think it's not even close is ridiculous. You can make a case for both QB's, so to get all worked up over idiots like Clayton puking up tired opinions like this is not worth our time............yet we just can't help ourselves over someone talking shit about our Hawks!

Did I miss the posts claiming that Wilson was far and away on a different level than Luck and that it's "not even close"??

The actual argument I see here is that Wilson has been statistically better, so its odd why Luck is consistently ranked higher by the media, and that said ranking isnt based on anything real or concrete, just what has been stereotypically true in the NFL past.

I dont think anyone has a problem with fans or media thinking highly of Luck, he's a good QB.

But lets not call him better than Wilson until he proves it on the field. Since all we can use to evaluate QB's fairly is stats and wins, Wilson is the better QB until proven otherwise.

 

[TAB420]

Haters gonna hate. I have found this out his year, It doesn't matter how good Seattle did or any of the players, their will always be people who just hate them and will never give them credit because of that. Niner fan's will tell you Kap in twice the QB as Wilson even though the stats tell the truth. As humans we can talk ourselves into a lot of things and I know plenty of fans who have done just that because Wilson has out played their super jock 1st round QB who was the next coming to Jesus.

 

[Steve2222]

If other teams fans care about the Seahawks as much as I care about every other team in the NFL, then they have seen him for some/most of the NFCCG and then the Super Bowl up until 12 seconds into the second half. What they would see and possibly remember is so much different than what we have seen time and again.

For instance - Before reading through the OP, I couldn't tell you one good thing about Andrew Luck. To me, he is a neck-bearded doofus who somehow went to the playoffs with the Colts and then, as I expected, lost. That's it. He could be the greatest QB of his generation and I would neither care about it nor appreciate it because I only care about one team and one team only.

So are you saying you only watch Seahawks football? If that's the case you're missing out on a lot of good football. I'm a Seahawks fan first and foremost, however I'm a fan of the league in general.