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

[Hawkpower]

It is as simple as where they were drafted.

That's all these people see.

Very true.

The argument here is less about Luck vs. Wilson, and more about the sillyness of labels and rankings based on things like height, college pedigree and beards

If you put Luck and Wilsons numbers/accomplishments side by side and labeled one player A and one player B 100% of people would pick Wilson as the better player right now.

It should be as simple as that. But people try and make more of it because it justifies their jobs as an analyst, makes them feel smarter than they are to scrutinize the intangibles, makes them feel better about the prototypical traditional QB, along with all of the hype given to Luck out of Stanford that must be justified.

I think sometimes analysts are afraid of ranking 3rd round Wilson too highly because of what it says about their abilities to predict future success of college players in the NFL. Wilson better than otherworldly Luck???? Its a threatening thought for many.

But hey at the end of the day, Wilson has the Lombardi, all that matters

 

[Missing_Clink]

Yea this is one of the most common debates on the NFL subreddit. I get downvoted to hell but I always fight the good fight for Wilson.

 

[chris98251]

How many Super Bowls did it take Joe Montana to get respect, to small, to slow,3rd round pick, arm was to weak.
Consider it as the experts repeating history and not accepting what they see because it doesn't fit the hype they had built up for Luck.

Steve Fuller, Phil Smms, and Jack Thompson taken in first round that year with Thompson being first QB taken. Hardly a celebrated draft class for QB's which makes taking Montana all the more perplexing since he slipped to the 3rd round. In fact a Kicker was taken before Montana was, Tony Franklin by the Eagles. Kind of like what the Jags did

 

[Pandion Haliaetus]

Perception is that Russell Wilson has it easier than let's say a QB like luck.

Is that really so?

Luck: signed for 4 yrs, 22 mil (more than 5m per)
Wilson: signed for 4yrs, 3 mil (less than 800,000 per)

Luck: came into the league as the starting QB.
Wilson: came into the league as the 3rd QB.

Luck: Had future HoF WR Reggie Wayne in his ear
Wilson: Had Sidney Rice

Luck: Got majority of starting reps
Wilson: Got 1/3rd of starting reps

Luck: Much of his supporting cast was drafted with him as his peers
Wilson: Only Robert Turbin was drafted w/ Wilson, meaning he had to earn the respect of Offensive teammates

Luck: Cost the Colts the 1st pick of the draft.
Wilson: Cost the 75th pick but rise up the depth chart sent Tarvaris Jackson packing for a 7th rounder and later the Seahawks would also get a 5th rounder for Flynn. None of those QBs become picks without Wilson breaking out and taking control of the team.

Luck: is great and deserves all the attention he gets but the Colts have a solid team, their GM didn't win Exec of the Year solely because they drafted Luck. Grigson did very well getting young hungry players as well as cheap, hungry vets to mesh well with the holdover veterans on that roster.

Wilson: sure I get the perception that the D/ST and Running Game carries the Seahawks, but Wilson as always been there to keep it competitive and close, and had the D been as stout as many people assume Wilson likely would have had a 14-2 record in 2012 with at least a NFC CG berth as well as a 15-1 record in 2013. That's how competitive this team as been and it could have been much better had our dominating defense held strong after Wilson and Co. brought the team back in the 4th QTR in almost every game.

 

[Missing_Clink]

If Luck was on the Colts with the same Win Loss record he currently has but otherwise had the EXACT same stats as Wilson, does anyone doubt he would still be considered the best young QB to come along in years? Of course he would.

 

[Sgt. Largent]

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..

If we just judged on stats, then Nick Foles would be #1 last year.

http://espn.go.com/nfl/statistics/playe ... backRating

So to hyper focus on stats doesn't take into account other factors like strengths, weaknesses, QB IQ, leadership, potential, upside, physical attributes, players around, overall team, etc.

Luck to most analysts and talking heads is the complete package, as in he has no weaknesses..........which is why he went #1 and is perceived to be the greatest QB to come out of the draft in 25 years. THAT'S why he's ahead of Wilson right now. Back to perception.

 

[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

 

[Sarlacc83]

The answer to this issue is quite simple, in my opinion, and the answer originates from psychology.

The preference for Luck over Wilson begins (though doesn't end) with three major principles: Confirmation bias, the backfire effect, and the Ben Franklin effect. The confirmation bias, I think is obvious, especially when dealing with non-Seahawks fans. They "know" Luck is better, so they look for reasons to justify their position. (This is troubling when it happens with Seahawk fans who would still take Luck, despite everything they've seen with their own eyes.)

They have taken their position because of the Ben Franklin effect - which states that you come up with the reason behind your feelings after you've taken action, not vice versa. In this case, analysts and the casual fan have spent so long praising Andrew Luck, declaring him the next Peyton Manning, that they have no choice but to psychologically assume he's the best. Their action begets their feelings. In the opposite end, they've spent so long maligning "game manager" Russell Wilson, all they can feel towards him is disdain, at best.

The backfire effect then deals with the fact people will not only ignore facts that contradict their position, but they will, in fact, dig into their conclusions even further. So whenever you present the multitude of accomplishments Wilson has (that Luck doesn't), you're actually losing the war.

Finally, there is a very simple reason GMs will not outwardly praise Wilson, and it's job security. The only man who can publicly enjoy Wilson's success is Schneider. If any one else were to say that Wilson is better than Luck, the first question they'll receive in response is: Why didn't you draft him? Even a successful GM will have that blackmark on his resume when his team takes a nose dive to mediocrity (or worse.) (Whereas as Pete and Jon played chicken with the NFL and won.) So they have to publicly decry Russell, else they fall under scrutiny. They, after all, had no choice but to 'pass' on Luck, since they had no chance to draft him in the first place.

This is why the players voted Wilson higher. They will not feel the same scourge on their backs.

We all know Wilson has accomplished more and accordingly deserved the MVP talk during the middle of last season. He will continue to play at a high level and prove people wrong, while Luck maintains his current career trajectory more in the line of Peyton Manning (1 ring) or Dan Marino (well, you know). That's fine by me.

 

[twisted_steel2]

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.

I keep hearing this, so I finally looked. Doesn't look that bad, mediocre run game, middle of the pack. And the defense was actually 9th in points allowed, yea there run D is soft, but overall not horrible. How is that NO running game and NO defense? Seems that angle is getting exaggerated.

Rushing
10th - Rushing TD's
13th - Yards per attempt
20th - Rushing yards

Defense
9th - Defense/points
13th - Defense/passing yards
20th - Defense/total yards
26th - Defense/rushing yards

 

[Scottemojo]

Sarlacc for the win.

Luck went first overall. Not one other team could have taken him. They lose no shine saying he is better.

Every team in the league could have had Wilson. To say he is better is to say they should have taken him.

I recently heard pundits talking about the demise of Tom Brady. Same damn deal. Guy throws for 4300 yards to damn near no one last year and they are trying to say he is slipping. Of course they are. Every team passed on him multiple times. PFM took a giant steaming dump in the SB and no one is throwing any dirt on his grave. Same story.

 

[The Radish]

I don't understand why there are people that are still complaining about this. We have the trophy, Luck doesn't, seems pretty clear to me.

On the other hand perhaps its the same fans that used to complain that the Seahawks don't get enough attention from the media.

Probably one of those.

:roll:

 

[rigelian]

Luck to most analysts and talking heads is the complete package, as in he has no weaknesses..........which is why he went #1 and is perceived to be the greatest QB to come out of the draft in 25 years. THAT'S why he's ahead of Wilson right now. Back to perception.

Except for the weakness of throwing a lot of interceptions and a comparatively low completion percentage.

To be fair a lot of people believe that experience will temper those faults.

 

[WilsonMVP]

would like to point out that Luck is
82/141,
58%,
904 yards,
6.4YPA
4TD
4Int
74.9 rating against the NFC west this year...you know...that same division Wilson plays in...and that is with Luck having his best game against the Seahawks in those division games.

If you take out the Seahawks this is his stat line
66/112 59%
675yds
2TD
4INT
67 qb rating...

that is mighty impressive.... :179422:

 

[rigelian]

Radish, not quite the same fans necessarily. I've never complained about how the media treats the seahawks. I tend to think that the collective seahawk fan outrage goes a bit too far. At the same time I recognize that the NFL follows patterns. The pattern suggests that Luck is the perfect QB, big, tall, strong armed and smart. Wilson offends that notion because he is short. The same notion also used to be true with big corners. That notion is beginning to fall. Give Wilson another year.

 

[WilsonMVP]

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.

Oh please...the colts were in the playoffs for 9 years in a row before manning got hurt and then they win 2 games because their entire team was built upon manning + the backup fillin qbs were pure garabge....Curtis Painter and Dan Orlovsky started 13 games and Kerry Collins started 3.

I like how convenient it is in Lucks case to cite how bad the colts were even though they had made the playoffs like 10 out of 11 times before that season. Much like Seattle I believe they turned their roster over quite a bit and they have some talent on both sides of the ball.

The seahawks were:
4-12 2008
5-11 2009
7-9 2010
7-9 2011

Then all of a sudden Wilson becomes the starting qb and we go 11-5 and 16-3 with a superbowl win and our run this year had Harvin out most of the year, Rice out half the year, more than half the Oline out a significant ammount of time, Browner suspended.

 

[WilsonMVP]

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.

Which is also funny because Wilson has over a 100qb rating and 40 something TD from the pocket

 

[Hawkpower]

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..

If we just judged on stats, then Nick Foles would be #1 last year.

http://espn.go.com/nfl/statistics/playe ... backRating

So to hyper focus on stats doesn't take into account other factors like strengths, weaknesses, QB IQ, leadership, potential, upside, physical attributes, players around, overall team, etc.

Luck to most analysts and talking heads is the complete package, as in he has no weaknesses..........which is why he went #1 and is perceived to be the greatest QB to come out of the draft in 25 years. THAT'S why he's ahead of Wilson right now. Back to perception.

So Wilson is better statistically, and is arguably Luck's equal or better in your following categories

QB IQ
Leadership
Potential.

Both play on playoff teams. That horrible Indy roster beat Seattle, remember?

Wilson has a Super Bowl win.

But Luck is...........taller. And was drafted in the first round.

Again my point is made. Luck is seen as better than Wilson because he is the prototypical NFL dream QB. Lets let Luck actually be better than Wilson in something other than height, and then we can have this discussion.

 

[twisted_steel2]

Let's be honest, it's all about that cool neckbeard!

Winner!

 

[renofox]

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.

I don't think the Seahawks would have even made it to the SB without Bennet and Avril - two free agents that the Seahawks could only afford because of RW's low cap hit. Paying Luck would have precluded their acquisition.

Seahawks with Wilson >>> Seahawks with Luck

 

[theincrediblesok]

Luck is suppose to be the next Peyton Manning, RG3 was suppose to be a better Mike Vick, Russell Wilson is incomparable. Russell Wilson has the mind of Peyton Manning, more elusive than Aaron Rodgers/Ben Roethlisberger, and clutch like Tom Brady/Eli Manning. Passing Accuracy and stature of Drew Brees. What do all those QBs have in common? Superbowl Win(s) and are Top 10 Elite QB. Russell Wilson isn't your standard Elite QB because he does a bit of everything, a very versatile QB. I'd take that all day long, just means his name will be on most recorded stats. Let the media talk, Wilson will just keep proving them wrong.