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

[WilsonMVP]

Wilson is my favorite QB in the entire league. Straight up trade? I'd take Luck 10 times out of 10. No question. Zero.

So essentially I see the future of quarterbacks as:

Wilson = Tom Brady except even better and more wins

Luck = Peyton Manning except worst and less wins (probably won't win a Superbowl from what I've seen of him so far)

Brady has literally no valid argument for being better than Manning, so I'm not sure that's the comparison that you want to draw.

Of course, if Wilson wins more rings than Luck then that is what will make me happiest anyway. I'd surely rather have more Super Bowls than have some illusory claim to having the best QB.

Really he doesnt? If it werent for the defense choking at the end of the game twice against the Giants he would have 5 superbowl rings.

In the second superbowl against the Giants he got the ball back with 50 something seconds
In the first superbowl against the Giants he got the ball back with 35 seconds left

 

[Hawkpower]

The case for Luck > Wilson is not at all ridiculous, and people who are overly dismissive of it are thinking about things far too simplistically.

I would like for Wilson to outpace Luck over the course of their careers, and I think that he has a decent chance at it, but it's still very much an open and unresolved question.

So what is the case for Luck being better than Wilson?

It isn't numbers/stats

It isnt wins

It isnt intangibles.

It isnt accomplishments.

All you have left is "opinion" and height.

Luck may end up being better. I am willing to admit that. But right now what objective, measurable, real evidence is so clear??

 

[Hawkpower]

Wilson is my favorite QB in the entire league. Straight up trade? I'd take Luck 10 times out of 10. No question. Zero.

So essentially I see the future of quarterbacks as:

Wilson = Tom Brady except even better and more wins

Luck = Peyton Manning except worst and less wins (probably won't win a Superbowl from what I've seen of him so far)

Brady has literally no valid argument for being better than Manning, so I'm not sure that's the comparison that you want to draw.

Of course, if Wilson wins more rings than Luck then that is what will make me happiest anyway. I'd surely rather have more Super Bowls than have some illusory claim to having the best QB.

Brady actually has quite valid arguments for being better than Manning, but the point can be made for either QB.

Depends on what is important to you from the QB position.

 

[ctrcat]

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!

Why? Newton is ahead of Luck in the NFL top 100, as he should be IMO.

 

[MidwestHawker]

Wilson is my favorite QB in the entire league. Straight up trade? I'd take Luck 10 times out of 10. No question. Zero.

So essentially I see the future of quarterbacks as:

Wilson = Tom Brady except even better and more wins

Luck = Peyton Manning except worst and less wins (probably won't win a Superbowl from what I've seen of him so far)

Brady has literally no valid argument for being better than Manning, so I'm not sure that's the comparison that you want to draw.

Of course, if Wilson wins more rings than Luck then that is what will make me happiest anyway. I'd surely rather have more Super Bowls than have some illusory claim to having the best QB.

Really he doesnt? If it werent for the defense choking at the end of the game twice against the Giants he would have 5 superbowl rings.

In the second superbowl against the Giants he got the ball back with 50 something seconds
In the first superbowl against the Giants he got the ball back with 35 seconds left

Sort-by-rings is a terrible metric. That's incredibly self-evident just as soon as you start ranking all QBs all-time by that metric. Obviously I think that Brady is great, surefire first-ballot HOF, etc., so I'm not denigrating him. Just saying that he falls markedly short of the greatest QB of this era.

 

[MidwestHawker]

So what is the case for Luck being better than Wilson?

It isn't numbers/stats

It isnt wins

It isnt intangibles.

It isnt accomplishments.

All you have left is "opinion" and height.

Luck may end up being better. I am willing to admit that. But right now what objective, measurable, real evidence is so clear??

The problem with drawing a clear distinction between the two is level of usage. Luck has thrown just under 50% more passes than Wilson has. He's asked to do a lot more. And in terms of numbers, one number that is significantly in Luck's favor is WPA (win probability added). Obviously he laps Wilson in gross yardage for the same reason. Luck's sample size makes his continued success a surer thing. Luck is asked to shoulder the whole load, while Wilson is asked to do a good, efficient job of commandeering a more talented offense who consistently gets left in better positions by a better defense.

If asked to do a lot more, to shoulder a Luck-level load, could he do it as well or even better? Sure, possibly. But he's extremely well-protected in our system right now, and the evidence is just incomplete at this point.

For what it's worth, I agree that Wilson has probably been the better one so far. However, I also think that it's a difficult comparison, and I think the question of which one is likely to be a bigger asset going forward is a far tougher one to call, and one that may actually tilt Luck's way.

 

[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.

 

[TXHawk]

Fun facts about Russell Wilson:

1. Most wins after two seasons including playoffs (28)
2. Home record 17-1
3. Tied for second with Peyton Manning for most TD passes after two seasons (52)
4. First quarterback ever to post 100+ QB rating each of his first two seasons
5. Fourth most rushing yards by a QB after two seasons (1028)
6. Rookie record for yards passing in a playoff game (385 vs Atlanta)
7. 4-1 in playoff games with a QB rating of 102.0
8. Eight fourth quarter comebacks and ten game winning drives over the past two seasons (most in the NFL)
9. Has never lost an NFL game by more than seven points
10. Fifth best yards per attempt average after two seasons (8.09)
11. Ninth highest QB rating in a Super Bowl (123.1)
12. Holds the NCAA single season record for passing efficiency (191.8 )

Any way you want to cut it, Russell Wilson has had a historic start to his career.

 

[Sports Hernia]

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.

Solid points!

 

[chris98251]

So what is the case for Luck being better than Wilson?

It isn't numbers/stats

It isnt wins

It isnt intangibles.

It isnt accomplishments.

All you have left is "opinion" and height.

Luck may end up being better. I am willing to admit that. But right now what objective, measurable, real evidence is so clear??

The problem with drawing a clear distinction between the two is level of usage. Luck has thrown just under 50% more passes than Wilson has. He's asked to do a lot more. And in terms of numbers, one number that is significantly in Luck's favor is WPA (win probability added). Obviously he laps Wilson in gross yardage for the same reason. Luck's sample size makes his continued success a surer thing. Luck is asked to shoulder the whole load, while Wilson is asked to do a good, efficient job of commandeering a more talented offense who consistently gets left in better positions by a better defense.

If asked to do a lot more, to shoulder a Luck-level load, could he do it as well or even better? Sure, possibly. But he's extremely well-protected in our system right now, and the evidence is just incomplete at this point.

For what it's worth, I agree that Wilson has probably been the better one so far. However, I also think that it's a difficult comparison, and I think the question of which one is likely to be a bigger asset going forward is a far tougher one to call, and one that may actually tilt Luck's way.

The used to be a QB that wore #7 for the Broncos that was asked and did the same thing, drove Seahawks fans nuts with last second heroics, was very mobile, asked to be all world, actually made it to a Super Bowl, but lost. Later in his career after being beat up and almost broke down they put a team around him and gave him a running game and he ended up with a few Super Bowl wins, he wasn't asked to carry the load but to use the tools provided to him and they had a decent defense.

We will see if Irsay is able to rebuild that team, Peyton was and is an enigma and could go down as the most cerebreal QB to ever play. Luck isn't on that level and heck very few people are as far as a QB goes. But having said all that Terry Bradshaw has more rings and is remembered as a slinger and a competitor with a IQ closer to a broken egg then a surgeon, he is legendary in his confrontations with Chuck Noll, yet he was still put on the field every week. He worked with the team they had and the players beleived in him and they won.

He is on the air talking the talk because he walked the walk, and few can dispute his accomplishments, as much as we in many circles feel he is a idiot you can't take away the rings and the wins.

Wilson as many have said is more like a Tarkenton, but very tuned in to the mental aspects, he has one Super Bowl already, Luck is all potential, if this of they do that, if they trade away first round picks for a reach to get a running game, if they draft right, if they protect.

We have spoke of a lot of if's here as well, if we get a better line and if we give Wilson more time, if we give him better receivers. The thing is we finally got a win in the big game with a lot of if's still on the table. We resolve those and what is Wilsons ceiling then?

 

[Hawkpower]

So what is the case for Luck being better than Wilson?

It isn't numbers/stats

It isnt wins

It isnt intangibles.

It isnt accomplishments.

All you have left is "opinion" and height.

Luck may end up being better. I am willing to admit that. But right now what objective, measurable, real evidence is so clear??

The problem with drawing a clear distinction between the two is level of usage. Luck has thrown just under 50% more passes than Wilson has. He's asked to do a lot more. And in terms of numbers, one number that is significantly in Luck's favor is WPA (win probability added). Obviously he laps Wilson in gross yardage for the same reason. Luck's sample size makes his continued success a surer thing. Luck is asked to shoulder the whole load, while Wilson is asked to do a good, efficient job of commandeering a more talented offense who consistently gets left in better positions by a better defense.

If asked to do a lot more, to shoulder a Luck-level load, could he do it as well or even better? Sure, possibly. But he's extremely well-protected in our system right now, and the evidence is just incomplete at this point.

For what it's worth, I agree that Wilson has probably been the better one so far. However, I also think that it's a difficult comparison, and I think the question of which one is likely to be a bigger asset going forward is a far tougher one to call, and one that may actually tilt Luck's way.

Fair points, however:

1. Well protected? Not by his o-line. He has had dreadful pass protection thus far in his career. We cant just gloss over that while pretending Luck plays for the 2008 Lions.

2. What evidence do we have that suggests Wilson isnt capable of playing a "Luck type" role? Every time he has been asked to carry the offense he has been superb. We could just as easily wrongly contemplate that Luck would struggle if asked to play in Carrol's style of offense and take less of a role. Of course he wouldnt. But speculating that he would is just as dumb as assuming Wilson couldnt thrive in a pass happy offense.

3. Luck has weapons on offense. Luck is asked to throw a lot because that is their offensive identity. Its not because Indianopolis is a dreadful offense with Luck as the only weapon.

 

[Scottemojo]

The Luck is asked to do more argument is a crock of horse shit. More what? Yards? Attempts? Other QBs are asked to do more than Wilson. Does being asked to do more make Matt Stafford better? Andy Dalton? Matt Ryan has a crap running game and is asked to more than Wilson, he must be better!

 

[Anthony!]

Wilson is my favorite QB in the entire league. Straight up trade? I'd take Luck 10 times out of 10. No question. Zero.

One poster above summed this thread up nicely with his proclamation "I only watch one team in the NFL". He's not alone. Oh, he also said he didn't like Luck's neck beard. Just being honest here, but I have to admit I've not taken Luck's beard into consideration. I will do so, then edit this post if it changes my opinion on the subject .

I have watched every game both have played and I would not make that trade at all, Luck has benefited form a much better o-line, better wr and a pass orientated offense, a top 10 scoring defense, a run game that avg 4.3 ypa same as ours in the much easier AFC. RW has a better defense, an better RB but not run game, a worse o-line(dead last in pass protection), but has done it in the much tougher NFC and specifically playing 6 games against 3 top 10 defenses. Also in the playoffs luck has crumbled, Rw has excelled.

 

[Anthony!]

The case for Luck > Wilson is not at all ridiculous, and people who are overly dismissive of it are thinking about things far too simplistically.

I would like for Wilson to outpace Luck over the course of their careers, and I think that he has a decent chance at it, but it's still very much an open and unresolved question.

Please provide the stats that prove luck > Wilson, and keep in mind the stats showing Wilson > luck are overwhelming so good luck, pun intended

 

[Anthony!]

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.

 

[WilsonMVP]

Wilson is my favorite QB in the entire league. Straight up trade? I'd take Luck 10 times out of 10. No question. Zero.

One poster above summed this thread up nicely with his proclamation "I only watch one team in the NFL". He's not alone. Oh, he also said he didn't like Luck's neck beard. Just being honest here, but I have to admit I've not taken Luck's beard into consideration. I will do so, then edit this post if it changes my opinion on the subject .

I have watched every game both have played and I would not make that trade at all, Luck has benefited form a much better o-line, better wr and a pass orientated offense, a top 10 scoring defense, a run game that avg 4.3 ypa same as ours in the much easier AFC. RW has a better defense, an better RB but not run game, a worse o-line(dead last in pass protection), but has done it in the much tougher NFC and specifically playing 6 games against 3 top 10 defenses. Also in the playoffs luck has crumbled, Rw has excelled.

All you have to do is look at Lucks 60 something QB rating with 2TD/4INt against the 49ers/Cards/Rams to see how well he would fair if he was switched with Wilson with WORSE protection.

10 of Wilsons 19 regular season ints have come against the NFC west although 5 of those came in the first seven weeks of his career.

 

[Hawkpower]

So basically, the argument for Luck being better than Wilson is:

Well he hasnt been so far, not even close, but someday he magically will be better than Wilson because......well because......he is taller. And he was a first round pick. And he passes it more. And because smart media dudes say so.

Well I guess that settles that. Who needs facts and data??

 

[chris98251]

Wilson has one thing that I have yet to really see in anything I have watched with Luck, Wilson has the un statistical, intangible, or the IT factor. I really could give two shits if you guys that want it to be a measurable can't grasp this, but he has it.

It comes out whenever we need something to happen, it carries over to the defense as well. Players on the defensive side of the ball have stated it.

 

[HawkAroundTheClock]

I want to chime in to say this is probably my favorite thread of the off-season so far. There are too many great statements to quote them all. 98% of contributors totally brought their "A Game," with excellent points backed up by reasoning, statistics, and observational analysis.

For the 2% who choose Andrew... we still haven't seen a legitimate reason. Tangible or otherwise.

 

[Tokadub]

Wilson is my favorite QB in the entire league. Straight up trade? I'd take Luck 10 times out of 10. No question. Zero.

So essentially I see the future of quarterbacks as:

Wilson = Tom Brady except even better and more wins

Luck = Peyton Manning except worst and less wins (probably won't win a Superbowl from what I've seen of him so far)

Brady has literally no valid argument for being better than Manning, so I'm not sure that's the comparison that you want to draw.

Of course, if Wilson wins more rings than Luck then that is what will make me happiest anyway. I'd surely rather have more Super Bowls than have some illusory claim to having the best QB.

I think Brady does have a valid argument for being better than Manning just as Wilson has a much more obvious and undeniable argument for being better than Luck.

Notice how I said in my analysis that Wilson will be "even better than Tom Brady" and Luck will be "worst than Peyton Manning".

But let us compare and RANK all 4 of these QB's in multiple statistical categories that I consider to be the most important for these kind of comparisons:

Completion Percentage

1) Manning = 65.5%
2) Wilson = 63.6%
3) Brady = 63.4%
4) Luck = 57%

Yards Per Pass Attempt

1) Wilson = 8.1
2) Manning = 7.7
3) Brady = 7.5
4) Luck = 6.8

Passer Rating

1) Wilson = 100.6
2) Manning = 97.2
3) Brady = 95.7
4) Luck = 81.5

Touchdown/Interception Ratio

1) Wilson = 2.74
2) Brady = 2.7
3) Manning = 2.24
4) Luck = 1.7

Passing Touchdowns Per Season Average

1) Manning = 30.69
2) Wilson = 26
3) Brady = 25.64
4) Luck = 23

Passing Yards Per Season Average

1) Luck = 4098
2) Manning = 4059
3) Brady = 3510
4) Wilson = 3238

Rushing Yards Per Season Average

1) Wilson = 514
2) Luck = 316
3) Brady = 55
4) Manning = 44

Passing + Rushing Yards Per Game Average

1) Luck = 276
2) Manning = 257
3) Wilson = 234
4) Brady = 222

Career Win %

1) Brady = 76.5%
2) Wilson = 75.7%
3) Manning = 67.7%
4) Luck = 65.7%

Total Super Bowl Wins

1) Brady = 3
2) Wilson = 1
3) Manning = 1
4) Luck = 0

Super Bowl Win %

1) Wilson = 100%
2) Brady = 60%
3) Manning = 33%
4) Luck = N/A

Super Bowl Wins Per Season%

1) Wilson = 50%
2) Brady = 21.4%
3) Manning = 6.25%
4) Luck = 0%


TOTAL 1ST PLACE RANKINGS:

1) Wilson = 6
2) Brady = 2
3) Manning = 2
4) Luck = 2

TOTAL 2ND PLACE RANKINGS:

1) Wilson = 4
2) Manning = 4
3) Brady = 3
4) Luck = 1

TOTAL 3RD PLACE RANKINGS:

1) Brady = 6
2) Manning = 5
3) Wilson = 1
4) Luck = 0

TOTAL 4TH PLACE RANKINGS:

1) Luck = 9
2) Wilson = 1
3) Brady = 1
4) Manning = 1


CONCLUSION:

When comparing all 4 of these QB's Wilson appears to be the best so far.

If we apply the scientifically fool-proof scoring system used in Mario Kart for the Super Nintendo the scoring would be as follows:

1st Place = 9 Points
2nd Place = 6 Points
3rd Place = 3 Points
4th Place = 1 Point

FINAL RANKINGS:

1) Wilson = 82 Points
2) Manning = 58 Points
3) Brady = 55 Points
4) Luck = 33 Points


That's about as good as I can summarize their rankings based on my 12 most important stats which I listed above. As you can see Wilson is far superior to Luck :les: