Seahaaaawks
New member
Are you crazy??!? Wilson is the only reason we had a chance at a comeback. He played like a stud. Our Oline and special teams, not so much.
el capitan":2nf0itq8 said:I think you're in the 16-20 range.
Douche.
TheRealDTM":2z6bk6s5 said:Luck is better than Wilson, i wish this board could just admit that.
Chawks1":38h4e6hp said:I agree I'd take luck over RW. Luck can do evrything RW can do but RW cant do everything Luck can do.....RW does not see the field or read blitzes as well as Luck. That being said i would take RW over every other QB in the NFL except Luck and Rodgers....no question
Anthony!":1fuj5nnc said:Chawks1":1fuj5nnc said:I agree I'd take luck over RW. Luck can do evrything RW can do but RW cant do everything Luck can do.....RW does not see the field or read blitzes as well as Luck. That being said i would take RW over every other QB in the NFL except Luck and Rodgers....no question
great but nothing you said is true so keep believing that. There is nothing Luck has done that Rw cannot do and that is a proven fact
First NFL player in history to throw for 300 and run for 100 also luck has the number 6 o line in a weak division wilson has the oline that shouldn't be on a freaking practice squad let alone starting in the nfl. Btw in RW's career he has a higher rating and completion % in the pocket then luck does. If wilson had ty reggie and that o line he would be doing as well or even better then luck is currently.TheRealDTM":hujahjkg said:Luck is better than Wilson, i wish this board could just admit that.
Microfiber":sx2ayjlk said:Wilson is not in the same class as luck. I've been a die hard Wilson supporter, but he's 16-20 range.
Lombardi Trophys won:Microfiber":3o76bdyv said:Wilson is not in the same class as luck. I've been a die hard Wilson supporter, but he's 16-20 range.
Yep!253hawk":19dcjksq said:I think some people's insatiable lust for ugly neckbearded men on here is blinding their judgment.
Lombardi Trophys won:Microfiber":24ld723l said:Wilson is not in the same class as luck. I've been a die hard Wilson supporter, but he's 16-20 range.
sc85sis":adwmtw5j said:Each QB is the guy their team needs. There is NO point to this endless comparison.
TheRealDTM":27vvucxw said:RW has to move to have a clear view of the pocket, even then he overthrows sometimes.
The difference is height. RW is an elite QB he's really good, Luck is just going to be a little better (and way better later in career) because he can't be schemed against as easily as Wilson, you can't just say "ok we're going to force him to stay in the pocket" because it plays to his strengths. RW is at his best when he finds lanes, because of his height.
Again not saying he's not a great franchise QB RW is, but our team would be better with Luck. If they are both the same height it's Wilson no doubt.
Anthony!":27vvucxw said:Chawks1":27vvucxw said:I agree I'd take luck over RW. Luck can do evrything RW can do but RW cant do everything Luck can do.....RW does not see the field or read blitzes as well as Luck. That being said i would take RW over every other QB in the NFL except Luck and Rodgers....no question
great but nothing you said is true so keep believing that. There is nothing Luck has done that Rw cannot do and that is a proven fact
RW cannot stand directly behind the center and throw a pass vertically downward to a RB in front of the center.
Sports Hernia":36in9jcf said:Lombardi Trophys won:Microfiber":36in9jcf said:Wilson is not in the same class as luck. I've been a die hard Wilson supporter, but he's 16-20 range.
Wilson 1
Luck 0
End of discussion.