Chris Harris said Wilson is better than Luck

[gohusk]

And the Seahawks had 2 7-9 seasons in a row including a playoff victory before Wilson ever got there. Nothing special, but certainly not 2-14 Colts bad.

I don't want to hear about the record because the Colts pulled off one of the most disgusting tank jobs of all time to get their guy. Jim Irsay is a fucking slob and I'm surprised he didn't just forfeit games to get what he wants. There were tons of Seahawks fans that thought they should pull the same stunt. But PC decided that he'd stand behind his players and the coaching staff and fo did everything they could to make sure that they had every opportunity to win even though the team was in the process of a complete overhaul of the roster. I really couldn't care less about Luck because the Lombardi is much sweeter.

 

[dkmightyhammer]

The Colts were a horrible team. When you have a qb like Manning, he can cover up a lot of holes in your team. The Colts for years were an average team at best, those was put over the top by Manning.

At what point do you think the "Suck for Luck" campaign started? They lost their first 13 games of the year and actually won their only 2 games late in the season which completely contradicts the idea that they tanked. Unless you think they planned to suck from the first game of the year, onward, that theory holds zero validity.

The Seahawks were a better team then the Colts in every meaningful way. Both statistically and record wise.

How you can deny that is baffling?

Fine. Indy was worse. Seattle wasn't good either, they had a bottom of the league offense and an improving defense.

So given that both QB's inherited God awful offenses you must admit that Wilson has done a far superior job of improving his squad. At least Luck had Reggie Wayne in his first year. Who did Wilson have to throw too? A rookie 3rd round pick in Golden Tate, an undrafted player in Doug Baldwin and an often injured Minnesota cast off in Sydney Rice. Wilson tied Manning's rookie QB record for TD's with that squad. If you can't see how impressive that is then I find that equally as baffling.

 

[gohusk]

Im saying with Tarvaris Jackson and Matt Hasselbeck, the Seahawks went 7-9 and won a playoff game without Wilson. Since Wilson is far superior to either of those qb's, it stands to reason that they would improve even more that. The Colts were a terrible 2-14 team. The whole "suck for luck" thing started because they were so bad in the first place. Luck as a rookie turns that team into an 11 team with no running game, no defense, and a rookie coach at any level.

The situations are not comparable at all.

The Suck for Luck thing did not start because they were so bad. The started off weak and then the FO decided that they'd be better off tanking the entire season instead of trying to win. And so +4 at QB is weak for you? I gave you the stats. You present a bunch of scattered facts about a team that you obviously know nothing about.

 

[Desean12345]

I don't want to hear about the record because the Colts pulled off one of the most disgusting tank jobs of all time to get their guy. Jim Irsay is a fucking slob and I'm surprised he didn't just forfeit games to get what he wants. There were tons of Seahawks fans that thought they should pull the same stunt. But PC decided that he'd stand behind his players and the coaching staff and fo did everything they could to make sure that they had every opportunity to win even though the team was in the process of a complete overhaul of the roster. I really couldn't care less about Luck because the Lombardi is much sweeter.

You obviously have confused tank job with just being a horrible team. If you think the reason the Colts sucked that badly was because they "tanked", they your just ignorant. Again, unless they decided to throw the season before it even started(which I don't believe) than that point is just plain wrong.

And i've been saying that I don't blame the Seahawks that they would rather have Wilson over Luck. Wilson's team has one a super bowl and Luck's team hasn't. But if i'm starting a team from scratch, i'm taking Luck every single time, without hesitation.

 

[Desean12345]

The Suck for Luck thing did not start because they were so bad. The started off weak and then the FO decided that they'd be better off tanking the entire season instead of trying to win. And so +4 at QB is weak for you? I gave you the stats. You present a bunch of scattered facts about a team that you obviously know nothing about.

And why did they star off so weak. Maybe it would have something to do with losing that Peyton guy, who can cover up a lot of flaws on your team, which he was doing for years.

The Seahawks had back to back 7-9 seasons and po win before Wilson got there.

In the year before Wilson took over, they were the 23rd ranked scoring team and 7th ranked defensive team and ninth in terms of yardage. They had a star running back in Marshawn and were

The Colts, before Luck took over,were the 28th ranked scoring team and 28th ranked defensive team and 25th in terms of yardage.

The Colts were an all around shitty team despite having much of the same players as the year before excluding one player. We know who that is.

 

[dkmightyhammer]

And why did they star off so weak. Maybe it would have something to do with losing that Peyton guy, who can cover up a lot of flaws on your team, which he was doing for years.

The Seahawks had back to back 7-9 seasons and po win before Wilson got there.

In the year before Wilson took over, they were the 23rd ranked scoring team and 7th ranked defensive team and ninth in terms of yardage. They had a star running back in Marshawn and were

The Colts, before Luck took over,were the 28th ranked scoring team and 28th ranked defensive team and 25th in terms of yardage.

The Colts were an all around shitty team despite having much of the same players as the year before excluding one player. We know who that is.

Seahawks never went 7-9 back to back. They went 5-11 and then 7-9. They were bad. The playoff win was an anomaly that not one person expected.

There wasn't a single person who looked at the Seahawks after that 7-9 season and picked them to make the playoffs. You're attempting to make them seem better than they were. They were bad. Indy was worse. Neither Luck nor Wilson were given the reigns to a good team. Wilson wasn't even supposed to be the starter remember? Seattle paid big money for Flynn who had lit up some teams with GB the year before but Wilson was so bloody impressive in practice and pre-season games that he stole that job from Flynn. Luck was handed his starting job based on his draft position. Luck is pretty much doing what he was expected to do but Wilson has succeeded and excelled against the odds, and against preconceived ideas that he would fail because he was too short and not the "prototypical" QB. Ya, Luck had a really bad team and has put up just OK numbers. Wilson was given a slightly better team and has set records and continues to impress. There still hasn't been any drop off.

I think if they did an anonymous poll of coaches around the league and asked them to pick between Wilson and Luck right now you'd find that Wilson would get a good chunk of votes. That wouldn't have happened if you did the same poll before the 2011 draft. Luck has been what we thought he'd be, Wilson has been far more than everyone expected.

 

[cdumler7]

Not sure taking the job from Flynn though is a huge deal considering he is barely still in the league. Teams figured out very quickly that he was a product of a good system full of very talented players that could help cover up deficiencies at the quarterback system. Same with Matt Cassel in this league in both are career back ups that looked good in a good system full of talent.


Now that doesn't take away from Wilson being a starter as he is a quality starter. Just not sure I would say he stole the starting job when there really wasn't much of a fight by Flynn. Plus didn't he has some kind of arthritis or something wrong with his throwing hand most of the preseason that year that limited his practicing ability?

 

[BSUSeahawk]

So TJax had a better running game for him, Wilson comes in and throws for 12 more TD's, rushes for 3 more TD's, puts up 20+ points more in passer rating, and his impact is a bit overstated? Why the hell do you think Lynch's numbers were down? Because of Wilson? It's because the line was a mess. Wilson was scrambling for his life at points and Lynch had to work as hard as ever to get yards because of problems with pass protection and run blocking. And the playoff game they won was with Hass who started off real hot. Hass wasn't the greatest QB in the world but he was very solid and he was on early to get the game out of reach for the Saints.

This is why these threads are stupid. You have a bunch of people who just follow box scores for a team telling the people who have been watching their games religiously what's going on.

Great post.

 

[dkmightyhammer]

Not sure taking the job from Flynn though is a huge deal considering he is barely still in the league. Teams figured out very quickly that he was a product of a good system full of very talented players that could help cover up deficiencies at the quarterback system. Same with Matt Cassel in this league in both are career back ups that looked good in a good system full of talent.


Now that doesn't take away from Wilson being a starter as he is a quality starter. Just not sure I would say he stole the starting job when there really wasn't much of a fight by Flynn. Plus didn't he has some kind of arthritis or something wrong with his throwing hand most of the preseason that year that limited his practicing ability?

Well we know what Flynn is now, but at that time Flynn was one of the bigger off season free agents and was pegged as the starter. That a 5'10" rookie QB that was the 6th QB taken in the 2012 draft could come in and beat out a free agent that the team paid big money to get is pretty impressive. I don't remember Flynn being injured either, at least not in training camp and the first couple pre season games. That's where Wilson really started to get noticed.

 

[cdumler7]

I just looked it up and his injury was when he was with the Raiders and he had hurt his elbow. My bad. I do get that he was expected to be the starter but like I said it is pretty darn obvious now to everybody in the league he is not a quality starter. Wilson obviously is so I don't think it would have been that hard of a decision to put Wilson as the starter. From what I understand Flynn just looked pretty pathetic. It is not like they were looking at 2 very good quarterbacks and having to pick between them. The money thing is the only reason that Flynn even stayed in the race.

 

[Desean12345]

Seahawks did have back to back 7-9 seasons in 2010 and 2011 before Wilson got there.

 

[dkmightyhammer]

Seahawks did have back to back 7-9 seasons in 2010 and 2011 before Wilson got there.

You're right. They went 5-11, 7-9, 7-9, and then Wilson (11-5, 13-3).....that actually shows the team was bad for longer before he showed up. I thought it was just two years but it was actually 3 terrible years.

 

[cdumler7]

Seahawks did have back to back 7-9 seasons in 2010 and 2011 before Wilson got there.

This would be correct.

List of Seattle Seahawks seasons - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

There is a link if anybody questions whether the Seahawks had back to back 7-9 seasons before Wilson came to town.

Wilson is definitely a part of the turn around for the Seahawks to being Super Bowl Champs but I would venture to say that most would agree that a lot of things beyond just Wilson happened for the Seahawks to get where they are today. The 2 drafts before Wilson came into the picture netted the team Okung, Thomas, Tate, Thurmond, Chancellor, Wright, Sherman, Maxwell, and Smith. Just goes to show if you want to win a Super Bowl it starts with drafting well and building great depth. Every one of those players contributed to the Super Bowl run last year and to the possible success moving forward.

Then I would say the coaching staff also has a big part in the turn around. They are now being regarded as one of the best coaching staffs in the NFL.

Again Wilson is a huge part of the turn around but really the whole organization completely turned around to become a powerhouse. They made a lot of very good moves over the last few years that have helped situate them well for the future.

 

[gohusk]

I just looked it up and his injury was when he was with the Raiders and he had hurt his elbow. My bad. I do get that he was expected to be the starter but like I said it is pretty darn obvious now to everybody in the league he is not a quality starter. Wilson obviously is so I don't think it would have been that hard of a decision to put Wilson as the starter. From what I understand Flynn just looked pretty pathetic. It is not like they were looking at 2 very good quarterbacks and having to pick between them. The money thing is the only reason that Flynn even stayed in the race.

I don't want to say Flynn got screwed over but he wasn't dealt a very good hand. There were problems with chemistry with the team and the 1st unit floundered against the other teams 1's. Not that he was playing well at all but the rest of the offense wasn't doing him any favors. I remember one drive where it looked like he might get on a roll and TO (yes, the situation was so bad that TO was called in) dropped a pretty easy TD pass and it didn't seem like he recovered from it. Wilson went out with the 2nd unit and shined and then got promoted. It was obvious he was better but saying a 3rd round rookie QB who has the whole "too short" thing going against him winning the starting job over a big signing was in any way an easy choice is ridiculous. He fought for the job and won it. It would have bee easy for PC to say that he's going with Flynn based on years in the league but he stuck with his philosophy of fighting for your job every week and it worked out great. Flynn was the easy choice and the Seahawks decided to go against conventional wisdom. Worked out pretty good.

 

[Desean12345]

You're right. They went 5-11, 7-9, 7-9, and then Wilson (11-5, 13-3).....that actually shows the team was bad for longer before he showed up. I thought it was just two years but it was actually 3 terrible years.

The Colts have been an average team for years and years now. Like I said, having Peyton Manning can cover up a lot of problems. Once they foolishly let him go, we saw what that team truly was to be honest, a below average team that was much worse than the Seahawks both statistically and record wise.

 

[dkmightyhammer]

This would be correct.

List of Seattle Seahawks seasons - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

There is a link if anybody questions whether the Seahawks had back to back 7-9 seasons before Wilson came to town.

Wilson is definitely a part of the turn around for the Seahawks to being Super Bowl Champs but I would venture to say that most would agree that a lot of things beyond just Wilson happened for the Seahawks to get where they are today. The 2 drafts before Wilson came into the picture netted the team Okung, Thomas, Tate, Thurmond, Chancellor, Wright, Sherman, Maxwell, and Smith. Just goes to show if you want to win a Super Bowl it starts with drafting well and building great depth. Every one of those players contributed to the Super Bowl run last year and to the possible success moving forward.

Then I would say the coaching staff also has a big part in the turn around. They are now being regarded as one of the best coaching staffs in the NFL.

Again Wilson is a huge part of the turn around but really the whole organization completely turned around to become a powerhouse. They made a lot of very good moves over the last few years that have helped situate them well for the future.

All of those moves would have likely meant nothing if they kept Flynn or T-Jack.

It all starts with your starting pivot. I could understand the feeling that Wilson was just along for the ride more so if he was just putting up average numbers, but he puts up extremely good numbers in every single category except for passing yards which he more than makes up for with his rushing yards. Did you know that if you take Luck and Wilson's total yards last year all that separates them is 19 yards a game? That's it. Only 19 yards a game, but Wilson has more TDs, better comp %, less int's, and a higher passer rating. No QB in NFL history has as many TD's in their first two seasons and had over a hundred passer rating at the same time. That can't all be because of the defense and Lynch can it?

It's like in this debate people take Luck's mediocre numbers and then add points for various excuses and then they take Wilson's outstanding numbers and deduct points for various excuses and that's how they conclude Luck is better. The only way Luck is better is if people twist numbers and facts to make it happen. By every natural measure, that isn't tweaked to suit an argument, Wilson is just better right now.

 

[cdumler7]

All those moves would have meant nothing? So having the best defense in the NFL and one that will go down in history would mean a mediocre team? I mean look at the Ravens in 2000 as that is a comparable unit. They had a great running back just like the Seahawks do and a great defense with a mediocre quarterback. They went on to win the Super Bowl. Now obviously having Wilson is icing on the cake as he makes them that much more dangerous but I wouldn't belittle the rest of the team just to raise up Wilson.


People did this with Tebow when the Broncos were winning with him completely ignoring that the defense was playing lights out and only noticed that Tebow would score the game winning touchdown in the 4th quarter even though he did jack squat for 90% of the game.


Again saying the rest of the team around Wilson is amazing is not taking away from his abilities. It is saying that Wilson is one part of what it takes to have a championship team. He is a big part don't get me wrong but I think the Seahawks even with a mediocre quarterback are still a good team in this league. You don't have a historical defense like they did and only be a mediocre team in this league.

 

[SonnyCID]

All of those moves would have likely meant nothing if they kept Flynn or T-Jack.

It all starts with your starting pivot. I could understand the feeling that Wilson was just along for the ride more so if he was just putting up average numbers, but he puts up extremely good numbers in every single category except for passing yards which he more than makes up for with his rushing yards. Did you know that if you take Luck and Wilson's total yards last year all that separates them is 19 yards a game? That's it. Only 19 yards a game, but Wilson has more TDs, better comp %, less int's, and a higher passer rating. No QB in NFL history has as many TD's in their first two seasons and had over a hundred passer rating at the same time. That can't all be because of the defense and Lynch can it?

It's like in this debate people take Luck's mediocre numbers and then add points for various excuses and then they take Wilson's outstanding numbers and deduct points for various excuses and that's how they conclude Luck is better. The only way Luck is better is if people twist numbers and facts to make it happen. By every natural measure, that isn't tweaked to suit an argument, Wilson is just better right now.

 

[SonnyCID]

All those moves would have meant nothing? So having the best defense in the NFL and one that will go down in history would mean a mediocre team? I mean look at the Ravens in 2000 as that is a comparable unit. They had a great running back just like the Seahawks do and a great defense with a mediocre quarterback. They went on to win the Super Bowl. Now obviously having Wilson is icing on the cake as he makes them that much more dangerous but I wouldn't belittle the rest of the team just to raise up Wilson.


People did this with Tebow when the Broncos were winning with him completely ignoring that the defense was playing lights out and only noticed that Tebow would score the game winning touchdown in the 4th quarter even though he did jack squat for 90% of the game.


Again saying the rest of the team around Wilson is amazing is not taking away from his abilities. It is saying that Wilson is one part of what it takes to have a championship team. He is a big part don't get me wrong but I think the Seahawks even with a mediocre quarterback are still a good team in this league. You don't have a historical defense like they did and only be a mediocre team in this league.

Those units benefit from Wilson as much as he benefits from them. He keeps defenses honest by challenging them down field. Keeps the defense off the field by engineering long drive that end in TDs, and he doesn't give them a short field. This guy is the straw that stirs the drink. For as good as that defense is, I wouldn't pencil them in for being the force they have been without him playing point on the other side. I certainly wouldn't pencil them in for a SB.

 

[dkmightyhammer]

All those moves would have meant nothing? So having the best defense in the NFL and one that will go down in history would mean a mediocre team? I mean look at the Ravens in 2000 as that is a comparable unit. They had a great running back just like the Seahawks do and a great defense with a mediocre quarterback. They went on to win the Super Bowl. Now obviously having Wilson is icing on the cake as he makes them that much more dangerous but I wouldn't belittle the rest of the team just to raise up Wilson.

Again saying the rest of the team around Wilson is amazing is not taking away from his abilities. It is saying that Wilson is one part of what it takes to have a championship team. He is a big part don't get me wrong but I think the Seahawks even with a mediocre quarterback are still a good team in this league. You don't have a historical defense like they did and only be a mediocre team in this league.

Yes, I think you can have the greatest team in the world on paper and if you have a QB that makes bonehead plays and gives games away it will mean nothing. Picture someone like a Tony Romo in Seattle last year instead of Wilson. He's a good QB, maybe even better than good, but in two close games in the playoffs against the Saints and Niners would you feel confident saying that Romo would have won those games? Do you think Romo ( or several others) make that come from behind drive to take the lead against the Niners who had maybe the 2nd best defense in the NFL last year? You need a Wilson. Winning with Tebow's and Dilfer's are anomalies. Nobody is going to confuse what Wilson does with guys like that. The only reason people bring stuff like that up is to try to bring Wilson down. It's really all they've got.