Pretty funny how people actually think Andrew Luck has been better than RW.

[night]

Sometimes this is true. But that's only when discussing bad to good QBs. When discussing great QBs, their stats don't dip with increased volume of throws.

I guess you could take a look at Wilson's college stats. You'll notice a pretty significant difference between his stats at NC State and Wisconsin. It's the same sort of deal. The difference between just his junior and senior year is 40 attempts vs 22 attempts per game. His rating, completion %, and yards per attempt made a huge leap.

Russell Wilson Stats | College Football at Sports-Reference.com

 

[Mondo Jay]

Luck may get to a Super Bowl someday and have a chance to throw a soul-crushing, game losing INT to break the collective hearts of millions. Until then, RW has the edge.

 

[Rex Racer]

Football is a team game.

Do you think the Colts would have won a Super Bowl in the past three seasons if they had Wilson?

NFW

 

[ATL96Steeler]

This is not really an apples to apples deal here. RW is not asked to carry the team on his arm every week.
If the teams switched QBs...I feel pretty confident in saying that Luck would fare as good or better in SEA and RW would not fare as well in IND.

 

[pantherfanforever11]

i think the better question is. would RW have done better in Indy then Luck has?

everyone seems to agree that RW would not have won a super with Indy and that Luck wins a superbowl win with Seattle. so i think the question above is proper one...

 

[Sharkonabicycle]

If I'm starting a franchise from scratch, I'm taking Luck. Of all the starting QB's, Wilson is about 15th on my list. Yes, Wilson has had the better career awards wise, but give Luck a capable RB and a better than average defense and it will be Indy in back to back Super Bowls, not Seattle.

15th on your list? I'm dying to hear (outside of Luck) who the other 13 are.

 

[ducky]

Flat out, if you gave Luck the running game and defense that RW has had up to this point, he probably has more than one ring.

Luck IS the Indy offense. RW has been a game manager (at least by modern NFL standards). That is not to diminish RW in anyway. He has been great and given Seattle exactly what they needed when they needed it. But he hasn't been as good as Luck who has had to do a lot more of the heavy lifting in Indy where the offense begins and ends with him.

There are only one or two teams in the league that have passed for fewer yards in the NFL in the 3 years that RW has been in the league. Teams like Oakland and Jacksoville have more passing yards over the last 3 years than Seattle does. It just goes to show how much less RW has been asked to do than your typical NFL QB.

 

[ducky]

15th on your list? I'm dying to hear (outside of Luck) who the other 13 are.

I just posted in support of Luck. But RW is no slouch. If I am starting a franchise and I get to pick my QB, he is in my top 5 based on youth and ability.

 

[SteveDallas]

Having heard all the "Romo's never won a SB" BS for the last few years I would have thought the answer to the question is obvious. Wilson has a ring, Luck does not. Arguement over.

 

[beardown07]

This premise is absurd. Football is the consummate team game and the Seahawks are a much better TEAM.




Having said that, this much I can say, Luck would've punched that in himself from the one and if I was picking a team from zero, I'd take Luck 100 times before I'd even consider Wilson.

 

[DHoey]

They use to argue who the best in that QB class was. It was between Luck and Robert Griffin....remember that guy?

Trying to decide who is better is pointless. A more relevant arguement is, who's career would you rather have? RW hands down.

 

[ducky]

Trying to decide who is better is pointless. A more relevant arguement is, who's career would you rather have? RW hands down.

Just winning a SB does not automatically make a better career. Phil Sims has a ring....but I would have rather had Dan Marino's career.

 

[Cyder]

Sometimes this is true. But that's only when discussing bad to good QBs. When discussing great QBs, their stats don't dip with increased volume of throws.

It does when you have receivers that drop every other pass and when you have zero running game.

 

[DHoey]

Just winning a SB does not automatically make a better career. Phil Sims has a ring....but I would have rather had Dan Marino's career.

I never said it did.

 

[Cyder]

i think the better question is. would RW have done better in Indy then Luck has?

everyone seems to agree that RW would not have won a super with Indy and that Luck wins a superbowl win with Seattle. so i think the question above is proper one...

I'm not sure about that. I agree Wilson would not win on Indy and I would take Luck over Wilson in a heartbeat although I think Wilson is excellent. However, 2 years ago the Hawks line had issues and Wilson's mobility was a key. I'm not sure if Luck could have stayed healthy all year that year.

 

[Uhsplit]

I hope the agents and GM's of the NFL agree with the majority in this forum.
With that in mind Luck = about $20-$22 M a year.
Russell= $12-$14 M a year.
That would work for me.

 

[Moab]

Sometimes I wonder if some of these fanboys remove their hero's nuts from their eyes and watch an actual football game.

 

[jeffro151]

15th on your list? I'm dying to hear (outside of Luck) who the other 13 are.

Brees
Brady
P Manning
Rivers
Ryan
Rodgers
Stafford
Flacco
Bridgewater
Romo
Newton
Foles
Roethlisberger

Not too hard to argue those players are better QB'S than Wilson.

 

[JMR]

How can you hypothetically give Luck Seattle's running game when Wilson is 30% of it?

 

[JMR]

Brees
Brady
P Manning
Rivers
Ryan
Rodgers
Stafford
Flacco
Bridgewater
Romo
Newton
Foles
Roethlisberger

Not too hard to argue those players are better QB'S than Wilson.

Bridgewater???? You just forfeited your vote in this discussion.