Sando QB rankings

[burrrton]

Anybody have an Insider account who can post his conclusions?

http://insider.espn.go.com/nfl/story/_/ ... acks-tiers

[Anthony]

Anybody have an Insider account who can post his conclusions?

http://insider.espn.go.com/nfl/story/_/ ... acks-tiers

It wasn't his conclusion but basically him adding up votes from various so called experts. They then broke it down into tiers, Rw was 2nd tier the 1st tier were the usual subjects and of course the media hype that is Luck. Thankfully the players no the truth

[kalibane]

I was arguably Luck's biggest fan coming into the draft and out of college but the Hype around him is really beginning to be insufferable. It's rare that I say this but I think Brock Huard made a good point the other day.

If Russell Wilson was 3 inches taller there wouldn't even be a debate as to whether Luck or Wilson was better. I still wouldn't be shocked if Luck was better when it's all said and done but he was outplayed by Wilson and RGIII in 2012 and Wilson in 2013.

Besides, wasn't Aikman a first ballot hall of famer doing what Wilson does... handing off 30 times per game? Talk about hypocritical analysis. I get people putting Manning, Rodgers, Big Ben, Brady and Brees above Wilson. Luck belongs on the same tier at best.

[Anthony]

I was arguably Luck's biggest fan coming into the draft and out of college but the Hype around him is really beginning to be insufferable. It's rare that I say this but I think Brock Huard made a good point the other day.

If Russell Wilson was 3 inches taller there wouldn't even be a debate as to whether Luck or Wilson was better. I still wouldn't be shocked if Luck was better when it's all said and done but he was outplayed by Wilson and RGIII in 2012 and Wilson in 2013.

Besides, wasn't Aikman a first ballot hall of famer doing what Wilson does... handing off 30 times per game? Talk about hypocritical analysis. I get people putting Manning, Rodgers, Big Ben, Brady and Brees above Wilson. Luck belongs on the same tier at best.

Not just Aikman but Montana, Young, and I can name more. I agree Luck should be on the same level at Rw not higher, that stats and facts show that. However you need to realize he is up there more because of the hype and the fact the media said he was the 2nd coming and they do not like to be wrong, so they will put him their and use examples like well Rw has a great run game, and defense, forgetting Luck has the much better o-line, and wrs and Indys defense was top 10 in scoring so they are not bad either. Also add to that Luck last year took a step backwards in almost every stat, while Rw went forward and Luck plays in the much weaker AFC while RW not only plays in the stronger NFC, but in the strongest division the NFC west. You can bet if those things were true of Luck they would be all over it, but not for RW. It will change in another year or 2 of great play.

[Futureite]

I was arguably Luck's biggest fan coming into the draft and out of college but the Hype around him is really beginning to be insufferable. It's rare that I say this but I think Brock Huard made a good point the other day.

If Russell Wilson was 3 inches taller there wouldn't even be a debate as to whether Luck or Wilson was better. I still wouldn't be shocked if Luck was better when it's all said and done but he was outplayed by Wilson and RGIII in 2012 and Wilson in 2013.

Besides, wasn't Aikman a first ballot hall of famer doing what Wilson does... handing off 30 times per game? Talk about hypocritical analysis. I get people putting Manning, Rodgers, Big Ben, Brady and Brees above Wilson. Luck belongs on the same tier at best.

You can look at it two different ways. (1) what value does each QB bring to his team? Or (2) who is the better player, period?
The MVP debates often go around in circles with this argument. You have one guy that is incredible in one system and other that has undeniable talent. MVP voting usually goes to the guy on the better team, because he gets credit for elevating them. The debate in this case applies similar reasoning IMO.

In this particular debate RW falls into (1). He does a lot of things extremely well that Carroll asks him to do, and he plays well under pressure. That said, Luck could go to Seattle and do what RW does. Clearly Luck has a high football IQ and is great under pressure. In fact, he became a phenom in college by playing that exact same style of QB under Jim Harbaugh. But I have a hard time envisioning RW going to Indy and doing what Luck does, which is to sit in the pocket consistently and beat great teams, with no run game or D. Luck has pure pocket passing ability that is head and shoulders above the young class of QBs at this point, and it's been evident in each head to head matchup that he's had with them. He has considerably less talent around him than SF, Seattle, Denver etc and yet he's beaten every one of them.

Now people have said I hold this opinion because he played at Stanford. I do root for Stanford when they play a big game, but my favorite team is Washington State. I have no vested interest in hyping Luck as better than Wilson or of course, my mancrush Kaep lol. I do believe he's a much better QB though, period. If he has any weapons, there is really no way to gameplan against him. If he had a top 5 D instead of the seive that couldn't stop running water in the playoffs, he'd have a ring too.

[kalibane]

That's just it Future. 1. I've seen nothing that indicates Wilson couldn't do what Luck is doing. People are just projecting that he can't based on the fact that Pete Carroll has a ball control offense focussed on the Running Game, which would not change if Luck was the QB. When he's been asked to throw a lot he's performed extremely well. 2. If Luck was doing this while maintaining a high level of efficiency then I wouldn't be saying anything but he doesn't. We like our NBA comparisons you and I right? Right now he's a volume scorer. The same way Kevin Durant was when he first got into the league. He racked up scoring stats because he got to take all the shots he wanted on a bad team. Now Kevin Durant is just the best pure scorer in the league. But it took him time to get there. Luck isn't there yet, he just has a lot of opportunities to rack up stats. To his credit he isn't a complete turn over machine, but he does play in the weakest division and has shown a tendency to turn the ball over against better defenses.

See this is a murky argument because when you talk out against a guy like Luck people act like you're calling him bad. Not the case. But these guys put Luck in a tier with Manning, Brady, Brees and Rodgers. That's ridiculous when you're barely completing 60% of your passes compared to the 65-70% these other guys complete. Watch some of Lucks games and you'll notice that he'll just go away for quarters at a time, because he's still trying to figure it out completely.

He is not on their level, not yet. It's not so much that people have him rated above Wilson in this instance, as it is they have him rated with 4 guys who are headed to the HOF. I can't stomach that. And if you want to drag college into this, Wilson did show that he could fling the ball around when he was at NC State I'm completely confident that if Luck didn't have that"Best prospect since Elway" narrative he'd be right in the wait and see guys like Wilson, Kaep and Newton.

I have no doubt he'll get there, probably in a couple years but he is not in the top tier yet.

[Futureite]

That's just it Future. 1. I've seen nothing that indicates Wilson couldn't do what Luck is doing. People are just projecting that he can't based on the fact that Pete Carroll has a ball control offense focussed on the Running Game, which would not change if Luck was the QB. When he's been asked to throw a lot he's performed extremely well. 2. If Luck was doing this while maintaining a high level of efficiency then I wouldn't be saying anything but he doesn't. We like our NBA comparisons you and I right? Right now he's a volume scorer. The same way Kevin Durant was when he first got into the league. He racked up scoring stats because he got to take all the shots he wanted on a bad team. Now Kevin Durant is just the best pure scorer in the league. But it took him time to get there. Luck isn't there yet, he just has a lot of opportunities to rack up stats. To his credit he isn't a complete turn over machine, but he does play in the weakest division and has shown a tendency to turn the ball over against better defenses.

See this is a murky argument because when you talk out against a guy like Luck people act like you're calling him bad. Not the case. But these guys put Luck in a tier with Manning, Brady, Brees and Rodgers. That's ridiculous when you're barely completing 60% of your passes compared to the 65-70% these other guys complete. Watch some of Lucks games and you'll notice that he'll just go away for quarters at a time, because he's still trying to figure it out completely.

He is not on their level, not yet. It's not so much that people have him rated above Wilson in this instance, as it is they have him rated with 4 guys who are headed to the HOF. I can't stomach that. And if you want to drag college into this, Wilson did show that he could fling the ball around when he was at NC State I'm completely confident that if Luck didn't have that"Best prospect since Elway" narrative he'd be right in the wait and see guys like Wilson, Kaep and Newton.

I have no doubt he'll get there, probably in a couple years but he is not in the top tier yet.

Those are solid points. But Durant is a legit MVP candidate yr in and yr out, so his talent was not a mirage. His numbers + special skillset = top tier player.

Same is true with Luck. If he did not have a unique skilkset that separates him from other players, you could view his numbers with a grain of salt. The truth is, Wilson and Kaep have a walk in the park compated to Luck. Teams load the box to stop the run, which opens up big plays that boost each QB's yds/attempt. Both have taken care of the ball extremely well, because top 5 Ds prevent them from having to force plays; hense low total INTs each yr.

Luck has none of that, pocket skills that are far better than any of the other young QBs, and he's beaten them with lesser talent. I am not saying RW or Kaep cannot be better - and as a Niner I am banking on Kaep's work ethic to make that next leap as a facilitator - but they are not at this point. Completely fair IMO to put Luck in a tier above the others. Just my opinion.

[burrrton]

That said, Luck could go to Seattle and do what RW does.

I like Luck *a lot*, but do you really think you can say this with confidence? We had one of the worst O-lines in the league. How was Indy's (honest question- I haven't looked yet)?

my favorite team is Washington State.

Ok, maybe we can hang after all...

[burrrton]

I've seen nothing that indicates Wilson couldn't do what Luck is doing.

This.

There is some meme out there that says RW can't pass from the pocket, but he's been *money*, and IIRC arguably even *better*, from the pocket.

It just seems to be one of those things that won't go away.

[burrrton]

Luck has none of that, pocket skills that are far better than any of the other young QBs, and he's beaten them with lesser talent.

By what measure has he beaten them (again, honest question)? How are you judging his "pocket skills" superior?

[Anthony]

I was arguably Luck's biggest fan coming into the draft and out of college but the Hype around him is really beginning to be insufferable. It's rare that I say this but I think Brock Huard made a good point the other day.

If Russell Wilson was 3 inches taller there wouldn't even be a debate as to whether Luck or Wilson was better. I still wouldn't be shocked if Luck was better when it's all said and done but he was outplayed by Wilson and RGIII in 2012 and Wilson in 2013.

Besides, wasn't Aikman a first ballot hall of famer doing what Wilson does... handing off 30 times per game? Talk about hypocritical analysis. I get people putting Manning, Rodgers, Big Ben, Brady and Brees above Wilson. Luck belongs on the same tier at best.

You can look at it two different ways. (1) what value does each QB bring to his team? Or (2) who is the better player, period?
The MVP debates often go around in circles with this argument. You have one guy that is incredible in one system and other that has undeniable talent. MVP voting usually goes to the guy on the better team, because he gets credit for elevating them. The debate in this case applies similar reasoning IMO.

In this particular debate RW falls into (1). He does a lot of things extremely well that Carroll asks him to do, and he plays well under pressure. That said, Luck could go to Seattle and do what RW does. Clearly Luck has a high football IQ and is great under pressure. In fact, he became a phenom in college by playing that exact same style of QB under Jim Harbaugh. But I have a hard time envisioning RW going to Indy and doing what Luck does, which is to sit in the pocket consistently and beat great teams, with no run game or D. Luck has pure pocket passing ability that is head and shoulders above the young class of QBs at this point, and it's been evident in each head to head matchup that he's had with them. He has considerably less talent around him than SF, Seattle, Denver etc and yet he's beaten every one of them.

Now people have said I hold this opinion because he played at Stanford. I do root for Stanford when they play a big game, but my favorite team is Washington State. I have no vested interest in hyping Luck as better than Wilson or of course, my mancrush Kaep lol. I do believe he's a much better QB though, period. If he has any weapons, there is really no way to gameplan against him. If he had a top 5 D instead of the seive that couldn't stop running water in the playoffs, he'd have a ring too.

Totally wrong on all counts, Luck has proven he is a turnover waiting to happen, and that alone would make him unsuccessful here. Add tot that he is playing behind a top 10 pass blocking o-line Rw behind the worse pass blocking o-line that again proves that while I agree luck has the potential to be great, he is not yet and would not do as well on our te3am as Rw has. FYi Lucks Defense is a top 10 scoring defense, and he has a HOF wr, and another who is in the top 10 amongst top 100, so lets stop the crap that Luck has no one he has more than RW.

[Anthony]

That said, Luck could go to Seattle and do what RW does.

I like Luck *a lot*, but do you really think you can say this with confidence? We had one of the worst O-lines in the league. How was Indy's (honest question- I haven't looked yet)?

my favorite team is Washington State.

Ok, maybe we can hang after all...

Lucks o-line is top 10 in pass blocking

[Anthony]

I've seen nothing that indicates Wilson couldn't do what Luck is doing.

This.

There is some meme out there that says RW can't pass from the pocket, but he's been *money*, and IIRC arguably even *better*, from the pocket.

It just seems to be one of those things that won't go away.

Rw has a 66.3% completion % from the pocket, luck 60.3

https://www.profootballfocus.com/blog/2 ... -scramble/

[Anthony]

Luck has none of that, pocket skills that are far better than any of the other young QBs, and he's beaten them with lesser talent.

By what measure has he beaten them (again, honest question)? How are you judging his "pocket skills" superior?

again see completion % from the pocket Luck 60.3, RW 66.1, enough said

[kalibane]

Durant is an MVP candidate year in and year out now. Not in his first two years. Luck will be there but not yet.

[Futureite]

That said, Luck could go to Seattle and do what RW does.

I like Luck *a lot*, but do you really think you can say this with confidence? We had one of the worst O-lines in the league. How was Indy's (honest question- I haven't looked yet)?

my favorite team is Washington State.

Ok, maybe we can hang after all...

Lol I'd kill for a Mark Fields, Chris Childs,Anthony Mclanahan or hell, even a Steve Gleason right now. I can't remember the last time I saw any semblance of a defense in the Palouse. Maybe some of what the Hawks have will rub off on rhem this yr by sheer geographical proximity.

[Futureite]

Luck has none of that, pocket skills that are far better than any of the other young QBs, and he's beaten them with lesser talent.

By what measure has he beaten them (again, honest question)? How are you judging his "pocket skills" superior?

Well, he outplayed Wilson and Kaep in the 4th QTR of both meetings. Luck scored TDs in the 4th, our guys didn't when they cpuld have won the game. That was the diffetence in both meetings. There is no way to really prove a QB has a better pocket presence, but can you honestly say that RW has sat in the pocket the entire game and picked a team apart with his arm the way Luck has? Both RW and Kaep's game is built off of movement. Look at RW's biggest game, v ATL. He was either moving or throwing on the run most of that game. If he didn't "leave" the pocket, he was buying tons of extra time within it untill wrs broke open. Teams have caught on to Kaep and RW, and both will have to be more like Luck to take their games to the next level, which can reasonably be in that top 5 after Brady, Manning and possibly Brees retire. Those vets are so good becauae they had to use theie brain and their arm for so long to beat teams, rather than their athleticism.

[savvyman]

Luck is a great QB and if we did not have Wilson I would be thrilled to have Luck as the Seahawks QB.

I do think that Wilson will be more effective than Luck behind a porous offensive line.

I will let Human Cockroach weigh in on who is the better QB overall.

[Anthony]

Luck has none of that, pocket skills that are far better than any of the other young QBs, and he's beaten them with lesser talent.

By what measure has he beaten them (again, honest question)? How are you judging his "pocket skills" superior?

Well, he outplayed Wilson and Kaep in the 4th QTR of both meetings. Luck scored TDs in the 4th, our guys didn't when they cpuld have won the game. That was the diffetence in both meetings. There is no way to really prove a QB has a better pocket presence, but can you honestly say that RW has sat in the pocket the entire game and picked a team apart with his arm the way Luck has? Both RW and Kaep's game is built off of movement. Look at RW's biggest game, v ATL. He was either moving or throwing on the run most of that game. If he didn't "leave" the pocket, he was buying tons of extra time within it untill wrs broke open. Teams have caught on to Kaep and RW, and both will have to be more like Luck to take their games to the next level, which can reasonably be in that top 5 after Brady, Manning and possibly Brees retire. Those vets are so good becauae they had to use theie brain and their arm for so long to beat teams, rather than their athleticism.

First off Luck has not set in the pocket a whole game so that point is moot. AS to teams catching up to RW. hmm Yeah I saw that in the SB oh wait ho I did not, OR in the NFCG oh wait you did not. If the have caught up to RW then why is every stat but yards way better than Lucks? IF they caught up how did he end up with a 100+ QB rating, because they have not caught up. Answer they have not caught up with anything. Also please lets not act like Luck did not play any bad games, lets see 7 Ints in 2 playoff games I guess they caught up to Luck. 4 game stretch of QB rating under 85 I guess they caught up with luck there too. Let me remind you Luck had 8 games with a QB rating below the avg mark of 85. He had 7 games with compl % under 60. In the AFC of all places. HIs QB rating for the year was 87 that is not great.

Oh and by the way the whole Rw game is bult off movement one more time

LUCK IN THE POCKET 60.3 COMPLT %, RW IN THE POCKET 66.1. So remind me who is better in the pocket oh yeah the guy with the higher complt % who is RW.

[burrrton]

I've seen nothing that indicates Wilson couldn't do what Luck is doing.

This.

There is some meme out there that says RW can't pass from the pocket, but he's been *money*, and IIRC arguably even *better*, from the pocket.

It just seems to be one of those things that won't go away.

Rw has a 66.3% completion % from the pocket, luck 60.3

https://www.profootballfocus.com/blog/2 ... -scramble/

Ouch. You want to retract anything, Future?

[burrrton]

Maybe some of what the Hawks have will rub off on rhem this yr by sheer geographical proximity.

Yeah, me, too. Sh*t, at this point I'd take Leaf coming back just for a short-term 'fix', ya know?

[burrrton]

There is no way to really prove a QB has a better pocket presence, but can you honestly say that RW has sat in the pocket the entire game and picked a team apart with his arm the way Luck has?

Well, he hasn't *had* to do it the entire game. I'm not going to say that should solidify his position as "best evar", but I think the fact that he's done it whenever necessary should make you step back and say "ok, maybe...", right?

Teams have caught on to Kaep and RW, and both will have to be more like Luck to take their games to the next level, which can reasonably be in that top 5 after Brady, Manning and possibly Brees retire. Those vets are so good becauae they had to use theie brain and their arm for so long to beat teams, rather than their athleticism.

See, there's the thing. Certainly, they've both been able to work under the assumption that their Ds could bail them out, but Russell *HAS* "used his brain and arm" by any and all metrics you can point to.

I've said it before, but I'm not one of those guys that will predict the future, but if you want to argue RW hasn't been absolute fcking *money* in virtually every aspect to this point, you're being dishonest, and if you want to argue he'll fold going forward, you have to retreat to "Eh, I just don't think he can continue to be that good".

He's been in the league 2 full seasons- if there were any weaknesses besides "can't excel with a shitty defense" (which is simply an unknown at this point), they would have shown up.

[Futureite]

There is no way to really prove a QB has a better pocket presence, but can you honestly say that RW has sat in the pocket the entire game and picked a team apart with his arm the way Luck has?

Well, he hasn't *had* to do it the entire game. I'm not going to say that should solidify his position as "best evar", but I think the fact that he's done it whenever necessary should make you step back and say "ok, maybe...", right?

Teams have caught on to Kaep and RW, and both will have to be more like Luck to take their games to the next level, which can reasonably be in that top 5 after Brady, Manning and possibly Brees retire. Those vets are so good becauae they had to use theie brain and their arm for so long to beat teams, rather than their athleticism.

See, there's the thing. Certainly, they've both been able to work under the assumption that their Ds could bail them out, but Russell *HAS* "used his brain and arm" by any and all metrics you can point to.

I've said it before, but I'm not one of those guys that will predict the future, but if you want to argue RW hasn't been absolute fcking *money* in virtually every aspect to this point, you're being dishonest, and if you want to argue he'll fold going forward, you have to retreat to "Eh, I just don't think he can continue to be that good".

He's been in the league 2 full seasons- if there were any weaknesses besides "can't excel with a shitty defense" (which is simply an unknown at this point), they would have shown up.

Of course RW has used his brain and his arm. He is a heady, intelligent QB that plays well under pressure. Makes good decisions, great deep ball thrower, throws well on the run. All around he has been great.

But my question was, have you seen a Seattle gameplan centered around RW consistently drop back, read a D and pick it apart from the pocket. Teams have figured out how to contain him within the pocket and play from it. What I noticed the last half of the yr was Ds were sending a LB the second RW left the pocket, which forced him to make quicker decisions and reduced the number of huge chunk pass plays he'd make when he had extended plays before. The result was he the last 4 weeks of the season with 4 TDs 3 INTs, and he struggled V the Saints in the playoffs and a good amount of the NFCCCG. Now he gets the benefit of the doubt because of how he's played, so I assume he will adapt. But IMO it is a fact that he will have to play more like a classic pocket passer to sustain his success.

Now Kap's issues were hammered by everyone under. I'd like to think he came through most of it last yr in the final 1/4th of the season, but we do not know. I want to see how or if he adapts his game this yr to become more of a facilitator rather than.a guy that tries to win on his own with his arm strength and legs.

Bottom line, regardless of how you rate any of the young QBs I think Luck is the very best at dropping back, reading and getting the ball out of his hands quickly to the right guy. I have watched games where linemen are in his face all day, and he still delivers with ridiculous accuracy, standing taking shots. He makes incredible throws under pressure in the pocket (and made sone amazing 4th qtr throws under pressure V Hawks), and I just haven't seen any other QB of his class do that on a consistent basis. Doesn't mean they cannot learn to, but IMO he is on another level in that respect right now.

[Futureite]

It just seems to be one of those things that won't go away.[/quote]

Rw has a 66.3% completion % from the pocket, luck 60.3

https://www.profootballfocus.com/blog/2 ... -scramble/[/quote]

Ouch. You want to retract anything, Future?[/quote]

No. When 2 QBs are capable NFL starters, I would fully expect the QB with the dominant run game to have better efficiency from the pocket than the QB with no run game. DCs spend their entire week planning to stop Indy by figuring out how to stop Luck. Everything flows through him. When DCs face the Hawks, they spend the entire week scheming to stop Lynch. Everything in the Hawk O flows through him.

[RiverDog]

That said, Luck could go to Seattle and do what RW does.

You sound pretty sure of yourself when in reality, there's no way to determine how either quarterback would perform with a different team. There's a good chance that Luck could get maimed by the lack of pass protection provided by our anemic OL, which was rated as 27th worst in the league, a stat that almost certainly would have been even worse had it not been for the fact that they were blocking for who is arguably the most mobile, elusive quarterback in the league.

Having said that, I do agree that Luck should be included in the conversation, especially if that conversation includes Cam Newton and RG3. But I agree with the others that claim that Luck is a bit over hyped.

[NorthHawk]

Luck is a little over hyped and Wilson is a little bit burdened by those who are prejudiced about his height and won't let go as well as the "game manager" perception.

These things are opinions and by definition, they cannot be completely evidence based.

[burrrton]

But my question was, have you seen a Seattle gameplan centered around RW consistently drop back, read a D and pick it apart from the pocket.

Of course not- it's predictable and easier to defend. Why would they?

However, there have been many times he's had to do exactly that, and (again) he's been not just good, but *money*.

I just haven't seen any other QB of his class do that on a consistent basis. Doesn't mean they cannot learn to, but IMO he is on another level in that respect right now.

Uh, Russell has done it on a consistent basis. Pointing to a 4-game stretch against 4 of the better defenses in the league (where he was merely good, not MVP caliber) doesn't negate that.

No. When 2 QBs are capable NFL starters, I would fully expect the QB with the dominant run game to have better efficiency from the pocket than the QB with no run game.

So RW wouldn't be able to pass from the pocket with one of the best O-lines in the league (like Luck has), even though RW is better from the pocket with one of the worst O-lines.

Translation: your claims are unfalsifiable.

Also, stop with the 'running game' canard- we certainly have a better running game than Indy, but Indy wasn't hapless by any stretch.

[burrrton]

And yeah, for the record if I haven't said so already, I like Luck a lot, too. Pretty tough to not fear a QB that hung 34 on us.

[Anthony]

It just seems to be one of those things that won't go away.

Rw has a 66.3% completion % from the pocket, luck 60.3

https://www.profootballfocus.com/blog/2 ... -scramble/[/quote]

Ouch. You want to retract anything, Future?[/quote]

No. When 2 QBs are capable NFL starters, I would fully expect the QB with the dominant run game to have better efficiency from the pocket than the QB with no run game. DCs spend their entire week planning to stop Indy by figuring out how to stop Luck. Everything flows through him. When DCs face the Hawks, they spend the entire week scheming to stop Lynch. Everything in the Hawk O flows through him.[/quote]


crap again Indys run game avg 4,3 ypa guess what so did ours, however I would expect the QB with the better oline Indys was top 10 in pass blocking to perform better in the pocket then the guy with the worse pass blocking o-line, and yet Luck did not enough said.

[Anthony]

That said, Luck could go to Seattle and do what RW does.

You sound pretty sure of yourself when in reality, there's no way to determine how either quarterback would perform with a different team. There's a good chance that Luck could get maimed by the lack of pass protection provided by our anemic OL, which was rated as 27th worst in the league, a stat that almost certainly would have been even worse had it not been for the fact that they were blocking for who is arguably the most mobile, elusive quarterback in the league.

Having said that, I do agree that Luck should be included in the conversation, especially if that conversation includes Cam Newton and RG3. But I agree with the others that claim that Luck is a bit over hyped.

correction our o-line was 32nd see footballotusiders.com

http://www.footballoutsiders.com/stats/ol

[burrrton]

crap again Indys run game avg 4,3 ypa guess what so did ours

LOL. I hadn't even checked it- yeah, they were equal to us.

I'll ask again: want to retract anything, Future?

[RiverDog]

That said, Luck could go to Seattle and do what RW does.

You sound pretty sure of yourself when in reality, there's no way to determine how either quarterback would perform with a different team. There's a good chance that Luck could get maimed by the lack of pass protection provided by our anemic OL, which was rated as 27th worst in the league, a stat that almost certainly would have been even worse had it not been for the fact that they were blocking for who is arguably the most mobile, elusive quarterback in the league.

Having said that, I do agree that Luck should be included in the conversation, especially if that conversation includes Cam Newton and RG3. But I agree with the others that claim that Luck is a bit over hyped.

correction our o-line was 32nd see footballotusiders.com

http://www.footballoutsiders.com/stats/ol

Here's the one I was referencing:

https://www.profootballfocus.com/blog/2 ... -rankings/

[Futureite]

Indy's run game may have averaged 4.3 yds/carry, but teams were not stacking the box to stop it the way they were with Seattle. I can say Gore averaged 4.0 yds/carry too, but everyone knows that power running is what the 49ers do, and they continue to do it all game despite 8 or 9 men crowding upfront. No one loads up to stop Indy. They scheme to disrupt Luck, and that is common knowledge.

Also, Indy is not facing the same defensive fronts that Seattle does 6 times/yr. In fact, Cards were the NFL's best team at stopping the run last yr.

I think Russell is very good and could easily be a top 5 QB with some progression as a pure QB. He may even be ahead of Kaep in some respects. But if you put all these guys in a phone booth and made them throw to the right target accurately, with some one running at them, there is no question in my mind that Luck is the best of the young QBs.

[burrrton]

I think Russell is very good and could easily be a top 5 QB with some progression as a pure QB.

That's not unreasonable, and I don't know about specific rankings and all, but the point here is that RW has shown many, many times that he *excels* as a "pure QB".

I get the feeling if he wasn't so effective when flushed from the pocket, and just stood there and took 20 more sacks a year, people like you would be more forgiving.

Indy's run game may have averaged 4.3 yds/carry, but teams were not stacking the box to stop it the way they were with Seattle.

Indy passing offense (with league rankings in parens):

Yards/game-------------------233-----------(17th)
Yards/attempt----------------6.8-----------(21st)
Completion %-----------------60.1----------(17th)
TDs-----------------------------23------------(19th)

All while being sacked 6th fewest in the league.

So Indy's rushing offense is just as effective as ours, but that's because of their passing offense that's in the bottom-half-of-the-league?

[edit]

To be fair, I think I know where you're going to go with this- you're going to argue that their passing offense is so bad because teams scheme to shut it down.

However, I think it's pretty tough to argue that a team's passing offense is so good that their statistics end up bad, ya know?

Paraphrasing an old quote, you are what the stats say you are, and Indy is a playoff team with a running game just as effective as ours and a passing game in the bottom half of the league. It seems a pretty big stretch to argue that's because the QB is so good.

[Anthony]

Here's the one I was referencing:

https://www.profootballfocus.com/blog/2 ... -rankings/

Hmm interesting I like footballoutsiders better though, takes more things into account either way though they were bad

[Anthony]

Indy's run game may have averaged 4.3 yds/carry, but teams were not stacking the box to stop it the way they were with Seattle. I can say Gore averaged 4.0 yds/carry too, but everyone knows that power running is what the 49ers do, and they continue to do it all game despite 8 or 9 men crowding upfront. No one loads up to stop Indy. They scheme to disrupt Luck, and that is common knowledge.

Also, Indy is not facing the same defensive fronts that Seattle does 6 times/yr. In fact, Cards were the NFL's best team at stopping the run last yr.

I think Russell is very good and could easily be a top 5 QB with some progression as a pure QB. He may even be ahead of Kaep in some respects. But if you put all these guys in a phone booth and made them throw to the right target accurately, with some one running at them, there is no question in my mind that Luck is the best of the young QBs.

Dude they were not stacking the box is more a by product of the type of offense they run, nothing else. IF you are going to run a pass first offense teams are gogin to back off. Not to mention since we were a very very predictable run, run, pass teams knew what was coming and we still passed the ball better than luck you excuses are just wrong and old.

There may be no question is your mind, but your mind has proven to be a waste, the players spoke and they put Rw ahead of luck I think I will take it since they would know far better than some poor excuse of a fan like you. Sorry but I have had it with you and your BS excuses. RW plays in the hardest division in Football and still puts up numbers Luck can only dream about. OH and let me help you

the hawks played teams with an avg pass defense ranking of 12, Indy 16 HMm so we played the tougher pass defensive team and yet Rw was way better.

Now as to this "pure QB" BS that means throwing form the pocket,

Luck 60.3 complt % form inside the pocket. RW 68.4 complt% form inside the pocket

Oh and let me help you more

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.

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

Once again you have been proven to be wrong.

[HumanCockroach]

That's just it Future. 1. I've seen nothing that indicates Wilson couldn't do what Luck is doing. People are just projecting that he can't based on the fact that Pete Carroll has a ball control offense focussed on the Running Game, which would not change if Luck was the QB. When he's been asked to throw a lot he's performed extremely well. 2. If Luck was doing this while maintaining a high level of efficiency then I wouldn't be saying anything but he doesn't. We like our NBA comparisons you and I right? Right now he's a volume scorer. The same way Kevin Durant was when he first got into the league. He racked up scoring stats because he got to take all the shots he wanted on a bad team. Now Kevin Durant is just the best pure scorer in the league. But it took him time to get there. Luck isn't there yet, he just has a lot of opportunities to rack up stats. To his credit he isn't a complete turn over machine, but he does play in the weakest division and has shown a tendency to turn the ball over against better defenses.

See this is a murky argument because when you talk out against a guy like Luck people act like you're calling him bad. Not the case. But these guys put Luck in a tier with Manning, Brady, Brees and Rodgers. That's ridiculous when you're barely completing 60% of your passes compared to the 65-70% these other guys complete. Watch some of Lucks games and you'll notice that he'll just go away for quarters at a time, because he's still trying to figure it out completely.

He is not on their level, not yet. It's not so much that people have him rated above Wilson in this instance, as it is they have him rated with 4 guys who are headed to the HOF. I can't stomach that. And if you want to drag college into this, Wilson did show that he could fling the ball around when he was at NC State I'm completely confident that if Luck didn't have that"Best prospect since Elway" narrative he'd be right in the wait and see guys like Wilson, Kaep and Newton.

I have no doubt he'll get there, probably in a couple years but he is not in the top tier yet.

Those are solid points. But Durant is a legit MVP candidate yr in and yr out, so his talent was not a mirage. His numbers + special skillset = top tier player.

Same is true with Luck. If he did not have a unique skilkset that separates him from other players, you could view his numbers with a grain of salt. The truth is, Wilson and Kaep have a walk in the park compated to Luck. Teams load the box to stop the run, which opens up big plays that boost each QB's yds/attempt. Both have taken care of the ball extremely well, because top 5 Ds prevent them from having to force plays; hense low total INTs each yr.

Luck has none of that, pocket skills that are far better than any of the other young QBs, and he's beaten them with lesser talent. I am not saying RW or Kaep cannot be better - and as a Niner I am banking on Kaep's work ethic to make that next leap as a facilitator - but they are not at this point. Completely fair IMO to put Luck in a tier above the others. Just my opinion.

this would be a viable reason if there weren't so many QB's with the same benefits, but not the same results. Sorry just not buying the more TD's with less turnovers lends itself to the defense or really the running game. Wilson isn't getting a slew of goal line play action TDS and he actually was top three or four last season in TD's over 25+ yards in the NFL. Not every pass is a play action, and there are certainly a LOT of "top tier" QB's that benefit from strong run games, are we to say Ben isn't a good QB because when his run game dissapeared so did his production, are we to say Manning only succeeded because his run game was successful. This whole debate is kind of pointles. Wilson has indeed outperformed Luck, it's that simple, in the first two years in the league. In EVERY stat that matters Wilson wins ( unless you are apt to hinge the entire position on yardage, but Luck even fails in that regard based on YPP and YPC meaning he HAD to throw the ball a gazillion times to get his yardage).

I agree that Lucks ceiling is indeed higher, and he certainly has talent, that said I'll take the QB that has a hundred plus passer rating, throws two td's and no picks in the biggest game of his career over the one that throws five int's against a horrid Patriots defense ( and no matter what anyone says played horribly the week before) and self destructs two years in a row in the post season. At this point Luck is Dalton plus and that isn't where I would think anyone would want the "second coming" QB to be in season two.

[Hawktawk]

Casserly is high. He wrote a little article where he says he would rank 12!!!! quarterbacks ahead of Wilson.

Theres a bias about Wilson around the league. People dont like being wrong. They dont like a little goody two shoes midget who actually is all he appears to be, not some phony. And for all the arguments about RW and his mighty run game and defense being the only reason for his success you know when a QB rushed for over 500 yards it makes that stat look better.The defense gave up over 200 yds rushing in back to back games both of which Wilson made enough plays to win. Lynch got stuffed by the Broncos and Wilson carved them up like a Christmas Turkey. I would not trade him for Mr neck beard Luck under any circumstances. Wilson is a deadly assassin and the best QB in the league.

[Anthony]

That's just it Future. 1. I've seen nothing that indicates Wilson couldn't do what Luck is doing. People are just projecting that he can't based on the fact that Pete Carroll has a ball control offense focussed on the Running Game, which would not change if Luck was the QB. When he's been asked to throw a lot he's performed extremely well. 2. If Luck was doing this while maintaining a high level of efficiency then I wouldn't be saying anything but he doesn't. We like our NBA comparisons you and I right? Right now he's a volume scorer. The same way Kevin Durant was when he first got into the league. He racked up scoring stats because he got to take all the shots he wanted on a bad team. Now Kevin Durant is just the best pure scorer in the league. But it took him time to get there. Luck isn't there yet, he just has a lot of opportunities to rack up stats. To his credit he isn't a complete turn over machine, but he does play in the weakest division and has shown a tendency to turn the ball over against better defenses.

See this is a murky argument because when you talk out against a guy like Luck people act like you're calling him bad. Not the case. But these guys put Luck in a tier with Manning, Brady, Brees and Rodgers. That's ridiculous when you're barely completing 60% of your passes compared to the 65-70% these other guys complete. Watch some of Lucks games and you'll notice that he'll just go away for quarters at a time, because he's still trying to figure it out completely.

He is not on their level, not yet. It's not so much that people have him rated above Wilson in this instance, as it is they have him rated with 4 guys who are headed to the HOF. I can't stomach that. And if you want to drag college into this, Wilson did show that he could fling the ball around when he was at NC State I'm completely confident that if Luck didn't have that"Best prospect since Elway" narrative he'd be right in the wait and see guys like Wilson, Kaep and Newton.

I have no doubt he'll get there, probably in a couple years but he is not in the top tier yet.

Those are solid points. But Durant is a legit MVP candidate yr in and yr out, so his talent was not a mirage. His numbers + special skillset = top tier player.

Same is true with Luck. If he did not have a unique skilkset that separates him from other players, you could view his numbers with a grain of salt. The truth is, Wilson and Kaep have a walk in the park compated to Luck. Teams load the box to stop the run, which opens up big plays that boost each QB's yds/attempt. Both have taken care of the ball extremely well, because top 5 Ds prevent them from having to force plays; hense low total INTs each yr.

Luck has none of that, pocket skills that are far better than any of the other young QBs, and he's beaten them with lesser talent. I am not saying RW or Kaep cannot be better - and as a Niner I am banking on Kaep's work ethic to make that next leap as a facilitator - but they are not at this point. Completely fair IMO to put Luck in a tier above the others. Just my opinion.

this would be a viable reason if there weren't so many QB's with the same benefits, but not the same results. Sorry just not buying the more TD's with less turnovers lends itself to the defense or really the running game. Wilson isn't getting a slew of goal line play action TDS and he actually was top three or four last season in TD's over 25+ yards in the NFL. Not every pass is a play action, and there are certainly a LOT of "top tier" QB's that benefit from strong run games, are we to say Ben isn't a good QB because when his run game dissapeared so did his production, are we to say Manning only succeeded because his run game was successful. This whole debate is kind of pointles. Wilson has indeed outperformed Luck, it's that simple, in the first two years in the league. In EVERY stat that matters Wilson wins ( unless you are apt to hinge the entire position on yardage, but Luck even fails in that regard based on YPP and YPC meaning he HAD to throw the ball a gazillion times to get his yardage).

I agree that Lucks ceiling is indeed higher, and he certainly has talent, that said I'll take the QB that has a hundred plus passer rating, throws two td's and no picks in the biggest game of his career over the one that throws five int's against a horrid Patriots defense ( and no matter what anyone says played horribly the week before) and self destructs two years in a row in the post season. At this point Luck is Dalton plus and that isn't where I would think anyone would want the "second coming" QB to be in season two.

Lets put the whole running game thing to rest right now

Hmm the funny part of that is
GB was 7 in rushing and avg 4.7 ypa,
NE was 9th and avg 4.4 ypa,
Indy was 20th but avg 4.3 ypa,
Denver was 15th and avg 4.1 ypa,
Detroit was 17th and avg 4.0 ypa
Seattle were 4th and avg 4.3 ypa

GB 4th at 4.7 459 attempts
NE 9th at 4.4 470 attempts
Seattle 12th at 4.3 509 attempts
Indy 13th at 4.3 409 attempts
Denver 20th at 4.1 461 attempts
Detroit 22nd at 4.0 445 attempts

Take out the QB yardage and the number are even closer since RW had 539 yards rushing and the next nearest on this list had was luck who had only 377 and then Rogers at 120, so you can see that RWs ability to run skews the numbers a lot and he avg 5.6 ypa so that even skews that number.

Without QB

Denver 1873 yards 461 attempts 4.1 ypa
GB 1955 yards 412 attempts 4.7 ypa
Detroit 1723 yards 408 attempts 4.3 ypa
NE 2047 yards 438 attempts 4.67 ypa
Seattle 1649 yards 413 attempts 3.99 ypa
Indy 1366 yards 342 attempts 3.99 ypa


so as you can see without RW we are actually not as good as running the ball as we think, of course people will point to lynch so lets look just at the to RB from each team(of 2 rbs are close in stats I will list both

Seattle-Lynch had 1257 yards on 301 attempts and 4.2 ypa
GB-Lacey had 1178 yards on 284 attempts and 4.,1 ypa
Denver-Moreno had 1038 yards on 241 attempts 4.3 ypa
Det-Bush had 1006 yards on 223 attempts 4.5 ypa
Ne-Ridley had 773 yards on 178 attempts 4.3 ypa-note they also had Blount who had 772 yards on 153 attempts 5.0 ypa
Indy-Brown had 537 yards on 102 attempts 5.3 ypa

So even ging by the top RB we actually had the 2nd lowest ypa, so more proof all these teams have good run games the just do not run as much.


Now lets also hit the defense Luck s was a top 10 scoring defense and

The Colts average starting field position was their own 28 yard line. The Seahawks Average starting field position was their own 31 yard line. So stow the argument that the Seahawks defense gave Wilson a substantially shorter distances to travel for his touchdowns, because it just isn't true. Here's the link:
http://www.footballoutsiders.com/stats/drivestatsoff


Enough said.

[Hawktown]

future, you might as well throw in the towel, your not thinking well, i am afraid you have a concussion