Jacksonville Jaguars Fan Forums

Quote:We all know coltshomers would argue the opposite if they had Wilson.

 

We'd finish around 8-8 and you guys would HATE on Wilson.

Quote:We'd finish around 8-8 and you guys would HATE on Wilson.

Not really. Wilson actually has earned his hype. Rather than being called elite before he played a game.

Quote:Not really. Wilson actually has earned his hype. Rather than being called elite before he played a game.

Can you deny that Wilson plays on a team with the #1 defense in the league, and one of the top rushing offenses in the league? And yet, this does not seem to be included in your evaluation. It's been proven without a doubt that playing the QB position is infinitely easier on a team with a solid supporting cast, especially a #1 defense.

 

This year's stat splits per ESPN.com

 

Russel Wilson: 285 of 452 for 3,475 yards   63.1% Completion,  20 TDs and 7  INTs (.02456 INT%)  95.0 QBR

Andrew Luck:  380 of 616 for  4,761 yards   61.7% Completion,  40 TDs and 16INTs (.02597 INT%)  96.5 QBR

 

 

Further, their 4th quarter stats: 

Russel Wilson: 52.5% completion    5.76 YPA   

Andrew Luck:   58.7% completion   7.65  YPA

 

Lastly, where does each QB throw the ball?

Russel Wilson: Throws behind the LOS 21%

Andrew Luck:   Throws behind the LOS 18%

 

Andrew Luck led the league in completions of 20+ yards and has a much better completion percentage compared to Russel Wilson on throws 10+ yards down field. The advantage gained by Russel Wilson in completion percentage is that he throws more shorter passes, and completes more shorter passes. 

 

This is not my opinion, but facts.

Quote:Can you deny that Wilson plays on a team with the #1 defense in the league, and one of the top rushing offenses in the league? And yet, this does not seem to be included in your evaluation. It's been proven without a doubt that playing the QB position is infinitely easier on a team with a solid supporting cast, especially a #1 defense.

 

This year's stat splits per ESPN.com

 

Russel Wilson: 285 of 452 for 3,475 yards   63.1% Completion,  20 TDs and 7  INTs (.02456 INT%)  95.0 QBR

Andrew Luck:  380 of 616 for  4,761 yards   61.7% Completion,  40 TDs and 16INTs (.02597 INT%)  96.5 QBR

 

 

Further, their 4th quarter stats: 

Russel Wilson: 52.5% completion    5.76 YPA   

Andrew Luck:   58.7% completion   7.65  YPA

 

Lastly, where does each QB throw the ball?

Russel Wilson: Throws behind the LOS 21%

Andrew Luck:   Throws behind the LOS 18%

 

Andrew Luck led the league in completions of 20+ yards and has a much better completion percentage compared to Russel Wilson on throws 10+ yards down field. The advantage gained by Russel Wilson in completion percentage is that he throws more shorter passes, and completes more shorter passes. 

 

This is not my opinion, but facts.

 

whether he throws the ball short or long is irrelevant. also 4th quarter stats are irrelevant. we are arguing who the better overall qb is. not the 4th quarter qb. this year luck had a great season, but he beat up on bad teams, and for the career, RW still beats luck in almost all categories.

Quote:whether he throws the ball short or long is irrelevant. also 4th quarter stats are irrelevant. we are arguing who the better overall qb is. not the 4th quarter qb. this year luck had a great season, but he beat up on bad teams, and for the career, RW still beats luck in almost all categories.

Achilles, you've made a few points and I will try to address them all, but I am starting to question your understanding of football based on your response. Let's discuss:

 

1. "whether he throws the ball short or long is irrelevant"  - I'm not sure how this is irrelevant. First, let's acknowledge that the statistics clearly show that Luck is more of a down field passer. A QB that attempts a greater amount of shorter throws (Wilson) will usually have a higher completion percentage, but completion percentage doesn't always translate into the better QB. Take Alex Smith for example.

 

2. 4th quarter stats are irrelevant - Fourth quarter stats are relevent in this case, especially since Wilson is thought to be a more "winning" QB. The stats clearly show that Luck is better than Wilson in the 4th quarter. In this case, it's clear that Seattle is a more winning team as compared to the Colts rather than Wilson being the more winning QB compared to Luck.

 

3. "but he beat up on bad teams"  Here's what he did this year against good teams: Denver 370 yards passing, Baltimore 312 yards passing, Houston 370 yards passing, Cincinnati 340 yards passing, Pittsburgh 400 yards. He had a ton of TDs and a fair amount of INTs. As shown above, his INT ratio was nearly identical to RW's. He had good games against good competition. The Colts as a team lost against the top teams, while Luck actually had good games. 

 

4.  for the career, RW still beats luck in almost all categories. If you did the same exercise for each year, you find similar results. RW is simply allowed to be a game manager as he is supported by a tremendous run game, #1 defense, and a short "easy to complete" passing offense.

Quote:Achilles, you've made a few points and I will try to address them all, but I am starting to question your understanding of football based on your response. Let's discuss:

 

1. "whether he throws the ball short or long is irrelevant"  - I'm not sure how this is irrelevant. First, let's acknowledge that the statistics clearly show that Luck is more of a down field passer. A QB that attempts a greater amount of shorter throws (Wilson) will usually have a higher completion percentage, but completion percentage doesn't always translate into the better QB. Take Alex Smith for example.

 

2. 4th quarter stats are irrelevant - Fourth quarter stats are relevent in this case, especially since Wilson is thought to be a more "winning" QB. The stats clearly show that Luck is better than Wilson in the 4th quarter. In this case, it's clear that Seattle is a more winning team as compared to the Colts rather than Wilson being the more winning QB compared to Luck.

 

3. "but he beat up on bad teams"  Here's what he did this year against good teams: Denver 370 yards passing, Baltimore 312 yards passing, Houston 370 yards passing, Cincinnati 340 yards passing, Pittsburgh 400 yards. He had a ton of TDs and a fair amount of INTs. As shown above, his INT ratio was nearly identical to RW's. He had good games against good competition. The Colts as a team lost against the top teams, while Luck actually had good games. 

 

4.  for the career, RW still beats luck in almost all categories. If you did the same exercise for each year, you find similar results. RW is simply allowed to be a game manager as he is supported by a tremendous run game, #1 defense, and a short "easy to complete" passing offense.

 

youre all about the yards. manning isnt much of a downfield passer either. also maybe luck has better numbers in the 4th but rw numbers are good enough to get the job done. they can both be good 4th quarter qbs, but the first 3 quarters matter more.

 

now one good point you made is how rw could have a higher completion percentage because he makes more short passes. thats viable, maybe luck would have a better completion percent if he did shorter passes. BUT when you watch both qbs, rw is the more accurate passer. his passes are on the money. luck makes a lot of passes that are ugly and off the mark. so the stats can be skewed, but watching it, its just clear to me that RW is better.

 

id suggest just taking some time and actually watching RW play. hes really good.

 

 

edit: i said matter more but i meant matter just as much. im a little scatterbrained trying to sneak in replies between customers today haha

Quote: manning isnt much of a downfield passer either. also maybe luck has better numbers in the 4th but rw numbers are good enough to get the job done. they can both be good 4th quarter qbs, but the first 3 quarters matter more.

 

now one good point you made is how rw could have a higher completion percentage because he makes more short passes. thats viable, maybe luck would have a better completion percent if he did shorter passes. BUT when you watch both qbs, rw is the more accurate passer. his passes are on the money. luck makes a lot of passes that are ugly and off the mark. so the stats can be skewed, but watching it, its just clear to me that RW is better.

 

id suggest just taking some time and actually watching RW play. hes really good.

 

 

edit: i said matter more but i meant matter just as much. im a little scatterbrained trying to sneak in replies between customers today haha

1. "youre all about the yards." Actually Luck led the league in TDs but that's already been mentioned. I wanted to provide another perspective.

 

2. Manning isn't much of a down field passer right now, but he definitely was in his prime.

 

3. "maybe luck would have a better completion percent if he did shorter passes" - This is true, but the difference is that one QB is allowed to get away with this while the other sometimes has to do much more to win. Here's an interesting stat: Since Pagano became the head coach of the Colts (2012) no other team in the NFL has allowed more 40+ point games. (Colts- 10) (Bears/Titans/Raiders- 7) and (Jags/Redskins -6). The Colts defense is really bad when they are not tuned in. Luck has to get into a shoot out in many games in order to win, which calls for deeper throws. Meanwhile, the highest amount of points any team has put up on the Seahawks this season is 30 (Dallas). Seattle lost that game.

 

I live in California. We get a lot of the Seahawk games. I watch Wilson play nearly every week and I think he's good.

Quote:1. "youre all about the yards." Actually Luck led the league in TDs but that's already been mentioned. I wanted to provide another perspective.

 

2. Manning isn't much of a down field passer right now, but he definitely was in his prime.

 

3. "maybe luck would have a better completion percent if he did shorter passes" - This is true, but the difference is that one QB is allowed to get away with this while the other sometimes has to do much more to win. Here's an interesting stat: Since Pagano became the head coach of the Colts (2012) no other team in the NFL has allowed more 40+ point games. (Colts- 10) (Bears/Titans/Raiders- 7) and (Jags/Redskins -6). The Colts defense is really bad when they are not tuned in. Luck has to get into a shoot out in many games in order to win, which calls for deeper throws. Meanwhile, the highest amount of points any team has put up on the Seahawks this season is 30 (Dallas). Seattle lost that game.

 

I live in California. We get a lot of the Seahawk games. I watch Wilson play nearly every week and I think he's good.

 

turnovers committed by luck put the defense in bad spots too and are going to inflate the score.

 

we could argue all day but i think rw is clearly a notch above.

Quote:turnovers committed by luck put the defense in bad spots too and are going to inflate the score.

 

we could argue all day but i think rw is clearly a notch above.

 

1. "we could argue all day but i think rw is clearly a notch above." - I'm not sure how you came to this conclusion based on our discussion above and the statistics that evidence otherwise.

 

2. Turnovers- Yes, Andrew Luck had more turnovers, but he did throw it more. His INT percentage was nearly identical to RW, but he did have more fumbles, which was an issue for him this year.

 

Imagine if Bortles had an amazing college career and was thought of as an elite prospect, (the hype begins). Then he is drafted by the Jaguars, who just completely re-hauled their roster, letting their top players leave (Manning, Clark, Addai, Freeney, Brackett, etc..) and starting over with players that were recently drafted, including rookie TEs, RBs and Receivers. You would expect a lot of growing pains, instead, Bortles leads the Jaguars to the playoffs as a rookie, despite poor O-line play, poor defensive play, playing with rookies, and dealing with being a rookie himself. The next year he wins his first playoff game and the year after he makes it to the AFCCG, all along setting records for most yards thrown as a rookie, most yards thrown in a single game by a rookie, most consecutive 300-yard games, leading the league in TDS, etc....  Bortles achieves all of this and people still say "He's over-hyped" or "He's just above average" or my favorite "he's not as good as Rodgers, Manning, or Brady" (they are in discussion for best ever). Luck is special. In time, it will become vastly evident.

Quote:1. "we could argue all day but i think rw is clearly a notch above." - I'm not sure how you came to this conclusion based on our discussion above and the statistics that evidence otherwise.

 

2. Turnovers- Yes, Andrew Luck had more turnovers, but he did throw it more. His INT percentage was nearly identical to RW, but he did have more fumbles, which was an issue for him this year.

 

Imagine if Bortles had an amazing college career and was thought of as an elite prospect, (the hype begins). Then he is drafted by the Jaguars, who just completely re-hauled their roster, letting their top players leave (Manning, Clark, Addai, Freeney, Brackett, etc..) and starting over with players that were recently drafted, including rookie TEs, RBs and Receivers. You would expect a lot of growing pains, instead, Bortles leads the Jaguars to the playoffs as a rookie, despite poor O-line play, poor defensive play, playing with rookies, and dealing with being a rookie himself. The next year he wins his first playoff game and the year after he makes it to the AFCCG, all along setting records for most yards thrown as a rookie, most yards thrown in a single game by a rookie, most consecutive 300-yard games, leading the league in TDS, etc....  Bortles achieves all of this and people still say "He's over-hyped" or "He's just above average" or my favorite "he's not as good as Rodgers, Manning, or Brady" (they are in discussion for best ever). Luck is special. In time, it will become vastly evident.

 

we will never agree on this. i think RW is better, you think luck is better. thats pretty much it.

Russell Wilson may also be about to win back to back superbowls joining an elite club of qbs. I'm not Luck would be as capable without Ty Hilton running wide open and his 2 TE's.


Seems to me when TY gets shut down Luck starts looking very ordinary.

Quote:Achilles, you've made a few points and I will try to address them all, but I am starting to question your understanding of football based on your response. 

 

This has been in question since the start of this thread...

Quote:This has been in question since the start of this thread...

I've played middle school, high school, junior college, flag, and semi pro, as well as coached middle/high school. I'm pretty sure my understanding and experience surpasses both of you put together.


As a jaguars fan, I can admit when other players are better. Oddly enough, not a single colts fan can admit that rw is better. Its not even an option for you guys. Denying rw doesn't make luck any better, but the white and blue horseshoes you've taken to the head must effect your ability to perceive reality.

QB Rating

 

Luck 76.5 / 87.0 / 96.5

Wilson 100 / 101.2 / 95.0

 

YPA

 

Luck 7.0 / 6.7 / 7.7

Wilson 7.9 / 8.2 / 7.7

 

And I think we can all agree Luck has better receivers

Quote:I've played middle school, high school, junior college, flag, and semi pro, as well as coached middle/high school. I'm pretty sure my understanding and experience surpasses both of you put together.


As a jaguars fan, I can admit when other players are better. Oddly enough, not a single colts fan can admit that rw is better. Its not even an option for you guys. Denying rw doesn't make luck any better, but the while and blue horseshoes you've taken to the head must effect your ability to perceive reality.

I can admit that Rodgers is better, or Brady, Manning, Roethlisberger, and possibly Romo (this year) but I will never think RW is better.

Quote:I can admit that Rodgers is better, or Brady, Manning, Roethlisberger, and possibly Romo (this year) but I will never think RW is better.

 

not until the media tells you to.

Quote:not until the media tells you to.

I can care less what the media thinks. Again, I live in the West Coast. I hear plenty about Wilson.

Quote:I've played middle school, high school, junior college, flag, and semi pro, as well as coached middle/high school. I'm pretty sure my understanding and experience surpasses both of you put together.


As a jaguars fan, I can admit when other players are better. Oddly enough, not a single colts fan can admit that rw is better. Its not even an option for you guys. Denying rw doesn't make luck any better, but the white and blue horseshoes you've taken to the head must effect your ability to perceive reality.

 

Because RW isn't. Most football fans without a hate agenda who agree with me. I feel like I need to keep saying this, but I do think RW is a good player, he's just not on the level of Luck.

 

Quote:QB Rating

 

Luck 76.5 / 87.0 / 96.5

Wilson 100 / 101.2 / 95.0

 

YPA

 

Luck 7.0 / 6.7 / 7.7

Wilson 7.9 / 8.2 / 7.7

 

And I think we can all agree Luck has better receivers

 

But we can't agree that RW has a better defense and running game, can we lastonealive??????

Quote:Because RW isn't. Most football fans without a hate agenda who agree with me. I feel like I need to keep saying this, but I do think RW is a good player, he's just not on the level of Luck.

 

 

But we can't agree that RW has a better defense and running game, can we lastonealive??????

 

http://www.nytimes.com/2015/01/20/sports....html?_r=0

 

http://www.rantsports.com/nfl/2015/01/18...nship-win/

 

 

just a bunch of hate agenda propaganda.

Lets compare RW with another QB that relies on a good run game and a solid defense:

 

Russel Wilson: 285 of 452 for 3,475 yards   63.1% Completion, 7.69 YPA   20 TDs and 7  INTs   95.0 QBR

 

Alex Smith:       303 of 464 for 3,265 yards   65.3% Completion,  7.04 YPA 18 TDs and  6 INTs   93.4 QBR

 

 

Turns out that they're nearly identical. They're game manager stats. How interesting......