Denver CB Harris says Wilson is better than Luck [Merge]

[TAPLOOK]

Wilson is better. Debating is foolish.

[yakimacanutt]

No, Luck is not 3-3, Wilson is not 7-1. The COLTS are 3-3 and the SEAHAWKS are 7-1. Its kind of a bit different. 

So, when the stats are good and in his favor, you use them to promote Luck. When they are not, it is the team. I see what you are doing here.

[Gavin]

Whose better, Tavaris Jackson or Dan Orlovsky, cause Tavaris won 7 games in 2011 with 90% of the same team in place as when Wilson took over in 2012

Orlovsky, People forget (who doesn't want to if your a Colts fan) Orlovsky completed 63% of his passes through 5 starts and outside 1 int Orlovsky outplayed Tom Brady in yards and completion percentage (On a night where Tom Brady completed 76% of his passes) and matched him in TD's with 2 with Brady playing all but the last series and 1 kneel down on the final play, The defense was awful in the game

[SilentHill]

overall between Brees, Wilson, Luck, Manning, Rodgers and Brady the two are: 

 

Luck 3-3

Wilson 7-1

 

take if for what it is worth, but in the big boy games Wilson and his team has come out on top more than Luck and his team . . .

 

if you throw in Ryan, Romo, Rivers, Eli, Flacco, and Kap to the list you get

 

Luck 4-4

Wilson 13-4

 

so Luck is still around 0.500 against upper third QBs and Wilson is at 0.750 . . .

 

so you can view it for what you wish . . .

 

We must also remember that their respective careers have coincided with resurgence of SF and to an extent Arizona and at least for one year a weaker Houston team . . .

 

 

Thanks for that boatload of irrelevant information, it was greatly appreciated.

[SilentHill]

OK, The Seahawks won the Super Bowl

 

[SilentHill]

Playoff record

 

Seahawks 5-1

Colts   1-3

 

career record

 

Seahawks 30-10

Colts    24-15

 

fixed

[SilentHill]

Wilson is better. Debating is foolish.

 

[Gavin]

This is a terrible argument.

 

Dan Orlovsky wasn't on the roster in Week 1, because he was terrible in preseason. He was at home watching us lose to the Bucs on MNF just like the rest of us, because he was terrible. He didn't even sign back with us until after Kerry Collins got hurt in Week 3. The last time he started a game before 2011 was in 2008, when he helped the Detroit Lions go 0-16, and yes, he was terrible for them as well.

 

But we were supposed to name him the Week 1 starter? He didn't even make the 53 man roster!

 

And when he did start, he was terrible. He had a good second half against the Pats, but other than that, he was bad. Better than Painter isn't a high threshold, and he didn't even reach that threshold right away.

 

Again, let's not rewrite history.

He was bad in preseason I agree but he only threw 54 passes over 4 games(13.5 a game), My point being I probably would have went with Orlovsky that year over trying to bring in an average vet 16 days before game 1 adding on Collins only threw 10 passes in the preseason

[Yehoodi]

Thanks for that boatload of irrelevant information, it was greatly appreciated.

 

no worries . . . sorry that you are incapable of understanding a QB's contribution to a football team . . . you certainly need help in this area . . . thanks for playing . . .

 

and I know deep in your heart you think Manning has zero to do with the Broncos success in the last two years and the fact that the colts went 2-14 in 2011 has zero correlation to Manning's contribution to the Colts in the years preceding . . . but then again there is something that tells me you may, just maybe, just think a little different . . . and hiding behind the keyboard, you to afraid to admit that lest you showing your colors as a double standard . . .

 

but that is fine take your one liners and hide your true feelings and opinions . . . it is no skin off my nose . . . I know where I stand .

 

but thanks for playing though . . .

[SilentHill]

no worries . . . sorry that you are incapable of understanding a QB's contribution to a football team . . . you certainly need help in this area . . . thanks for playing . . .

 

and I know deep in your heart you think Manning has zero to do with the Broncos success in the last two years and the fact that the colts went 2-14 in 2011 has zero correlation to Manning's contribution to the Colts in the years preceding . . . but then again there is something that tells me you may, just maybe, just think a little different . . . and hiding behind the keyboard, you to afraid to admit that lest you showing your colors as a double standard . . .

 

but that is fine take your one liners and hide your true feelings and opinions . . . it is no skin off my nose . . . I know where I stand .

 

but thanks for playing though . . .

 

I understand just fine how a QB contributes to a football team, and if we are going by that standard, Wilson is 0-0. The Seahawks defense carries that team, and the defense won the superbowl. There is a reason why Wilson was not the MVP.

 

In regards to Manning, well yea, Manning is Manning, but Russel Wilson is not Manning, he's not even that close to being Luck. Luck took this flawed team and put it on his back and carried it to the playoffs two times in two years. The Seahawks defense took the team, put it on it's back and carried it to a superbowl win. Russel Wilson road the coat tails.

 

The fact is, the Seahawks are 0-3 (including playoffs since 2012) when their opponent scores 30 points or more. It's crystal clear that the Defense carries that team, and in the event that they have a bad game, they lose.

[chad72]

Its Manning vs Brady all over again, the expectations and fulfillment of expectations of a No.1 pick in Manning/Luck vs the guy that exceeded expectations as a later round draft pick in Brady/Wilson .

 

It is what it is, the circle of life

[Narcosys]

Well this blew up quick.

 

Anybody seen this?

http://espn.go.com/video/clip?id=11569182&ex_cid=espnapi_public

[amfootball]

I understand just fine how a QB contributes to a football team, and if we are going by that standard, Wilson is 0-0. The Seahawks defense carries that team, and the defense won the superbowl. There is a reason why Wilson was not the MVP.

 

In regards to Manning, well yea, Manning is Manning, but Russel Wilson is not Manning, he's not even that close to being Luck. Luck took this flawed team and put it on his back and carried it to the playoffs two times in two years. The Seahawks defense took the team, put it on it's back and carried it to a superbowl win. Russel Wilson road the coat tails.

 

The fact is, the Seahawks are 0-3 (including playoffs since 2012) when their opponent scores 30 points or more. It's crystal clear that the Defense carries that team, and in the event that they have a bad game, they lose.

Most teams lose when the opponent scores 30+.

[dw49]

My point was that the Colts were not a 2-14 team when Luck took over. That 2011 team which could have won 7-8 games with a half decent QB was blown up and then Luck inherited a new team. The poster I was responding too was making it sound like Luck inherited a vastly worse team than Wilson. I agree that Luck's team was more in a state of flux but let's not forget that Wilson also got a perennial losing team which was 7-9 in its last TWO seasons before he came aboard. He is the one that made it into a 11 win team and eventually super bowl champion, the way Luck made Indy into a 11 win team and post-season berth.

 

 

You could not compare those 2 rosters in a million years. And a decent QB would have never won 7-8 games with that roster. Most QB's would have never even survives the year with that OL. Not saying that Luck was an elite QB in his rookie year but he did pull out 4-5 wins by just being clutch and having great talent. You really are saying the above without having any real knowledge to compare rosters. But so be it...

[SilentHill]

Most teams lose when the opponent scores 30+.

 

And the Seahawks Defense only gave up 30 or more points 3 times in 2+ years.

 

Guess how many times the Colts gave up 30 or more points in the last 2 + years? It's 12.

[amfootball]

You could not compare those 2 rosters in a million years. And a decent QB would have never won 7-8 games with that roster. Most QB's would have never even survives the year with that OL. Not saying that Luck was an elite QB in his rookie year but he did pull out 4-5 wins by just being clutch and having great talent. You really are saying the above without having any real knowledge to compare rosters. But so be it...

He tossed 18 picks and 5 fumbles and had a completion percentage of 54. No way any team wins 11 games with a QB doing that unless the team has some real talent and very good coaching.

[yakimacanutt]

Thanks for that boatload of irrelevant information, it was greatly appreciated.

It looked very relevant to me.

[SilentHill]

He tossed 18 picks and 5 fumbles and had a completion percentage of 54. No way any team wins 11 games with a QB doing that unless the team has some real talent and very good coaching.

 

Luck made up for his mistakes, he's been doing it his entire career.

[SilentHill]

It looked very relevant to me.

 

Might need to check your prescription.

[yakimacanutt]

no worries . . . sorry that you are incapable of understanding a QB's contribution to a football team . . . you certainly need help in this area . . . thanks for playing . . .

 

and I know deep in your heart you think Manning has zero to do with the Broncos success in the last two years and the fact that the colts went 2-14 in 2011 has zero correlation to Manning's contribution to the Colts in the years preceding . . . but then again there is something that tells me you may, just maybe, just think a little different . . . and hiding behind the keyboard, you to afraid to admit that lest you showing your colors as a double standard . . .

 

but that is fine take your one liners and hide your true feelings and opinions . . . it is no skin off my nose . . . I know where I stand .

 

but thanks for playing though . . .

The Colts would have been over .500 in 2011 and probably would have made the playoffs if Manning had been healthy. That is how much difference he made.

[dw49]

He tossed 18 picks and 5 fumbles and had a completion percentage of 54. No way any team wins 11 games with a QB doing that unless the team has some real talent and very good coaching.

 

 

That is a very silly statement because he could throw most of the picks in some of those losses. Like the game with NE.. right ? Bunch of turnovers. Lets just say goodby to this thread between us two. You are just once again making statements that are general with no real knowledge of the situation. Too annoying for me... adios on this one. Take care...

[GoPats]

Its Manning vs Brady all over again, the expectations and fulfillment of expectations of a No.1 pick in Manning/Luck vs the guy that exceeded expectations as a later round draft pick in Brady/Wilson .

 

It is what it is, the circle of life

 

To quote Yogi Berra... "It's deja vu all over again." 

 

I don't mean to generalize, but... I'm not sure why Colts fans care so much about this sort of thing. It was the same with Manning. There will always be diverging opinions. Getting all riled up about it is a waste of time and energy. 

[ColtStronger]

Russell Wilson is better than Andrew Luck?  Thanks for your opinion!! But my dad can beat up your dad!

[amfootball]

That is a very silly statement because he could throw most of the picks in some of those losses. Like the game with NE.. right ? Bunch of turnovers. Lets just say goodby to this thread between us two. You are just once again making statements that are general with no real knowledge of the situation. Too annoying for me... adios on this one. Take care...

Fair points. I didn't mean to upset you. The only thing I am combatting is this idea that Luck inherited this horrid team in 2012 and yet he propelled them by himself to 11 wins. You know that does not happen in the NFL. His team was not horrid, it was not the 2-14 team from 2011, and he played like a rookie making a ton of mistakes and also made some huge plays too. Total team effort including Arians who won COY, deservedly so.

[TAPLOOK]

To quote Yogi Berra... "It's deja vu all over again." 

 

I don't mean to generalize, but... I'm not sure why Colts fans care so much about this sort of thing. It was the same with Manning. There will always be diverging opinions. Getting all riled up about it is a waste of time and energy. 

 

 

Indianapolis Colts QB  _________________  is the best in the league. Just fill the blank is what it has come too. Luck is a good QB. We've seen enough to know exactly what he is. He's not great, He's not the next, Manning, Brady, Montana or Unitas. Not even close . If you want to compare him to another Colts QB Bert Jones would be more on par. 

[SkyBane]

To quote Yogi Berra... "It's deja vu all over again." 

 

I don't mean to generalize, but... I'm not sure why Colts fans care so much about this sort of thing. It was the same with Manning. There will always be diverging opinions. Getting all riled up about it is a waste of time and energy. 

It's ingrained behavior. Throughout the history of the franchise (even going all the way back to the beginning in Baltimore), the relevancy of the team has always been directly correlated to the relevancy it's QB. Never have they had a dominating defense, and rare is the day when they had a HB that could take over a game. For Colts fans (and even I notice that it irks me on a subconscious level), trying to downplay the QB is trying to downplay the whole franchise.

 

It's the same reason so many Colts fans are (sickeningly, in my opinion) now also secondary Broncos fans. Peyton Manning wasn't just the QB of the franchise, he WAS the franchise. Back in the day, Unitas was the franchise. We as fans of this team have all been trained that as the QB goes, so does the team's fortunes. Therefore, subconsciously, if the QB isn't great, how can the team be expected to achieve?

 

Throw in the exacerbation of this by the modern NFL and it's pass friendly format, combined with the flyover effect of Indianapolis reducing relevancy if a player isn't great, and it's abundantly clear why Colt's fans care. Andrew Luck isn't just the future QB of the franchise to many. He's also the future hope of remaining relevant.

[GoPats]

It's ingrained behavior. Throughout the history of the franchise (even going all the way back to the beginning in Baltimore), the relevancy of the team has always been directly correlated to the relevancy it's QB. Never have they had a dominating defense, and rare is the day when they had a HB that could take over a game. For Colts fans (and even I notice that it irks me on a subconscious level), trying to downplay the QB is trying to downplay the whole franchise.

 

It's the same reason so many Colts fans are (sickeningly, in my opinion) now also secondary Broncos fans. Peyton Manning wasn't just the QB of the franchise, he WAS the franchise. Back in the day, Unitas was the franchise. We as fans of this team have all been trained that as the QB goes, so does the team's fortunes. Therefore, subconsciously, if the QB isn't great, how can the team be expected to achieve?

 

Throw in the exacerbation of this by the modern NFL and it's pass friendly format, combined with the flyover effect of Indianapolis reducing relevancy if a player isn't great, and it's abundantly clear why Colt's fans care. Andrew Luck isn't just the future QB of the franchise to many. He's also the future hope of remaining relevant.

 

Good and thorough explanation... thanks! 

 

Needless to say, it's unnecessary to feel that way, but you clearly get that. Between their early history and the Manning era, and now Luck's, I personally regard the Colts one of the more storied franchises in the NFL. 

[thedude]

How bout this question . . . do you see any correlation between the COLTS 2-14 record in 2011 and the name Peyton Manning? or are the two things mutually exclusive?

 

Do the words Matt Cassel and 2008 mean anything to you?

 

Do you find interesting the coincidence of the BRONCOS being the one seed the last two years and appearing in the SB last year coinciding with the name of Peyton Manning appearing on their roster in those same years?

 

Did you find interesting that CBS quoted a record that Manning set a record for most 12 win seasons?

 

See my point is that everything has the fingerprint of a QB and likewise as there are many teammates everything the QB does has the fingerprint of his teammates, you cant win without teammate and at the same time you can not complete a pass without your teammates doing their jobs . . .

 

And my point is that we need to be consistent when we look at things . . . bottom line if we, well you, want to make a point regarding the above and regarding that Peyton Manning to a degree effected those wins in above reference points we can not then thereafter state wins and QB have no correlation . . .

 

Similarly when we want to state, which is true, that Moss and Welker, and his Oline helped Brady increase his personal stats we then can not say that a QB stats are totally personal without the help of his teammates . . .

 

And just as we all feel that Peyton had a fingerprint on the above, I find in significant that the arrival of Russell Wilson and the Seahawks change from 4 losing seasons to two winning seasons, a SB and a 7-0 record against the 4 big QBs as not being happenstance . . . whether you want to admit to it or not Wilson, just like Manning, has a fingerprint on it . . .   THATS my point . . . treat Wilson the same way we talk about other QBs and their respective contribution to their teams . . . and understand that the QB can get help from teammates and can help them in return . . .

I lost interest in this at the end of the first paragraph. My Internet attention span is too short for this discussion

[thedude]

fixed

Edit your own comments. Leave others alone. If you want to dispute something, do so without changing someone's post.

[SilentHill]

Edit your own comments. Leave others alone. If you want to dispute something, do so without changing someone's post.

 

No.

[Qwiz]

Its Manning vs Brady all over again, the expectations and fulfillment of expectations of a No.1 pick in Manning/Luck vs the guy that exceeded expectations as a later round draft pick in Brady/Wilson .

 

It is what it is, the circle of life

If history repeats itself, the future looks bright for Mr. Wilson  Funny how these things happen...

[Superman]

He was bad in preseason I agree but he only threw 54 passes over 4 games(13.5 a game), My point being I probably would have went with Orlovsky that year over trying to bring in an average vet 16 days before game 1 adding on Collins only threw 10 passes in the preseason

 

He was never going to make the roster. He was a camp arm. And there was nothing from him in preseason to suggest that he should be starting.

 

Kerry Collins wasn't a great signing either, but he at least had a veteran resume and some ability. Dan Orlovsky was just a body, and that's why he didn't make the roster. He wasn't going to be named the starter from Week 1, and if he was, we wouldn't have been a 6-8 win team. That's crazy talk.

[thedude]

No.

So, you are admitting that you can't make your point without altering someone's comments..... good.

 

Don't do it any more. at least to me.

[SilentHill]

So, you are admitting that you can't make your point without altering someone's comments..... good.

 

Don't do it any more. at least to me.

 

srrgfvjsjgjlgvngolgveglsfnhsf

 

I'll do what I want, thank you very much.

[dw49]

Fair points. I didn't mean to upset you. The only thing I am combatting is this idea that Luck inherited this horrid team in 2012 and yet he propelled them by himself to 11 wins. You know that does not happen in the NFL. His team was not horrid, it was not the 2-14 team from 2011, and he played like a rookie making a ton of mistakes and also made some huge plays too. Total team effort including Arians who won COY, deservedly so.

 

 

Not upset at all , just old. It was a horrible team . It was a joke that they won 11 games. Crazy thing is they probably don't win more than 7-8 with Peyton Manning. Never would I say that Luck was better than Manning . It's just how the cards fell that year. It was a team with a horrible O line , bad RB's , fair WR's and an overall pitiful defense. Luck just happened to make some unbelievable , athletic clutch plays that led to some improbable wins. At the same time a really low talented defense stepped up in a bunch of games to do just enough . But to say this was anything close to a solid roster is crazy. The Colts had Freeney and Mathis from the Polian era. Not much more than that and Freeney played horrible in the 3-4 besides. They decided to take all the cap hit that year and signed ZERO free agents of any consequence. Bottom line is that roster was no where in God's name even in the same league that Seattle's was . The argument that Wilson is better than Luck doesn't even bother me. Had way too much of that with Brady vs Manning. So what if he is better ? Were the Colts supposed to draft a midget at 1.1 ? Who cares ? But anyone saying that 2012 Colt team was a solid roster is just speaking without good knowledge of the situation. 

[amfootball]

Not upset at all , just old. It was a horrible team . It was a joke that they won 11 games. Crazy thing is they probably don't win more than 7-8 with Peyton Manning. Never would I say that Luck was better than Manning . It's just how the cards fell that year. It was a team with a horrible O line , bad RB's , fair WR's and an overall pitiful defense. Luck just happened to make some unbelievable , athletic clutch plays that led to some improbable wins. At the same time a really low talented defense stepped up in a bunch of games to do just enough . But to say this was anything close to a solid roster is crazy. The Colts had Freeney and Mathis from the Polian era. Not much more than that and Freeney played horrible in the 3-4 besides. They decided to take all the cap hit that year and signed ZERO free agents of any consequence. Bottom line is that roster was no where in God's name even in the same league that Seattle's was . The argument that Wilson is better than Luck doesn't even bother me. Had way too much of that with Brady vs Manning. So what if he is better ? Were the Colts supposed to draft a midget at 1.1 ? Who cares ? But anyone saying that 2012 Colt team was a solid roster is just speaking without good knowledge of the situation. 

I get what you are saying but your post speaks of smoke and mirrors and fairy dust. Perhaps on paper, the Colts roster seemed awful but it did not perform that way on the field in 2012. As you say, Luck made plays, the defense, the STs and most of all Arians who had the toughest job of all IMO.

 

I am with you on the debate though. If I had either guy, I would not trade for the other one. I think both guys are perfectly suited for their respective teams, coaches and cities. And of course, it was a Denver player that started all this! Figures. ;)

[dw49]

I get what you are saying but your post speaks of smoke and mirrors and fairy dust. Perhaps on paper, the Colts roster seemed awful but it did not perform that way on the field in 2012. As you say, Luck made plays, the defense, the STs and most of all Arians who had the toughest job of all IMO.

 

I am with you on the debate though. If I had either guy, I would not trade for the other one. I think both guys are perfectly suited for their respective teams, coaches and cities. And of course, it was a Denver player that started all this! Figures. ;)

 

 

No smoke and mirrors. It was a bad team that won 11 games and Luck had to do much , much more than Wilson did to get to the playoffs. That is fact and by no means conjecture or debatable opinion. Now if you want to say you would rather have Wilson than Luck as we speak , I'll listen.

[thedude]

I'll do what I want, thank you very much.

Well, do it to someone else, not me.

[jvan1973]

Well, do it to someone else, not me.

or what?

[Superman]

I get what you are saying but your post speaks of smoke and mirrors and fairy dust. Perhaps on paper, the Colts roster seemed awful but it did not perform that way on the field in 2012. As you say, Luck made plays, the defense, the STs and most of all Arians who had the toughest job of all IMO.

 

I am with you on the debate though. If I had either guy, I would not trade for the other one. I think both guys are perfectly suited for their respective teams, coaches and cities. And of course, it was a Denver player that started all this! Figures. ;)

 

I disagree with dw49 in that I would speak of smoke and mirrors and fairy dust. The stats speak to that. We had a negative turnover differential, we gave up more points than we scored, the offense was one-dimensional, etc. When you look at the metrics, teams that perform overall the way we did don't win 11 games and go to the playoffs. That's why the 2013 projections weren't favorable, because that formula, if you can even call it that, was unsustainable.