Luck #30

[TDavis58]

I agree with a lot of what you're saying, but this is very false. And that's before you throw in the "literally" part.

Edit: Ryan Kalil, Jordan Gross and Travelle Wharton were very, very good last year, by virtually any metric. The other linemen had issues, and there was lots of movement because of that, but there's no way -- NO WAY -- the Panthers had the worst line in the league. And there's no way their line was worse than the Colts.

Kalil- top 5 C

Gross- top 10 LT

Wrong about Wharton, though. He was complete garbage last year, especially in the passing game. He was out of shape and played like a mid 30s guy who had been out of the game. He benefited from playing between Gross & Kalil.

Chandler & Bell were beyond horrible. Just atrocious.

And there was absolutely no depth behind them.

Carolina's line was bottom 5 in the league as a whole. They were bad. If Cam weren't a huge athletic freak he would've ended up on IR. I'm not sure any other QB plays all 48 games behind Carolina's line the last 3 years.

Bottom line.......

Cam has been hit in the pocket more than any QB in the NFL the last 3 years, & by a large margin.

Cam has led his team in rushing yards & rushing TDs 2 of 3 seasons.

Saying that Cam has a good offensive line & running game is being laughable. He doesn't. Making crap up to prop up Luck is pretty sad. They're both great young QBs.

[TDavis58]

Bottom line is this; If all NFL players were put into an NFL redraft then Andrew Luck would be the first pick. All of this other stuff is just widow decorations.

Carolina, & several other teams, would disagree with that homer statement.

Would several teams take Luck? Sure.

There are plenty out there who would take Newton, too.

[Superman]

Carolina, & several other teams, would disagree with that homer statement.

Would several teams take Luck? Sure.

There are plenty out there who would take Newton, too.

 

Nah. No one would take Newton over Luck. The only debate would be Luck vs. Rodgers. (And I rarely make such definitive statements.)

 

That doesn't mean Newton can't be ranked higher than Luck on this list. I'm pretty sure Peyton Manning will be top 3 (he'll probably be #1), but no one would take him over Luck right now either.

[GoPats]

When they open the "NFL Hall of Lists" right next door to the Hall of Fame, things like this may matter a tiny little bit. 

[Bravo]

Its a popularity list amongst players...voted on by players. I mean when Ray Lewis was still playing he was a top 5 guy even though he was far far past his prime. I'm not worried about it...and yet I find no fault in what they ranked him. There were far worse slights then Andrew....FAR WORSE. People around here just get so worked up over the littlest things. I swear people in Indy suffer from little man syndrome. Always feeling victimized and slighted. I never understand worrying about the media. Sure if it is being blatently hostile or taking shots I could understand speaking out about it but to get all hurt over such random stuff...its like people look for reasons to be offended.

Of course Indy is going to feel that way! They get slighted every year! Indy sports no matter what sport never get the recognition that they deserve. It's every year!

Now I'm not saying this is the case from every single person because I'm pretty sure USA Today projected the Colts in the Super Bowl this coming year, so of course we do get some love but

The Colts could go undefeated and of course they will get attention from the media but it wouldn't be as much at 75% of the other teams that would be in the same posisiton, and even if the Indy Colts were doing great I would guess about 30-40% of the media would still say it was a fluke they are getting lucky ect..

Yes some Indy teams get recognized sometimes, just when they deserve the attention they usually don't get it unless it is something bad..

If anything Indy fans should have come to expect this! I don't get all hurt about it anymore because it's the same thing every year! Indy is never going to get tons of recognition from the media/sporting world Becuase were Indiana and were small market with good sports! People want the big popular cities to be good at the sports and they get upset because Indy has good sporting teams.

No reason to get butt hurt about it... Just accept it and embrace the under dog role.

[Superman]

Kalil- top 5 C

Gross- top 10 LT

Wrong about Wharton, though. He was complete garbage last year, especially in the passing game. He was out of shape and played like a mid 30s guy who had been out of the game. He benefited from playing between Gross & Kalil.

Chandler & Bell were beyond horrible. Just atrocious.

And there was absolutely no depth behind them.

Carolina's line was bottom 5 in the league as a whole. They were bad. If Cam weren't a huge athletic freak he would've ended up on IR. I'm not sure any other QB plays all 48 games behind Carolina's line the last 3 years.

Bottom line.......

Cam has been hit in the pocket more than any QB in the NFL the last 3 years, & by a large margin.

Cam has led his team in rushing yards & rushing TDs 2 of 3 seasons.

Saying that Cam has a good offensive line & running game is being laughable. He doesn't. Making crap up to prop up Luck is pretty sad. They're both great young QBs.

 

It's not making up crap. It's probably misapplying stats; the Panthers had a more productive ground game, but a lot of that is because of Cam Newton.

 

I also disagree about Wharton. He was rated very well, and many reported well on Wharton last year. You obviously watched more Panthers game than I did, so I'll defer to you, but that doesn't change that the Panthers didn't have the worst line in the league last year. I wouldn't have responded to your post if you hadn't made such a dogmatic statement that was so clearly false. I'm not saying their line was good, but it wasn't the worst. 

[Ryan Pelley]

Dude, you just exposed the fact that you don't watch many Seattle or Carolina games.

 

Seattle's O-line is not good.

Carolina has neither a good oline nor a strong running game.

 

Carolina was 17th in sacks allowed, pretty meh, but produced the 11th best running attack last year. A big part of that is Cam Newton, with the DeAngelo / Stewart duo being less effective than years past, but still more reliable than the Colts' backfield.

 

The Seahawks though, I don't think any team that combined for over 2,000 rushing yards is a bad oline. They were obviously hurting without a few of their starters for much of the season and did suffer, but they still did enough for Marshawn to do the rest. Although I do recall their pass protection being down right lousy at times, even with Russell Wilson's great mobility. Stats say 23rd most allowed sacks.

[TDavis58]

Nah. No one would take Newton over Luck. The only debate would be Luck vs. Rodgers. (And I rarely make such definitive statements.)

That doesn't mean Newton can't be ranked higher than Luck on this list. I'm pretty sure Peyton Manning will be top 3 (he'll probably be #1), but no one would take him over Luck right now either.

Yes they would. He's been more productive than any QB not named Dan Marino in football history thru 3 seasons, & he's done it with little offensive talent around him.

Andrew Luck is a finished product. He played 4 years of college in a pro style offense. Luck is a turnover machine & has accuracy issues.

Newton only played 1 year in college, which was better than anything Luck ever did, & he's still growing & learning the position.

[TDavis58]

Carolina was 17th in sacks allowed, pretty meh, but produced the 11th best running attack last year. A big part of that is Cam Newton, with the DeAngelo / Stewart duo being less effective than years past, but still more reliable than the Colts' backfield.

The Seahawks though, I don't think any team that combined for over 2,000 rushing yards is a bad oline. They were obviously hurting without a few of their starters for much of the season and did suffer, but they still did enough for Marshawn to do the rest. Although I do recall their pass protection being down right lousy at times, even with Russell Wilson's great mobility. Stats say 23rd most allowed sacks.

Cam Newton broke more tackles than any player in the NFL last year. Without his athleticism, that sack total would've fell near the very bottom. He was hit more than any QB in the pocket.

Carolina's running game would also be best the very bottom without Newton. Take away his runs & Carolina isn't much better, if any, than Indy.

[Qwiz]

[Superman]

Carolina was 17th in sacks allowed, pretty meh, but produced the 11th best running attack last year. A big part of that is Cam Newton, with the DeAngelo / Stewart duo being less effective than years past, but still more reliable than the Colts' backfield.

 

The Seahawks though, I don't think any team that combined for over 2,000 rushing yards is a bad oline. They were obviously hurting without a few of their starters for much of the season and did suffer, but they still did enough for Marshawn to do the rest. Although I do recall their pass protection being down right lousy at times, even with Russell Wilson's great mobility. Stats say 23rd most allowed sacks.

 

Seahawks had lousy protection last year. And they put up a lot of yards because of their option attack. Bottom line is production, so their bad line play didn't exactly hurt them, but that doesn't change the fact that their line play was bad.

 

Sometimes us Colts fans get stuck in our own little bubble. We weren't the only team with bad line play. A lot of teams suffered from this just like we did.

[Superman]

Yes they would. He's been more productive than any QB not named Dan Marino in football history thru 3 seasons, & he's done it with little offensive talent around him.

Andrew Luck is a finished product. He played 4 years of college in a pro style offense. Luck is a turnover machine & has accuracy issues.

Newton only played 1 year in college, which was better than anything Luck ever did, & he's still growing & learning the position.

 

LOL

 

There's no way to prove this either way, but your opinion is definitely in the minority. Feel free to defend it, but I'm not going to argue this with you anymore. You enjoy your QB, we'll enjoy ours.

 

[Ryan Pelley]

Cam Newton broke more tackles than any player in the NFL last year. Without his athleticism, that sack total would've fell near the very bottom. He was hit more than any QB in the pocket.

Carolina's running game would also be best the very bottom without Newton. Take away his runs & Carolina isn't much better, if any, than Indy.

Fair enough. And that does make sense, considering Cam's freaky size and speed combination. Only saw the Panthers play 4 or 5 times last season, but some of his runs were down right funny (the tackle breaking / having the size to run over defenders). What happened to Stewart and DeAngelo being a top notch 2 headed monster anyway?

[rsrobinson]

Carolina, & several other teams, would disagree with that homer statement.

Would several teams take Luck? Sure.

There are plenty out there who would take Newton, too.

I don't think there's any doubt that Pete Carroll would take Russell Wilson if given a chance to redraft. He believes that Wilson is absolutely the perfect QB for his system and Wilson's ability to take care of the ball and make plays during critical situations is grossly underrated by too many fans. No matter how you want to spin it, Luck's 7 INTs in two playoff games is simply unacceptable for any NFL quarterback especially one who has aspirations of becoming elite. Wilson has thrown just one pick in five playoff games and that was on a last second Hail Mary against Atlanta.

For Luck to pass up Wilson he has to step up his game during the playoffs which is where elite QBs are made.

[Nadine]

How do you measure 'leadership'? Those who watch Luck know how good he is, but stop making stuff up.

 

Good question,we should create a thread about it 

We could title it something like "Who is the better leader.......Andrew Luck or (fill in the name that will cause the move arguments)?

[TDavis58]

thru 48 games...

Newton- 25 wins, 13,364 Yd, 92 TD, 48 turnovers

Manning- 26 wins, 12,538 Yd, 88 TD, 64 turnovers

Damn. Just imagine if Cam was worth a %!!! If he wasn't a laptop stealing, towel moping, bum QB who can't even hold Luck's jock strap he would've really stomped Manning's numbers!!!!

[TDavis58]

Fair enough. And that does make sense, considering Cam's freaky size and speed combination. Only saw the Panthers play 4 or 5 times last season, but some of his runs were down right funny (the tackle breaking / having the size to run over defenders). What happened to Stewart and DeAngelo being a top notch 2 headed monster anyway?

Most of it stems from the horrible offensive line play over the past few seasons.

Stewart is always injured. He's only played a handful of games the last 3 seasons. He's still only 27 & has less carries than some guys with only 2 years experience. He's a monster when healthy, the problem is he's never healthy.

Williams is on the wrong side of 30 & has lost his burst of speed. Doesn't help that he isn't a bruiser & can't run behind our line that can't create holes for him.

They'll both be fine in the next year or two. Stewart's cap hit is like $18mil this year in dead money. Hurney was an *. Gettleman will ship them out as soon as he can.

[Superman]

thru 48 games...

Newton- 25 wins, 13,364 Yd, 92 TD, 48 turnovers

Manning- 26 wins, 12,538 Yd, 88 TD, 64 turnovers

Damn. Just imagine if Cam was worth a %!!! If he wasn't a laptop stealing, towel moping, bum QB who can't even hold Luck's jock strap he would've really stomped Manning's numbers!!!!

 

https://yourlogicalfallacyis.com/

 

Just pick one...

[rsrobinson]

Carolina was 17th in sacks allowed, pretty meh, but produced the 11th best running attack last year. A big part of that is Cam Newton, with the DeAngelo / Stewart duo being less effective than years past, but still more reliable than the Colts' backfield.

 

The Seahawks though, I don't think any team that combined for over 2,000 rushing yards is a bad oline. They were obviously hurting without a few of their starters for much of the season and did suffer, but they still did enough for Marshawn to do the rest. Although I do recall their pass protection being down right lousy at times, even with Russell Wilson's great mobility. Stats say 23rd most allowed sacks.

The Seahawks and Colts both averaged 4.3 yards per rushing attempt. The Seahawks had 2000 yards rushing because Carroll is more committed to the running game than Pagano is and will continue to pound the ball even when its not particularly effective in order to wear the opposing defense down. Lynch had a very good season because he's a beast who can grind out yards even when nothing is there, not because he had great blocking. His numbers were still down significantly from 2012, though.

The Seahawks offensive line was easily the weakest unit on the team and they were able to overcome it only because they had Russell Wilson and Marshawn Lynch in the backfield who have unique abilities to make plays out of nothing.

[BrentMc11]

 

 

Is that Grandpa Munster on crack.....or the ghost of Lombardi's past?

 

[Atrain]

Carolina was 17th in sacks allowed, pretty meh, but produced the 11th best running attack last year. A big part of that is Cam Newton, with the DeAngelo / Stewart duo being less effective than years past, but still more reliable than the Colts' backfield.

 

The Seahawks though, I don't think any team that combined for over 2,000 rushing yards is a bad oline. They were obviously hurting without a few of their starters for much of the season and did suffer, but they still did enough for Marshawn to do the rest. Although I do recall their pass protection being down right lousy at times, even with Russell Wilson's great mobility. Stats say 23rd most allowed sacks.

 

 

I just posted the stats earlier in this thread.

 

Carolina: 1441 yards 8 tds.

Indy: 1336 yards 11 tds

(without QB numbers)

 

Difference in the running game in negligible. Can we really say one was more effective than the other?

 

Aluding to what TDavis85 mentioned Football outsiders has a stat they call "Houdinis" that they define as a play where a QB escapes a would-be sack.

Cam lead the league BY FAR with 20 would-be-sacks evaded, guess who was next.. Russel wilson with 10.  Had they not been able to avoid those sacks with their feet, both of them would easily be close to the most sacked QBs in the league. Carolina  O-line and Seattle's pass protection is not very good at all.

[BlueShoe]

Carolina, & several other teams, would disagree with that homer statement.

Would several teams take Luck? Sure.

There are plenty out there who would take Newton, too.

 

That's nonsense.

[jskinnz]

Yes they would. He's been more productive than any QB not named Dan Marino in football history thru 3 seasons, & he's done it with little offensive talent around him.

Andrew Luck is a finished product. He played 4 years of college in a pro style offense. Luck is a turnover machine & has accuracy issues.

Newton only played 1 year in college, which was better than anything Luck ever did, & he's still growing & learning the position.

The only reason newton went # 1 in 2011 because luck went back to school. There is no gm who would take newton over luck.

[TDavis58]

The only reason newton went # 1 in 2011 because luck went back to school. There is no gm who would take newton over luck.

Carolina would've taken Newton #1 regardless.

[jvan1973]

Carolina would've taken Newton #1 regardless.

[dgambill]

Of course Indy is going to feel that way! They get slighted every year! Indy sports no matter what sport never get the recognition that they deserve. It's every year!

Now I'm not saying this is the case from every single person because I'm pretty sure USA Today projected the Colts in the Super Bowl this coming year, so of course we do get some love but

The Colts could go undefeated and of course they will get attention from the media but it wouldn't be as much at 75% of the other teams that would be in the same posisiton, and even if the Indy Colts were doing great I would guess about 30-40% of the media would still say it was a fluke they are getting lucky ect..

Yes some Indy teams get recognized sometimes, just when they deserve the attention they usually don't get it unless it is something bad..

If anything Indy fans should have come to expect this! I don't get all hurt about it anymore because it's the same thing every year! Indy is never going to get tons of recognition from the media/sporting world Becuase were Indiana and were small market with good sports! People want the big popular cities to be good at the sports and they get upset because Indy has good sporting teams.

No reason to get butt hurt about it... Just accept it and embrace the under dog role.

My experience is that while Peyton was here....we were talked about CONSTANTLY and called a SB contender...even when looking at our defense and seeing our huge flaws I thought it was humorous. Pacers get plenty of attention this year...but yes they are still under dogs because well quite frankly they can't get past the Heat in the playoffs....so of course they aren't going to get the same love....you have to beat the best to be the best...until they do...they were always second fiddle in the East despite the regular season record.

 

I know ND football is all over the place especially prime time....Indiana basketball got a ton of pub when they beat Kentucky and a year or so ago when they had a great run.....really....I don't get it....we get plenty of recognition in my opinion...some not even warranted. Of course we aren't in a big market like NY or Boston so the media is going to spend more time on those teams because more people CARE about those teams (bigger fan base) but I think we get a fair amount of respect. Overall we are in a small market with other small market teams (Jax and Ten) so we just aren't going to get the same coverage...but I think people respect Luck and this team as a playoff team...just maybe not SB team just yet.

[BrentMc11]

Carolina would've taken Newton #1 regardless.

Not if his brother Fig Newton was available.

 

 

[dgambill]

I fixed it for you.  Also, check out their total quarterback ratings...  It tells a more complete picture.

 

2013 playoffs:

http://espn.go.com/nfl/qbr/_/seasontype/3

 

2013 regular season:

http://espn.go.com/nfl/qbr

 

Russel Wilson is still a game manager.

However you want to word it....Luck didn't manage the NE game well at all....so while I still think Luck is the better qb clearly Wilson performed better in the playoffs. I don't even see how that is disputable. I'm not saying Wilson was Joe Montana or Joe Flacco from a year ago...just that he did a good job in the playoffs leading his team to the SB. I would say Luck had a hugely up and down playoffs....VERY inconsistant...moments of brilliance and unfortanetly too many poor poor throws/decisions. I can't give Luck anything above a C...probably a D+ in my book. I'm sorry if I expect my qbs to take care of the football and not turn it over. I'm not saying he was the reason we lost...but he certainly contributed to it. I don't know what more you want Wilson to do...he didn't break records but he played well...I'm sorry he did a good job....and continued it from the season through the post season. Had Luck kept his stat sheet clean I would agree with you. I don't think I'm going to find any common ground in this matter. I guess people value things differently....I value the ball and keeping momentum...turnovers especially in the playoffs aren't just drive killers...they are demoralizing. Also you are playing the best competition...typically they will capitalize on those mistakes at a higher percentage. There is just very little room for error.

[Qwiz]

Is that Grandpa Munster on crack.....or the ghost of Lombardi's past?

Double post! Stupid phone lol

[Qwiz]

Is that Grandpa Munster on crack.....or the ghost of Lombardi's past?

no it is the puppet from Saw. Good guess though, he looks just like the grandpa lol

[BOTT]

Not in the Chiefs game. Luck didn't turn the ball over until the score was 31-10. 

 

 

I just think you're giving Wilson a little too much credit, and giving Luck a little too much blame. I don't care too much who is ranked higher on this list, to be honest.

I have pointed out your first point to him before, but for some reason he and others continue to ignore it.

[BOTT]

Are you kidding me? I think it is a pretty legitament arguement that a guy throwing 7 ints in two games in the playoffs is a big PROBLEM. Sorry if I value the football!! This is one of the very reasons why Tom Brady has done so great in the playoffs and Peyton has suffered. Turnovers in the playoffs. I love Peyton...I know he had to press at times to make up for his defense but playing a clean game against ELITE defenses is a huge difference when moving on in the playoffs. I'm sorry that Andrew played terribly against NE. Trust me...I am! As great as his come back was against KC it wasn't like Andrew didn't contribute MIGHTLY to the deficit himself. That NE game reminded me of Peyton early in his career against Belichek...just out coached....sure he made some big plays but he put us behind the eight ball with his first play of the game and of course our defense didn't help us out but if he plays a clean game....we still have a shot to win.

On the flip side....Russell Wilson had 3 games with no ints. Yes he lost a fumble early against SF but he was playing against the best defense in football (outside his own). He took care of the ball...and made a HUGE TD throw to Baldwell. I mean incredible! His rating was 104, throws for over 200yds and a td. Just great disciplined football. Turns around in the SB on the biggest stage and outplays Peyton...throws for over another 200yds....a ridiculous 123 qb rating and two more tds...and like 75% for the game passing. Had some timely scrambles..just played as well as any young qb could in the spot light. He drove his team right down the field and put points up the whole game. Defense and special teams scored 16pts of the 40 some....please...that offense dominated Denvers...and Wilson was brilliant. You go back to the Saints game and it was an ugly one...rainy and cold...nobody was going to pass in that weather well. Trust me not turning the ball over and letting the running game do its job is VERY important. Also the Saints had a really good defense. I just don't see how throwing for 48% and 4 ints and a passer rating of 53.....i mean even Andy Dalton played better against SD than that. I think Andrew is going to be great...but he put up a terrible performance against NE...and a spectacularly bad/good performance agianst KC. Don't know how that can be better than winning your team a SB and playing mistake free football. Wilson had a great season last year...he performed exactly how Seattle needed him too. Took care of the football...made big plays with his legs and arm when needed and was a GREAT vocal leader on the team. Why the hate....idk...what more could the guy do? Throw 60tds like Peyton? I mean his numbers weren't like he was just along for the ride....only a fool couldn't see how important he was to that team last year. I'm not going to say he is going to be better than Andrew or anything...but he had a better season...because he had good stats, wins, AND A SB. He did it all.

That's far too long for me to respond to every point. But the fact that you act like Wilson played tremendous in the SB is hilarious. Why do you think he didn't win MVP from a media that is obsessed with quarterback play? It was because he did very little until the game was already decided. Wilson was 9-14 94 0 and the score was 29-0.

And I don't know what you have against Luck....I didn't even bring his name up and wasn't even comparing the two. All I was responding to was the notion that Wilson played GREAT in the playoffs.

* I guess I did say Wilson wasn't good in the playoffs....my bad. I just don't think he was anything special.

[Warhorse]

My slingers better than your slinger, 

My slingers better than yours......

My slingers better cuz he's from Colts Nation,

My slingers better than yours.

[Superman]

Why do you think he didn't win MVP from a media that is obsessed with quarterback play? It was because he did very little until the game was already decided. Wilson was 9-14 94 0 and the score was 29-0.

 

Those are very good points.

[BOTT]

Yes they would. He's been more productive than any QB not named Dan Marino in football history thru 3 seasons, & he's done it with little offensive talent around him.

Andrew Luck is a finished product. He played 4 years of college in a pro style offense. Luck is a turnover machine & has accuracy issues.

Newton only played 1 year in college, which was better than anything Luck ever did, & he's still growing & learning the position.

Maybe the worst post ever

[snkdy]

That's far too long for me to respond to every point. But the fact that you act like Wilson played tremendous in the SB is hilarious. Why do you think he didn't win MVP from a media that is obsessed with quarterback play? It was because he did very little until the game was already decided. Wilson was 9-14 94 0 and the score was 29-0.

And I don't know what you have against Luck....I didn't even bring his name up and wasn't even comparing the two. All I was responding to was the notion that Wilson played GREAT in the playoffs.

* I guess I did say Wilson wasn't good in the playoffs....my bad. I just don't think he was anything special.

 

I agree. Wilson's performance in the playoffs can be described as him making the throws he needed to make. Against the Saints, he had a career low 103 yards, but that throw to Baldwin with 2 minutes to go was crucial. In the NFC Title game, he didn't impress until that TD pass to Kearse in the fourth quarter. I would say his performance in the Super Bowl was definitely the best of the three. Yes, the defense handed him a 29-0 lead, but again, he made some pretty impressive throws, especially in the second half. And he also didn't make many mistakes. 

[rsrobinson]

That's far too long for me to respond to every point. But the fact that you act like Wilson played tremendous in the SB is hilarious. Why do you think he didn't win MVP from a media that is obsessed with quarterback play? It was because he did very little until the game was already decided. Wilson was 9-14 94 0 and the score was 29-0.

You couldn't be more wrong. Wilson consistently moved the chains throughout the game, converting third down after third down with his passing and running, and keeping Manning and the Broncos offense stewing on the sidelines in frustration for large chunks of the game. The Seahawks punted only once, midway through the third quarter after the game was already out of hand. Wilson's passing was pinpoint accurate and, unlike Manning, he never put the ball in a spot where a defender could make a play on it. It was an uber-efficient performance on the sport's biggest stage.

[rsrobinson]

I agree. Wilson's performance in the playoffs can be described as him making the throws he needed to make. Against the Saints, he had a career low 103 yards, but that throw to Baldwin with 2 minutes to go was crucial. In the NFC Title game, he didn't impress until that TD pass to Kearse in the fourth quarter. I would say his performance in the Super Bowl was definitely the best of the three. Yes, the defense handed him a 29-0 lead, but again, he made some pretty impressive throws, especially in the second half. And he also didn't make many mistakes.

People keep bringing up the 103 yards passing in the Saints game without any context. I was at that game...they played in a monsoon. 30-40 mph winds with the rain coming down in sheets. It was the worst conditions ever for a Seahawks home game and that includes several snow games. I've never seen Drew Brees throw as many dying quails that missed his receivers by yards as I did in that game.

Because of the conditions, Pete Carroll decided to play a conservative game plan. After going up 16 - 0 at halftime that turned into an ultraconservative game plan in the second half and Wilson barely passed the ball until he needed a big play on third down in the 4th quarter which he nailed and led to the game-clinching TD. That's why Wilson passed for 103 yards in that game. He had shredded that same Saints defense for 310 yards and three TDs on MNF just a few weeks earlier.

[BOTT]

You couldn't be more wrong. Wilson consistently moved the chains throughout the game, converting third down after third down with his passing and running, and keeping Manning and the Broncos offense stewing on the sidelines in frustration for large chunks of the game. The Seahawks punted only once, midway through the third quarter after the game was already out of hand. Wilson's passing was pinpoint accurate and, unlike Manning, he never put the ball in a spot where a defender could make a play on it. It was an uber-efficient performance on the sport's biggest stage.

Consistently moved the chains? Yeah, after they had a 29 point lead....Big deal. You tell me I couldn't be more wrong and just give me filler on now great he was while ignoring the fact he did almost all of that damage after the game was decided. Guess what? It's not difficult to throw the ball when you're up 30 pts and everyone knows the game is over. After the Percy Having return at the start of the 3rd I expected seattle to run the ball 30 times....it's almost like Carrol wanted Wilson to pad his stats and win MVP. Luckily the voters didn't fall for it.

[Dustin]

Carolina would've taken Newton #1 regardless.

 

stop