Russell Wilson is too small to be a FBS QB.

[BlueMAB]

My point is this. Andrew Luck has to essentially carry that team and he does. The running game was mediocre-poor, the O-Line is mediocre, the receivers were pretty awful, etc. Put a game manager QB on that team and they're going to be awful IMO. Wilson may very well be capable of being that elite guy who can carry a team but the team doesn't ask him to and he's proven to be very good at limiting mistakes, moving the chains, etc. I feel like "Game manager" has a very negative connotation to it but I don't mean it in that way. If you've got the weapons, defense, etc. around you, then being the guy who's going to move the chains and not give the ball away is great to have. I feel like you think my opinion of him is well below what it actually is. I'm a Texans fan and I think Bridgwater has a lot of Russell Wilson qualities to him (not as dangerous running, but possibly a better thrower) and I'd be more than happy if they used the first overall pick on that.

The o-line isn't great, the running game was mediocre (Donald should have gotten more carries, he averaged 5 ypc).

BUT…. Luck doesn't throw the ball to himself. T.Y. Hilton is better than any receiver on the Seahawks. Marshawn Lynch was the third leading receiver on the Seahawks.

Hilton, Fleener, Wayne, Heyward-Bey > Tate, Baldwin

WR/TE depth at Seattle isn't nearly as good as it is at Indianapolis. I watched Wilson make more than a few plays the other night when he needed to. He scrambled to get open and make throws. He ran to pick up 2 first downs but got robbed on the first drive of the game with a bad spot, and had another 22 yard gain called back for a trip by an o-lineman.
We'll just have to agree to disagree on him being a game manager I guess.

 

[WhereistheDove?]

The o-line isn't great, the running game was mediocre (Donald should have gotten more carries, he averaged 5 ypc).

BUT…. Luck doesn't throw the ball to himself. T.Y. Hilton is better than any receiver on the Seahawks. Marshawn Lynch was the third leading receiver on the Seahawks.

Hilton, Fleener, Wayne, Heyward-Bey > Tate, Baldwin

WR/TE depth at Seattle isn't nearly as good as it is at Indianapolis. I watched Wilson make more than a few plays the other night when he needed to. He scrambled to get open and make throws. He ran to pick up 2 first downs but got robbed on the first drive of the game with a bad spot, and had another 22 yard gain called back for a trip by an o-lineman.
We'll just have to agree to disagree on him being a game manager I guess.

We can agree to disagree about him being a game manager, but I'm guessing you haven't seen much of the Colts playing. Hilton is looking very good, I'll give you that (better than anyone on the Hawks when Harvin isn't playing). That being said, Wayne was out for most of the year, Fleener has been a complete and total bust to this point and only saw the field because Dwayne Allen was out, and Heyward-Bey doesn't even start on the team now (LaVon Brazill took over that a while ago). Outside of Hilton this year, they had total dregs and not one person you could point to as a legitimate weapon or even an average receiver. Assuming Allen and Wayne can get healthy they could have some pretty decent starters, but make no mistake about it, Indy's receiving corps was legitimately terrible by the mid-way point of the season. Luck with Seattle's total supporting cast would have been much better than Luck with his team.

 

[BlueMAB]

We can agree to disagree about him being a game manager, but I'm guessing you haven't seen much of the Colts playing. Hilton is looking very good, I'll give you that (better than anyone on the Hawks when Harvin isn't playing). That being said, Wayne was out for most of the year, Fleener has been a complete and total bust to this point and only saw the field because Dwayne Allen was out, and Heyward-Bey doesn't even start on the team now (LaVon Brazill took over that a while ago). Outside of Hilton this year, they had total dregs and not one person you could point to as a legitimate weapon or even an average receiver. Assuming Allen and Wayne can get healthy they could have some pretty decent starters, but make no mistake about it, Indy's receiving corps was legitimately terrible by the mid-way point of the season. Luck with Seattle's total supporting cast would have been much better than Luck with his team.

As bad as your opinion of them is, look at their numbers compared to the Seattle WRs.

 

[WhereistheDove?]

As bad as your opinion of them is, look at their numbers compared to the Seattle WRs.

That's a totally flawed argument. The Colts threw the ball 582 times last year, compared to 420 for the Seahaws. One offense was predicated on the run and the other is a pass-first offense (with a better QB). It's not exactly a wild opinion I'm going out on here. The Colts' receivers' have a lot of measurables... and that's about it for guys like DHB and Fleener.

 

[BlueMAB]

That's a totally flawed argument. The Colts threw the ball 582 times last year, compared to 420 for the Seahaws. One offense was predicated on the run and the other is a pass-first offense (with a better QB). It's not exactly a wild opinion I'm going out on here. The Colts' receivers' have a lot of measurables... and that's about it for guys like DHB and Fleener.

Why exactly wouldn't Wilson succeed in the Colts offense?

Arm strength? Football IQ? Mobility? Accuracy?

Where does he fail to measure up against Luck because all you've said is Wilson is a game manager and Luck is better.

Do you think the Colts would run the ball more if they had Marshawn Lynch? Do you think the Hawks would pass more if they had Andrew Luck?

I would argue yes to the former, and no to the latter.

 

[WhereistheDove?]

Why exactly wouldn't Wilson succeed in the Colts offense?

Arm strength? Football IQ? Mobility? Accuracy?

Where does he fail to measure up against Luck because all you've said is Wilson is a game manager and Luck is better.

Do you think the Colts would run the ball more if they had Marshawn Lynch? Do you think the Hawks would pass more if they had Andrew Luck?

I would argue yes to the former, and no to the latter.

Whoah, I never said he wouldn't succeed or be a good player, just that we'd be having a very different view of him (which is to say, not an elite QB). I hate to heap praise on Luck as a Texans fan (we just got done with Manning, I don't want to see another decade of success), but he is truly one of the top talents at the position. Honestly, the only area where I don't think he surpasses Wilson is mobility. He carried a team with one reliable receiver to the playoffs (albeit in a weak division), when everyone knew they were going to throw (and generally to Hilton, who was often double covered or blanketed by the number 1 corner).

As far as your second point, I think both would be a yes. If you're a coach, not playing to your team's talent is a good way to get fired. I guess your no is based on our difference of opinion. If you think Luck isn't a better player, then of course you think they wouldn't throw any more. I happen to think with Luck they would throw significantly more just as the Colts would run more with a better RB (though I think his impact would be slightly capped due to their line issues).

 

[BlueMAB]

@WhereistheDove?

I think the difference is Marshawn Lynch.

If Luck had Marshawn Lynch, he wouldn't have to throw it as much. If Wilson didn't have Lynch, he'd have to throw it more. Based on his stats, there's no reason to assume his success would diminish with more opportunities to throw.

Luck also plays in a controlled (weather) environment, Wilson plays in rainy Seattle.

As far as everything else goes, Wilson's numbers (other than yards) are comparable or better than Luck's, so I'm not sure how you can be so sure Luck is that much better. It's not like Wilson is throwing to Larry Fitzgerald, Calvin Johnson, and Julio Jones.

Just because someone isn't asked to do more, doesn't mean they can't.

It's an interesting comparison, I think Wilson is underrated. I don't think either of them are elite now, but in 5-7 years, when Brady, Rodgers, Brees, Peyton, and the rest of the guys in the elite argument are gone, we're going to be talking about these two being among the best in the league.

 

[WhereistheDove?]

@WhereistheDove?

I think the difference is Marshawn Lynch.

If Luck had Marshawn Lynch, he wouldn't have to throw it as much. If Wilson didn't have Lynch, he'd have to throw it more. Based on his stats, there's no reason to assume his success would diminish with more opportunities to throw.

Luck also plays in a controlled (weather) environment, Wilson plays in rainy Seattle.

As far as everything else goes, Wilson's numbers (other than yards) are comparable or better than Luck's, so I'm not sure how you can be so sure Luck is that much better. It's not like Wilson is throwing to Larry Fitzgerald, Calvin Johnson, and Julio Jones.

Just because someone isn't asked to do more, doesn't mean they can't.

It's an interesting comparison, I think Wilson is underrated. I don't think either of them are elite now, but in 5-7 years, when Brady, Rodgers, Brees, Peyton, and the rest of the guys in the elite argument are gone, we're going to be talking about these two being among the best in the league.

If Luck had the seahawks team around him, obviously he wouldn't have to throw as much because he'd have a much better running game around him. That doesn't mean he would have thrown it 420 times though. There's a lot of room for an attempt number between 420 and 582. As far as Wilson throwing more, there is absolutely reason to assume his success would diminish with a lesser running game. Throwing when one of the safeties has to come down and play the run consistently is very different than throwing when they don't have to respect the running game as much. It's not a Wilson-specific issue, that would be the same for every QB. If the Colts draft well and develop some of their players (ie. put a good running game and some targets around him), I think we're going to see a pretty sizable statistical different between these two down the road. It's not a knock on Wilson as much as it is a complement to Luck.

Edit: To put it differently, the Seahawks and Colts averaged almost the same YPC, however the Seahawks and Lynch doing that when the other team put a lot more effort into stopping the run is much more impressive than the Colts backs doing that when the other team expected Luck to throw the ball.

 

[BlueMAB]

If Luck had the seahawks team around him, obviously he wouldn't have to throw as much because he'd have a much better running game around him. That doesn't mean he would have thrown it 420 times though. There's a lot of room for an attempt number between 420 and 582. As far as Wilson throwing more, there is absolutely reason to assume his success would diminish with a lesser running game. Throwing when one of the safeties has to come down and play the run consistently is very different than throwing when they don't have to respect the running game as much. It's not a Wilson-specific issue, that would be the same for every QB. If the Colts draft well and develop some of their players (ie. put a good running game and some targets around him), I think we're going to see a pretty sizable statistical different between these two down the road. It's not a knock on Wilson as much as it is a complement to Luck.

I didn't say a lesser running game, I said throwing it more. Luck's offense is designed to throw the ball more, regardless of the running game. But only 10 times more per game. Wilson threw for more touchdowns despite throwing the ball 10 fewer times per game. Luck had a lower completion percentage, better interception percentage but fewer yards per attempt and fewer touchdowns.

If the Colts put a good running game together, they are going to threw the ball less, not more.

 

[WhereistheDove?]

I didn't say a lesser running game, I said throwing it more. Luck's offense is designed to throw the ball more, regardless of the running game. But only 10 times more per game. Wilson threw for more touchdowns despite throwing the ball 10 fewer times per game. Luck had a lower completion percentage, better interception percentage but fewer yards per attempt and fewer touchdowns.

If the Colts put a good running game together, they are going to threw the ball less, not more.

The two are intertwined though. If all of a sudden they were to start throwing significantly more, then defenses would adjust and he wouldn't get to throw with the safety in the box as much. Of course in that situation, I'd also assume the YPC would go up for the same reason, even if their yards went down. This is a pretty standard concept.

As far as Luck v Wilson, let's be honest, you're not going to convince me and I'm not going to convince you, so what's the point?

For your last point, that's exactly what I said so I'm not sure what your point is.

 

[BlueMAB]

The two are intertwined though. If all of a sudden they were to start throwing significantly more, then defenses would adjust and he wouldn't get to throw with the safety in the box as much. Of course in that situation, I'd also assume the YPC would go up for the same reason, even if their yards went down. This is a pretty standard concept.

As far as Luck v Wilson, let's be honest, you're not going to convince me and I'm not going to convince you, so what's the point?

For your last point, that's exactly what I said so I'm not sure what your point is.

The two can be intertwined, but don't have to be, it depends on the offense. It's like when people confuse the spread offense with a pass first offense. A spread offense, spreads the field, it isn't necessarily a pass first offense, it depends on your talent.

The last sentence was directed at your opinion that Lucks stats will get much better than Wilson's if the Colts develop a running game. If he throws the ball less, and Wilson's stats are already as good or better, then Luck will lose the advantage of more attempts and you can't assume that his numbers will be much better than Wilson's. The Seahawks can also make a move for a better WR or two, and Marshawn Lynch won't last forever, the top backs usually put up 2-3 good years and that's it, so his shelf-life is diminishing.

Thought it was a good discussion, not trying to convince you're wrong, I already know you're wrong.