I'd trade Russell Wilson for Andrew Luck.

[Long Time Fan]

There, I said it.

This is no longer blasphemy, but common sense.

[mykc14]

There, I said it.

This is no longer blasphemy, but common sense.

I disagree.

[Seahawks4Ever]

That trade is never going to happen and whats more you know it is never going to happen so all you have done is say that you are dissatisfied with our QB.

Earlier in the year many were asking, "what's wrong with Tom Brady?" or, "Is Brady done?"

The only thing wrong with Brady was the Patriot O-Line was in disarray because of injuries and such. Now that their O-line has got healthy Brady is back to being Brady.

I know they are not the best but we did win a Super Bowl with our starting O-Linemen. When they are back to being healthy, along with Zack Miller you will see a much improved Russell Wilson. I mean, what was Brady without Gronk?? Exactly!

[c_hawkbob]

There, I said it.

This is no longer blasphemy, but common sense.

Yeah OK, way to support an argument.

[NorthHawk]

Luck would do well here. He throws a better ball than Russell, but he lacks the escapability. On the other hand he has a little Roethlisberger in him in that he can make a play with an opponent draped over him. At this point, it's pretty much a wash in my opinion.

[mykc14]

Luck would do well here. He throws a better ball than Russell, but he lacks the escapability. On the other hand he has a little Roethlisberger in him in that he can make a play with an opponent draped over him. At this point, it's pretty much a wash in my opinion.

I think most would agree that he probably would do well here, but that doesn't mean we would ever want to trade RW for him.

[THX-1138]

There, I said it.

This is no longer blasphemy, but common sense.

Then it's a good thing that you're not in charge of the team. What, exactly, was the point of this? Were you just looking to start a scrap on the board? You didn't support your position in any meaningful way, shape, or form. In the good old days we might call this "flaming"; making an incendiary comment in order to start a fight. I think we should all take meaningless positions. Here's mine (which I am totally not serious about):

I would change the Seahawks team colors to dark brown and light brown. With evergreen trim.
There, I said it.

This is no longer blasphemy, but common sense. After all, most of the hawks where I live seem to be kinda those colors and they perch in the ponderosas around my house (see, I even supported my position).

[Anthony]

There, I said it.

This is no longer blasphemy, but common sense.

as long as he can bring his oline and Wr maybe and schedule were he plays only 3 teams that made the playoffs last year and he lost 2 of them. So you know we have already played 4 and still have 4 more while Luck has 1 more, but if not no, here without his top 10 oline and top 10 wr corps her would be worse than Rw due to lack of scrambling alone. Oh and lets not forget he plays in the AFC the weaker conference. Also add in, in our system he would not get all those attempts, tds, but his Int would still be there, especially with our oline and Wrs. However that said If I can get his oline and Wr I would keep Rw has he would have a field day with them. Let me help you

Luck - 7th pass blocking o-line and has TY Hilton, Wyane, Nicks to throw to
P Manning- 4th pass blocking o-line and he has Thomas, Welker, Sanders
Brady 19th ranked pass blocking o-line (ours is now ranked 21st) and he has Gronk, Edelman
Rodger o-line ranked 19th in pass blocking and has Nelson, Cobb to throw to
Brees o-line ranked 5th and he has Graham, cooks, Colson,
Ryan 7th pass blocking o-line and he has Hester, Jones, White, Smith
Rivers 9th o-line, and he has Gates, Floyd, Royal, Allen

Wilson 21st ranked(soon to be 26th) pass blocking oline and he has Baldwin, Kearse, TE-Wilson,

Plese show me any of these top Qbs oline that are ranked worse tha ours, and then ples eshow me were Balwdin is better than any of these QBs. Or for that matter were our WR corps is even in the same league as these. Last 2 years Rw has made the oline and WR look good. This year in 5 game she has made them look good, in 1 they looked ok and in 2 not good. So the answer I NO I would trade for Luck and there is no reason to, Give RW the weapons Luck has and he has a field day, and yes we can say that because he has proved even with what he has he can have a filed day, but every QB needs help. Ours is not getting much.

[Long Time Fan]

What, exactly, was the point of this? Were you just looking to start a scrap on the board? You didn't support your position in any meaningful way, shape, or form. In the good old days we might call this "flaming"; making an incendiary comment in order to start a fight.

]
Yeah OK, way to support an argument.

[/quote]

I will consider myself duly corrected.

http://www.nfl.com/player/russellwilson ... areerstats

http://www.nfl.com/player/andrewluck/25 ... areerstats

The stats re-enforce what the eye test clearly shows, Luck is improving every year to the degree that Russell has yet to match.

Luck no only makes all of the throws, stands fearlessly in the pocket, throws his receivers open, understands the game, is a more than capable runner with the ball, makes plays in the clutch, but he is every bit the team leader that Russell is.

Yes, AL has a better OL and better receivers, but his arm talent, accuracy and vision are better than RW.

I love having RW as the Seahawks qb. But if there were such a thing as a mirror mirror on the wall, then Luck is the fairest young qb of them all.

[THX-1138]

The Colts are 6-3 and leading a division that features the mighty Jags, Titans, and Texans. Andrew Luck is a fantastic QB. His stats point to that. But I think he lacks certain intangibles that RW has shown to possess in abundance. A stat that does bear mentioning, however, is his record in the postseason: 1-1. We all know Wilson's. It includes hardware and jewelry.

We could argue "what-ifs" for as long as our keyboards could take the abuse. The fact is that Indy basically tanked to get Luck. The Seahawks never were in that race, so Luck would never have put on the Hawks uniform. And neither the Colts nor the Hawks would ever entertain this trade. So I again ask the question: What was the point? If you are just airing your opinion I guess my response should have simply been:

Oh. Huh. That's interesting, I guess.

[Long Time Fan]

So I again ask the question: What was the point? If you are just airing your opinion

Yup, just airing my opinion.

[Distant Relative]

There, I said it.

This is no longer blasphemy, but common sense.

I can't help but wonder if this thread even gets started if the Colts lost last nights game.

[monkey]

My guess is after Wilson bounces back against the Giants, and he will, people will change their tunes again.

[burrrton]

As I (and many others) have said before: Luck is a stud.

As I (and many others) have said before: Luck may well end up being the better QB (or maybe he's even there now).

But, as I (and many others) have said before: RW has simply been better than Luck by nearly every measure.

Look at last night where Luck showed how good he can be- he was still only two completions over 50%. Throwing 50x/game is how he racks up the yardage.

I'm not saying I would or wouldn't trade for Luck (because I don't know how good he'd be with our shambles of an o-line and inferior receiving corps), but RW has simply been better (wherever you think their trend-lines point).

[c_hawkbob]

This is the first time in their entire careers that you could have found a half a season stretch where Luck's stats bettered Wilson's. Even at that take another look at their career stats:

Completions
Luck: 932
Wilson: 661

Completion %
Luck: 58.6
Wilson: 63.4

Yards
Luck: 11281
Wilson: 8144

Average
Luck: 7.1
Wilson: 7.8

TD's
Luck: 72
Wilson: 63


TD %
Luck: 4.5
Wilson: 6.0

INT
Luck: 36
Wilson: 22

INT %
Luck: 2.3
Wilson: 2.1

Rating
Luck: 86.2
Wilson: 98.9

Looks the same to me as it ever did; Luck has the higher totals and Wilson has the better percentages and higher rating.

If anything the first half of this season could be seen as an outlier, let's at least let the season play out before you proclaim Luck as having had a better season than Wilson, let alone proving conclusively that he's the better QB.

[Hawktawk]

Luck is actually 1-2 in the postseason. He has a playoff QBR of 70 but the two losses it is in the 50's.He was able to overcome 3 dreadful quarters of football to beat the chiefs last year which skewed up his numbers quite a but but basically he has been dreadful in the playoffs.

Luck has 6 TD passes and 8 picks in 3 playoff games. Wilson has 6 TD's and 1 pick in 5 playoff games. Granted the story isn't written yet but right now it looks like we have a guy who puts up star wars numbers in the regular season then flames out when the pressure gets cranked up. Then we have a guy who cares zero about any stat but winning, takes great care of the football and has a ring and a Lombardi. Luck may NEVER get what Wilson already has. RW is and will remain my guy.

But you faux fans can keep on singing Lucks praises all you like.

[Long Time Fan]

As I (and many others) have said before: Luck is a stud.

As I (and many others) have said before: Luck may well end up being the better QB (or maybe he's even there now).

But, as I (and many others) have said before: RW has simply been better than Luck by nearly every measure.

Look at last night where Luck showed how good he can be- he was still only two completions over 50%. Throwing 50x/game is how he racks up the yardage.

I'm not saying I would or wouldn't trade for Luck (because I don't know how good he'd be with our shambles of an o-line and inferior receiving corps), but RW has simply been better (wherever you think their trend-lines point).

A very reasonable perspective stated with relative objectivity.

We all love "our guy", but that doesn't make him the "best guy". It's very difficult to be objective about our own players relative to other team's players. Calling another player "better" does not diminish the regard for our player.

I actually have the audacity to have the opinion that Richard Sherman is not the best corner in the league and I would state it here, but I don't want to have to support it to those who question if a fan forum is the proper venue to state an opinion.

[Long Time Fan]

Would it be more palatable if I said that "Andrew Luck is the only QB that I would be willingly to trade Russell Wilson for"?

[Long Time Fan]

But you faux fans can keep on singing Lucks praises all you like.

Singing Luck's praises makes for a faux fan? That's objectivity for ya.

[Anthony]

I will consider myself duly corrected.

http://www.nfl.com/player/russellwilson ... areerstats

http://www.nfl.com/player/andrewluck/25 ... areerstats

The stats re-enforce what the eye test clearly shows, Luck is improving every year to the degree that Russell has yet to match.

Luck no only makes all of the throws, stands fearlessly in the pocket, throws his receivers open, understands the game, is a more than capable runner with the ball, makes plays in the clutch, but he is every bit the team leader that Russell is.

Yes, AL has a better OL and better receivers, but his arm talent, accuracy and vision are better than RW.

I love having RW as the Seahawks qb. But if there were such a thing as a mirror mirror on the wall, then Luck is the fairest young qb of them all.

Hmm and having a better oline, wr, play calling , weaker division and conference has nothing to do with that huh. me thinks you are a troll none in their right mind would agree with you knowing all the advantages Luck has. Sorry no. Everything you say Luck does Rw has done when he has time, something he rarely has. Bu they do not let the facts get in the way of a good fairy tale.

[Zorn76]

*Yawn*

[Long Time Fan]

me thinks you are a troll none in their right mind would agree with you knowing all the advantages Luck has.

http://q.usatoday.com/2014/10/10/russel ... lis-colts/

Plenty of people out there out of their right mind. Is it really unimaginable to you that someone would think that Luck is better than RW?

Calling me a troll, that's precious. That's all that you can resort to when your opinion is challenged?

[mykc14]

A very reasonable perspective stated with relative objectivity.

We all love "our guy", but that doesn't make him the "best guy". It's very difficult to be objective about our own players relative to other team's players. Calling another player "better" does not diminish the regard for our player.

I actually have the audacity to have the opinion that Richard Sherman is not the best corner in the league and I would state it here, but I don't want to have to support it to those who question if a fan forum is the proper venue to state an opinion.

I don't think anybody worries too much about an opinion like that. Its probably more in the way it was presented than anything else. Combine that with not much of an argument besides his stats keep getting better and people are going to argue. Also, we Hawks fans have had to hear that for years from the national media, without them really basing that off of anything besides raw passing yards and draft position. I also wouldn't care if somebody thought Sherm wasn't the best corner, of course I would expect some type of an argument to support that position.

[Uppercut]

Yeah Luck looks great and probably is great but I can say the same about the woman that lives next door. But I will stick with my wife. But sometimes ones mind and eye wanders!

[Long Time Fan]

Yeah Luck looks great and probably is great but I can say the same about the woman that lives next door. But I will stick with my wife. But sometimes ones mind and eye wanders!

No arguments there. The woman next door to me ain't got nothing on my wife.

[Anthony]

http://q.usatoday.com/2014/10/10/russel ... lis-colts/

Plenty of people out there out of their right mind. Is it really unimaginable to you that someone would think that Luck is better than RW?

Calling me a troll, that's precious. That's all that you can resort to when your opinion is challenged?

Due and I can show you plenty of write ups were they say the opposite to include the players themselves. The debate will go for years just like Manning and Brady. Unlike you no one is saying Luck is bad, just that Rw is as good if not slightly better, Doing more with less.

Like I said lets look at it

Oline Luck
Wr Luck
Play Calling Luck
Offensive design Luck
Ease of schedule Luck
Ease of Division Luck
Ease of Conference Luck
Room for Error Luck let me help you if you throw the ball 25 times like Rw and you start 1-10 you need to go 15-15 in the next 15 to get to 16/25 and 64% no room for error. NO lets say you throw the ball 35 times and start 1-10 you can go 22for you next 25 which would be 23/35 and get to 63% more room for error.

Nice to have all the facts huh.

[Long Time Fan]

Unlike you no one is saying Luck is bad, just that Rw is as good if not slightly better, Doing more with less.
Nice to have all the facts huh.

Your first sentence suggests that you are a little short on facts.

What happened to your assertion that no one in their right mind believed that Luck is better than RW?

I'll put on my Russell Wilson jersey while I wait for clarification.

[Anthony]

Your first sentence suggests that you are a little short on facts.

What happened to your assertion that no one in their right mind believed that Luck is better than RW?

I'll put on my Russell Wilson jersey while I wait for clarification.

wow I see were you ignored all the other thing sin the post huh?

oh and I said "none in their right mind would agree with you knowing all the advantages Luck has." please prove to me they all acknowledge all the advantages he has first. I will wait for your proof which will never happen.

[Long Time Fan]

I will wait

tick tock. yawn.

[THX-1138]

Calling another player "better" does not diminish the regard for our player.

No, saying that you would rather have a different player than the one you already have does.

[Long Time Fan]

No, saying that you would rather have a different player than the one you already have does.

The Seahawks have the best player at every position in the entire NFL?

For a guy who likes RW as much as I do, to be questioned because I think that one qb is better is funny.

[THX-1138]

You said something debatable and got debated. Did you have a different expectation of how this would go?

[Anthony]

tick tock. yawn.

I already gave the answer, and that's your reply thanks for admitting I am wright and you are wrong. When you find someone who says despite all the advantages Luck has you would still trade Rw for him show me until then your wrong.

[c_hawkbob]

Looks to me like Long Time's just here for the petty bickering ...

[Anthony]

Looks to me like Long Time's just here for the petty bickering ...

Pretty much.

[HumanCockroach]

I'll stick with the guy setting NFL records year in and year out, just how I roll. I'll also take the guy that doesn't tend to put his team in a whole ( whether he can sometimes pull out of said nosedive or not) and the guy that continues to outperform in almost every possible statistical category not named 'raw passing yardage'. Have an affinity to winning, after the regular season is done, and not imploding in the playoffs.

Really this is kind of a Tom Brady/ Peyton Manning debate. Do you prefer the guy that could hold all of the regular season records when they are done with the game, or the guy that in clutch moments ( and more importantly playoffs) raises the level of his game? I'll take the multiple Lombardi's personally, but can't go wrong with a QB that puts butts in the seats, throws for a gozillion yards, and then flounders miserably in the playoffs either, I suppose ( course that is dependant on what someone wants of course) Luck to date has two tds and seven ints in the postseason, with an injury aided "comeback" victory against KC's third string last season(a hole his poor play PUT them in to begin with), and two abysmal losses. Personally, I don't feel that that type of performance in the postseason even BELONGS in the conversation with Wilson.

Luck to date has played two good quarters ( against aforementioned third string KC team) and TEN horrid quarters of postseason play. At this point, I'm not sure many would pull that trigger ( even hypothetically) except you and good ol' eye test Future ( which is odd that both of you brought up that same thing for evaluating talent, though I suppose it does make an strong stance against, well, you know, actual numbers and stuff).

You're welcome to your opinion, I couldn't really agree with it ( as I would land on the "brady" side of the equation I guess) but never fear, there will be plenty of guys willing to side on the "best regular season QB of all time" side of the coin too....

So much for the RGIII is the "best" thing at least, won't have to stomach that rubish for the next decade as well. Just the Luck vs. Wilson ( aka Manning vs Brady) which IMHO is pretty cool, even IF I have to hear about how much "better" Luck is, I want Lombardi's, not the "best" QB. I'm petty like that.

[obiken]

Its a moot thread because its not going to happen. We have OUR franchise QB and they have theirs.

[Distant Relative]

I'd trade a Kit Kat for a Snickers bar.

[obiken]

I would trade Ann Margret, for Shophia Loren.

[Long Time Fan]

I would trade Ann Margret, for Shophia Loren.

Is there an option of having both? Assuming we could go back in time more than 40 years.