If you were starting a franchise which Rook QB would you choose.
Original Post
Replies sorted oldest to newest
It's a tough choice: I picked Wilson only because I've seen him take fewer hard hits, implying a smaller chance of devastating injury than RG3. Luck has been a little free with the ball this year so lacking more data, I'm going with the conservative choice- The older, more experienced player.
I would take Luck. I feel that he will have a longer career than the other two. Those kind of QB's can be great, but have a pretty short shelf life. I'm more willing to take a shot at a 15 year QB.
Definitely Luck. He is the best thrower of the bunch. When the other two slow down they will be less dynamic. Luck will only get better.
You can win with either one of them. I think Luck plays more games over a career though. If I had to pick one guy I would not want to face for one game it would be Robert Griffin III. He's absolutely terrifying.
I really like Russell Favre, but Luck has seven fourth quarter game winning drives. Seven in his rookie year. That kid is something special.
I'd take Luck. He's doing the most with the least.
Griffin has a solid running game with Morris and a couple really good receivers. Not taking anything away from him as a player, he's been outstanding.
Just like at Wisconsin, if Senecca Wilson didn't have the running game boosting him up, he would struggle a lot more. Teams are gameplanning to stop Lynch and Wilson is taking advantage. If teams were gameplanning to stop Wilson, he would be stopped. Teams are gameplanning to stop Luck and Griffin and they're still dominating.
Griffin has a solid running game with Morris and a couple really good receivers. Not taking anything away from him as a player, he's been outstanding.
Just like at Wisconsin, if Senecca Wilson didn't have the running game boosting him up, he would struggle a lot more. Teams are gameplanning to stop Lynch and Wilson is taking advantage. If teams were gameplanning to stop Wilson, he would be stopped. Teams are gameplanning to stop Luck and Griffin and they're still dominating.
This is not an easy choice for me. Based on what I've seen this year alone, however, I selected Wilson.
Luck will be great someday, and that someday could be very soon. But Andrew Luck circa 2012 is too careless with the football with 26 turnovers, and he has regressed late in the season. He should improve drastically going forward, but we're talking about starting a franchise, and I need to see him making better decisions in the pros before making him my choice. Over the last 4 games, he's completed 46.7% of his passes, and his quarterback rating of 72.0 is awful. Considering those numbers have come against one good team (Houston) and three awful teams (Detroit, Kansas City and Tennessee), that does cause some concern.
Robert Griffin III has been outstanding, but until he learns how to minimize those big hits, I'm leery about making a big commitment to him. When he hurt his knee, I thought he completely destroyed it. I thought he was looking at total reconstructive surgery. Thankfully, it looked worse than it was. There's no denying his talent, or his decision making with regards to the ball.
Russell Wilson, is a good enough runner to be dangerous, and a really underrated passer. And the games I've watched him play, he's known when to slide, or run out of bounds to avoid a big hit. His 2012 performance has offered the best combination of pure passing ability, mobility, and decision making.
I think ultimately all three will be great. Luck is the prototypical pocket passer with mobility should he need it. Griffin will run more early in his career, but he's got the big arm (stronger than Luck's), and accuracy to have a long career after his legs have had a few miles. Wilson has good arm strength, great athleticism, and he takes care of the ball. He set the NCAA record for most consecutive passes without a pick, and now that he's gotten the speed of the NFL game down, he's even better at protecting the ball. In his last ten games, he's thrown 20 touchdowns, and only 3 interceptions.
Luck will be great someday, and that someday could be very soon. But Andrew Luck circa 2012 is too careless with the football with 26 turnovers, and he has regressed late in the season. He should improve drastically going forward, but we're talking about starting a franchise, and I need to see him making better decisions in the pros before making him my choice. Over the last 4 games, he's completed 46.7% of his passes, and his quarterback rating of 72.0 is awful. Considering those numbers have come against one good team (Houston) and three awful teams (Detroit, Kansas City and Tennessee), that does cause some concern.
Robert Griffin III has been outstanding, but until he learns how to minimize those big hits, I'm leery about making a big commitment to him. When he hurt his knee, I thought he completely destroyed it. I thought he was looking at total reconstructive surgery. Thankfully, it looked worse than it was. There's no denying his talent, or his decision making with regards to the ball.
Russell Wilson, is a good enough runner to be dangerous, and a really underrated passer. And the games I've watched him play, he's known when to slide, or run out of bounds to avoid a big hit. His 2012 performance has offered the best combination of pure passing ability, mobility, and decision making.
I think ultimately all three will be great. Luck is the prototypical pocket passer with mobility should he need it. Griffin will run more early in his career, but he's got the big arm (stronger than Luck's), and accuracy to have a long career after his legs have had a few miles. Wilson has good arm strength, great athleticism, and he takes care of the ball. He set the NCAA record for most consecutive passes without a pick, and now that he's gotten the speed of the NFL game down, he's even better at protecting the ball. In his last ten games, he's thrown 20 touchdowns, and only 3 interceptions.
quote:Originally posted by Grave Digger:
I'd take Luck. He's doing the most with the least.
Griffin has a solid running game with Morris and a couple really good receivers. Not taking anything away from him as a player, he's been outstanding.
Just like at Wisconsin, if Senecca Wilson didn't have the running game boosting him up, he would struggle a lot more. Teams are gameplanning to stop Lynch and Wilson is taking advantage. If teams were gameplanning to stop Wilson, he would be stopped. Teams are gameplanning to stop Luck and Griffin and they're still dominating.
First of all, Luck is hardly dominating. He's failed to complete 50% of his passes in any of his last four games, and last time I looked, he was 31st in passer rating. Now those numbers don't tell the whole story, obviously, but he's not having even an average season for a passer. He has a lot of yards...but he's thrown the ball 600 times. Indianapolis has had a nice season winning ten games. They are also 32nd in strength of schedule. Everybody makes a big deal about Luck's come from behind wins. If he'd played better the rest of the game, he wouldn't have to come back at the end.
And Morris offers a little more than a solid run game for Griffin. He's fourth in the NFL with 1,410 yards rushing.
Finally, in case you haven't noticed, Russell Wilson is one TD pass from tying the NFL rookie record of 26, set by Peyton Manning. To say "if he didn't have a running game, he would be Seneca Wallace" is a little ridiculous. You have no evidence to back that up. Wilson was the top rated QB in the NCAA last year. Not Luck or Griffin. He's got a 20:3 TD to INT ratio his last ten games. And the same Seahawk team that had Marshawn Lynch last year running for 1,200 + yards had a passer rating of 77.6. Wilson's passer rating is 98.0.
Give the man some credit.
Yes, and to me this is obvious. Not so obvious if RGIII changes his playing style so he is less injury prone.quote:Originally posted by Herschel:
Luck, then Wilson, then Griffin.
LS, the poll is "starting a franchise quarterback." I take that to mean who is predicted to be the best franchise QB and that extends the prediction to the next decade or more.
Luck is by far the best prediction for a prototypical drop back quarterback. He has the arm, the body size (height and weight), and the x's and o's.
I don't even see how this is close.
I do understand what the poll is, phaedrus. Iowacheese said "after seeing them play for a full season", so I am basing my opinion in part on what I have seen from the three men actually playing in the NFL, and not purely on their "potential". Potential does not always equate success. Tony Mandrich was supposed to be one of the greatest offensive lineman ever. Ryan Leaf was supposed to be a superstar. Sometimes 'can't miss" prospects do. Now, have I seen anything that leads me to believe that Luck or Griffin won't be stars? No. But as I said, I am basing my opinion off of what I have actually seen these guys do against the toughest competition.
If we're discussing this purely based on potential, I pick Luck. If the element of performance thus far is included, then that influences my decision.
Wilson was my choice by a very narrow margin. But he was my choice.
If we're discussing this purely based on potential, I pick Luck. If the element of performance thus far is included, then that influences my decision.
Wilson was my choice by a very narrow margin. But he was my choice.
Griffin and Wilson both stepped into QB positions that have been manned by steaming bags of dogpoop for the past 5 years. They've both played well but it would be tough not to improve what has been in both places for a long time.
The Colts cut ties with one of the 5 best QB's to ever play the game so they could hand everything over to Luck. Then his coach developed Leukemia and Luck had to adjust to an interim coach on the fly, as a rookie. Manning is having a fantastic year in Denver and pretty much every Colts fan could care less. That's how good Luck has been.
His numbers may not be as tidy as Wilsons, but out of the 3 Luck had the most fringe baggage to deal with and the guy came up nails.
The Colts cut ties with one of the 5 best QB's to ever play the game so they could hand everything over to Luck. Then his coach developed Leukemia and Luck had to adjust to an interim coach on the fly, as a rookie. Manning is having a fantastic year in Denver and pretty much every Colts fan could care less. That's how good Luck has been.
His numbers may not be as tidy as Wilsons, but out of the 3 Luck had the most fringe baggage to deal with and the guy came up nails.
quote:Originally posted by ChilliJon:
Griffin and Wilson both stepped into QB positions that have been manned by steaming bags of dogpoop for the past 5 years. They've both played well but it would be tough not to improve what has been in both places for a long time.
The Colts cut ties with one of the 5 best QB's to ever play the game so they could hand everything over to Luck. Then his coach developed Leukemia and Luck had to adjust to an interim coach on the fly, as a rookie. Manning is having a fantastic year in Denver and pretty much every Colts fan could care less. That's how good Luck has been.
His numbers may not be as tidy as Wilsons, but out of the 3 Luck had the most fringe baggage to deal with and the guy came up nails.
With all due respect, ChilliJon, Luck has been an average NFL quarterback in 2012. He's had some big time throws, and flashes of what he most likely will be. But there have also been a lot of dumb mistakes. Some of that is the talent around him, sure, but Luck has not performed at a high level by any possible metric you could come up with. He's barely completing half of his passes, and he leads the NFL in turnovers.
Remember, too, that Wilson was drafted to be Matt Flynn's backup. He won the starting job as a rookie, and he's one TD pass from tying Manning's rookie record of 26. Yes, pretty much any decent QB would improve what has been the norm for Seattle quarterback performance, but he's one of the highest rated quarterbacks in the NFL. His rating is equal to Tom Brady's in 2012.
quote:Originally posted by lambeausouth:
Luck has not performed at a high level by any possible metric you could come up with.
10-5 as a starter? 22nd second ranked in rushing. 26th ranked defense.
Don't get me wrong. I like all 3 guys. You can win with all of them. But given everything Luck's had to work with (and deal with) I'm picking him if I had to choose one as my franchise guy.
And bye the way, as far as I'm concerned Wilson needs two more TD passes to match Manning's rookie record.
NFL Rushing Offense Rankings:
1. Washington Redskins
2. Seattle Seahawks
.
.
.
.
20. Green Bay Packers
.
22. Indianapolis Colts
I think that's the difference between the 3 QBs. Now Griffin is a major part of the Redskins rushing attack (750+ yards) as is Wilson (400+ yards), but it's those stud RBs they have that teams fear.
I also wouldn't use passing stats to back up Wilson. Sure he has 8 fewer INTs than Luck, but he's also attempted 220 fewer passes. His INT per Attempt rate is better than Luck's, but not much better(1 INT per 38 Atts. for Wilson versus 1/33 Atts. for Luck). Luck has also been sacked almost twice as often as Wilson. In fact Wilson has attempted the fewest passes in the NFL, 25 per game. He has made the most of those attempts, but the sample size is much smaller compared to Luck.
1. Washington Redskins
2. Seattle Seahawks
.
.
.
.
20. Green Bay Packers
.
22. Indianapolis Colts
I think that's the difference between the 3 QBs. Now Griffin is a major part of the Redskins rushing attack (750+ yards) as is Wilson (400+ yards), but it's those stud RBs they have that teams fear.
I also wouldn't use passing stats to back up Wilson. Sure he has 8 fewer INTs than Luck, but he's also attempted 220 fewer passes. His INT per Attempt rate is better than Luck's, but not much better(1 INT per 38 Atts. for Wilson versus 1/33 Atts. for Luck). Luck has also been sacked almost twice as often as Wilson. In fact Wilson has attempted the fewest passes in the NFL, 25 per game. He has made the most of those attempts, but the sample size is much smaller compared to Luck.
I liked RG III over luck before the draft. And I like him more now.
Colts have one of the worst defenses in the league as well, while Seattle's is top 5. Washington's defense is terrible as well.
Luck's numbers across the board are very similar to Manning's first year.
As for the question -
Luck
Griffin
Wilson
Luck's numbers across the board are very similar to Manning's first year.
As for the question -
Luck
Griffin
Wilson
Just how they were taken in the draft- Luck, Griffin and then Wilson.
RG3 accuracy is under rated.
He needs to get his running under control.
He needs to get his running under control.
quote:Originally posted by Grave Digger:...but it's those stud RBs they have that teams fear.
Really...
Anyway, great topic but I choose Luck but you can't go wrong with any of them. Greatest rookie crop of QBs ever?
Let's wait a few years to see if this class out-performs 1983.
quote:Originally posted by chickenboy:
Really...
Anyway, great topic but I choose Luck but you can't go wrong with any of them. Greatest rookie crop of QBs ever?
You think teams are gameplanning to stop Senecca Wilson versus trying to stop Beast Mode? Seriously doubt it. With Griffin that's more of a stretch, it's the running game overall that teams are trying to stop, with Griffin being a huge part of that, but I don't think Griffin looks nearly as good as he does if Alfred Morris isn't doing his thing.
quote:Originally posted by ChilliJon:quote:Originally posted by lambeausouth:
Luck has not performed at a high level by any possible metric you could come up with.
10-5 as a starter? 22nd second ranked in rushing. 26th ranked defense.
Easiest schedule in the NFL, too.
I'm an Andrew Luck fan, and think he's going to be an incredible quarterback. But he's not there yet, and I need to see him show even some of the consistency he showed in college before I "sign him long term" as my franchise quarterback.
quote:Originally posted by Grave Digger:
NFL Rushing Offense Rankings:
1. Washington Redskins
2. Seattle Seahawks
.
.
.
.
20. Green Bay Packers
.
22. Indianapolis Colts
I think that's the difference between the 3 QBs. Now Griffin is a major part of the Redskins rushing attack (750+ yards) as is Wilson (400+ yards), but it's those stud RBs they have that teams fear.
I also wouldn't use passing stats to back up Wilson. Sure he has 8 fewer INTs than Luck, but he's also attempted 220 fewer passes. His INT per Attempt rate is better than Luck's, but not much better(1 INT per 38 Atts. for Wilson versus 1/33 Atts. for Luck). Luck has also been sacked almost twice as often as Wilson. In fact Wilson has attempted the fewest passes in the NFL, 25 per game. He has made the most of those attempts, but the sample size is much smaller compared to Luck.
You make some good points, GD. But I would say that QB rating, while an imperfect metric, takes all those things into consideration, and Wilson is way, way ahead in that regard. However, it cannot account for the talent around the players being compared. I'd love to see a metric that compares players at a position, and makes adjustments based on things like strength of schedule, and teammate performance.
Would Luck have better numbers with a running game, and an offensive line that wasn't mistaken for a sieve by a casual observer? Sure. Would Wilson's numbers drop in Luck's predicament? Yes. It takes a special QB to thrive with no running game to speak of, and a porous line (cough ARod). But when I factor the talent around these three men, I also consider the expectations for all three. Luck and Griffin were supposed to be saviors in D.C and Indianapolis. Wilson was drafted to be a backup, and he's having a great year, one that has him in contention for NFL rookie of the year.
I'm not saying that anybody is right or wrong. I don't think you could really go wrong with any of the three. But it's fun to talk about
With Seattle's defense, running game, and pass:run ratio, I do think Wilson is in an extremely favorable position. The defense likely gives him more possessions and I expect the number of men in the box of opposing teams averages more than defenses opposing Luck.
When you include the scheme often including Wilson rolling out with the threat of run or pass, my guess is defenses are hard pressed to come close to optimize stopping the pass. Along with that is the fake hand off to the beast (oh, how I wish the Pack traded for Lynch!!!).
If I play devil's advocate against Luck, it would be the Seahawks scheme + Wilson's running ability + his savvy with respect to avoiding injury.
Yes, LS, it's a fun conversation.
I think I prefer Luck because I favor the prototype drop back scheme with Luck's attributes and factoring in his team's weaknesses relative to Skins and Hawks. I am thoughtful of Brady and his 5.8 40 (I think) and the success and length of his career.
When you include the scheme often including Wilson rolling out with the threat of run or pass, my guess is defenses are hard pressed to come close to optimize stopping the pass. Along with that is the fake hand off to the beast (oh, how I wish the Pack traded for Lynch!!!).
If I play devil's advocate against Luck, it would be the Seahawks scheme + Wilson's running ability + his savvy with respect to avoiding injury.
Yes, LS, it's a fun conversation.
I think I prefer Luck because I favor the prototype drop back scheme with Luck's attributes and factoring in his team's weaknesses relative to Skins and Hawks. I am thoughtful of Brady and his 5.8 40 (I think) and the success and length of his career.