Russell Wilson vs. Andrew Luck: Who Is the Better NFL Quarterback?

Embed from Getty Images

Andrew Luck. "It's a good, strong name," as Brian Cox says in one of my favorite movies, 25th Hour. He's big, tough, talented, likable and was the No. 1 overall selection in the 2012 NFL Draft. He's following in the Colts footsteps of the legendary Peyton Manning. He went to a big school (Stanford) and dominated. People expect him to be great. People WANT him to be great. 

Russell Wilson, on the other hand, was a little-discussed third round draft pick. He played at NC State for three-quarters of his collegiate career. Not quite as glamorous. He's small, corny and unassuming. Perhaps the only people who expected success from him were Pete Carroll and the Seahawks' savvy front office. 

Both Luck and Wilson's teams are 0-2 thus far this season, but the question is...individually, who is better?

I think it's best to handle this in segments. 

PART 1: PASSING

The average fan will look at this section and immediately give it to Luck. "Luck is a pocket quarterback, Wilson is just a scrambler!" First, let's see what the numbers indicate. Both Luck and Wilson were anointed starters right out of the gate in 2012, so their regular season stats are easy to compare:

LUCK: 13,450 yards, 89 TDs, 48 Ints, 85.4 QB rating, 58.4% completions, 1,899 attempts

RUSS:  10,407 yards, 75 TDs, 28 Ints, 98.2 QB rating, 63.9% completions, 1,323 attempts

Clearly, it's important for us to consider that Luck has 576 more career attempts than Wilson, which is an advantage for yards and TDs, but a disadvantage for Ints and possibly QB rating and/or completion percentage. That said, I think many people would be very surprised to see the incredible success that Wilson has had through the air. I'm a Wilson guy, but his career numbers are even better than I anticipated. 

Embed from Getty Images

For me, the issues here are QB rating and completion percentage. Some haters scoff at QB rating as an evaluation tool, but here were last season's leaders in the stat:

1. Tony Romo

2. Aaron Rodgers

3. Ben Roethlisberger

4. Peyton Manning

5. Tom Brady

6. Drew Brees

7. Andrew Luck

8. Carson Palmer

9. Ryan Fitzpatrick

10. Russell Wilson

I'm sorry, with the exception of Ryan Fitzpatrick at No. 9, if you don't think that's a useful stat you're an idiot. Luck finished ahead of Wilson last season, but is roughly 13 points back for his career. 98.2 to 85.4 is an alarming disparity. This is mostly a result of Luck's careless play, tossing too many interceptions and lacking efficiency at different stretches throughout his career. 

However, assessing these stats as a whole is a matter of preference. Luck is an effective volume passer. He's an aggressive playmaker who isn't afraid to take risky shots down the field. Many times this strategy results in success. Sometimes it's just plain awful decision-making. Wilson, on the other hand, is more efficient and conservative, though it's a misnomer that he doesn't stretch the field. Just watch the Seahawks play. They take deep shots every single game in an effort to open up the middle of the field for slants, crossing patterns and Marshawn Lynch's beastly runs. 

So what are we really talking about here? Basically, what kind of quarterback do you prefer? Aggressive like Brett Favre or efficient like Tom Brady? Can you really go wrong here? Personally, I'd rather protect the ball, but that doesn't make me right. Wilson has better efficiency numbers but Luck has better volume numbers. There is no right answer here. Oh wait, I forgot about the playoff stats:

Embed from Getty Images

LUCK: 1,829 yards, 9 TDs, 12 ints, 70.8 QB rating, 56.5% completions, 260 attempts

RUSS:  1,820 yards, 12 TDs, 6 Ints, 97.8 QB rating, 60.9% completions, 202 attempts

Wilson has only nine less passing yards on 58 less attempts! Seriously, is this even a comparison? Luck should be completely embarrassed by his postseason numbers. This is a massacre. An absolute no-contest. Anyone who ignores the reality of these numbers is simply being ignorant. Wilson has clearly out-passed Luck in the postseason, and their regular season stats are a matter of personal preference (volume or efficiency?). 

PART 1 VERDICT: WILSON IS A BETTER PASSER THAN LUCK. 

PART II: SUPPORTING CAST

Over the course of their careers, Luck has had the better receiving options -- T.Y. Hilton, Reggie Wayne, Donte Moncrief, Dwayne Allen, Coby Fleener and now Andre Johnson and Phillip Dorsett as opposed to Doug Baldwin and a bunch of scraps -- but that's about it. Outside of that, Wilson has the following advantages:

1. FAR better protection (Luck gets hit more than any other QB). 

2. FAR better rushing attack, which takes pressure off the passing game and allows for better balance. 

3. FAR better defense, which creates better field position and game flow. 

PART 2 VERDICT: WILSON'S SUPPORTING CAST MAKES HIS LIFE A LOT EASIER THAN LUCK'S. WILSON IS IN A MORE PREFERABLE SITUATION. 

PART III: EVERYTHING ELSE

Wilson is already one of the greatest rushing quarterbacks in the history of the game. He was one audible away from his second Super Bowl title in just three years in the league. But (I guess?) Luck is the best fantasy quarterback? Maybe? 

Embed from Getty Images

Come on, are you sure this is really a debate? The numbers don't lie. Go back and look at those playoff stats. If you had to win one game tomorrow, would YOU rather have Andrew Luck than Russell Wilson?

I know I wouldn't. I'd rather my quarterback throw to his own teammates, as opposed to the other team.