He also has a superior running back and defense around him, so there is less pressure on him every possession and he sees a lot more man coverage than Luck and many other QBs. You cannot just acknowledge that the situations are different then proceed to use the numbers as some sort of absolute case.
This runs counter to any and all league trends.
Alex Smith plays in a run based offense with a good defense. So do Joe Flacco and Colin Kaepernick. None is as efficient as Wilson, and the first two have much more experience.
Now looking at Luck's pass based contemporaries: Brady and Rivers also play in passing offenses with limited receiving help, and both are vastly more efficient than Luck.
In truth, regardless of situation, comparing run based to pass based, you get the same result: Luck is sub-par. Both to his run based contemporaries, as well as his pass based contemporaries.
Regarding the stats, you need to at least be consistent, you want to harp on the fact Wilson had more TD passes with far less attempts, but want to downplay the fact he had the same amount of picks and far more sacks with the same attempts. You cannot have it both ways.
That's because TD/INT ratio is more relevant than ATT/INT ratio. A coach can hide a QB's weaknesses by dinking and dunking, and Luck has. That's why his average is so much lower. He's throwing safe, easy passes. Wilson is throwing deep, completing, and throwing touchdowns. Even with all this short passing, he still has a lower completion percentage than Wilson. How is that?
In addition, QB rating is becoming obsolete, as there have been years where QBs like Matt Cassel were elite in that category. Accounting for situational football and other negative plays, such as sacks, ESPNs QBR is becoming more relevant.
Based on that, Luck was the better QB last year.
QBR is a fake stat. The formula has not been released, and according to ESPN they change the values from play to play. We have no idea what their measuring, so how can you say it's more relevant? They could be counting the beads of sweat on each guys forehead and entering that into the formula and we'd have no idea.
QBR is a total scam/marketing ploy.
I like Wilson, but based on watching them play, I think Luck is the more advanced passer and will be the player going forward.
Again, based on what? You're being all ambiguous and not giving any examples. Besides being taller, how is Luck better? The stat sheet says Wilson is the better QB. The win column says Wilson is the better QB. The Superbowl Ring says that Wilson is a better QB. In every way that we use to measure QBs, Wilson is better.
So please, elaborate, what is this magical quality that makes Luck better?
