NFL Discussion Thread: Pats win SB XLIX. Offseason begins

Status
Not open for further replies.
Man The talent parity in the NFL is so close

I don't think you can use that excuse, most of the time, the difference is the quarterback
 
Can we not resort to excuses?

Today's the first time I've watched First Take in a very long time, and Skip's Luck rant was so on point :lol: when he wins, he's a HOF lock, and when he loses, he has no teammates, boooooooohooooooo

Exactly

Teams can win as underdogs in the NFL especially if the quarterback plays well

If Andrew Luck completes 55 pct of his balls and throws for over 350, has a few touchdowns and no INTs and the Colts lose, ok I'll ride with the Luck needs more help train but Luck played like *****

Luck is the guy who will get paid 25 million not his supporting cast

To who much is given, much is expected

Teams win as underdogs when everybody steps up. They won last week cuz the defense stepped up. This week, nothing.



To who much is given, much is expected

That all sounds good but if you don't have a team around you you're not winning much. Damn sure ain't beating the Pats at home.
 
A Generational Hall of Fame QB should be able to lift his team on his back. He apparently has the crown already so greatness should be automatic. Should've beaten the Pats 45-3.



We get it :lol:

Worse than JJ with Peyton. What's up with these Houston boys
 
Last edited:
Peyton's actually great though, even though his legacy has taken hits. Can we let Luck do something before getting his HOF bust ready?
 
Who in the Patriots supporting cast besides Gronkowski and Revis is a starter on most NFL teams?

Maybe I'm missing somebody
 
Last edited:
:rofl: @D-Mac and Wilfork not being good enough to start. Must've not watched that many Pats games this season

I think (?) he was saying Luck and Tom have the same 'supporting' cast which simply isn't true. Tom is better regardless but that Pats team besides the QB is still much better than the Colts
 
Last edited:
:rofl: @D-Mac and Wilfork not being good enough to start. Must've not watched that many Pats games this season

I think he was saying Luck and Tom have the same 'supporting' cast which simply isn't true. Tom is better regardless but that Pats team besides the QB is still much better than the Colts

Yeah that's a bad argument if that's what he's suggesting imo. If the teams were so even it would've shown up on the scoreboard the last few times they've played :lol:
 
Last edited:
ummmmmmmm.. I thought we all knew (or at least accepted) that the colts didn't exactly have the horses.. or guns.. or ammunition.. or whatever analogy you want to make
 
Guys, if Luck played on the Seahawks he would have 1+ Super Bowls.  

If Luck played on the Pats he would have 3+ Super Bowls.

If Luck played on the Steelers he would have 2+ Super Bowls.

If Luck played on the Ravens he would have 2+ Super Bowls.

If Luck played on the Broncos he would have set the all time passing records.

If Luck played on the '07 Pats he would have set the then-alltime passing records.

If Luck played under Vince Lombardi he would be better than Bart Starr.

If Luck played on the Cowboys instead of Aikman the dynasty would have won 5 straight.

If Luck teamed up with Wade and Bosh he would have 3 NBA chips.

Line of reasoning is sooooooo tired....
 
Last edited:
ummmmmmmmm.. for as much impact as a QB can have on the game.. he literally cant win the game by himself

doesn't play defense or special teams.. then we have the various factors on offense (state of Oline, WRs, TEs and/or RBs)
 
The huge IF :lol:

I legit think if Brady had the Colts roster, they still beat the Colts by 3 touchdowns

Brady has won with suspect supporting casts before
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom