- Apr 27, 2009
- 19,563
- 6,839
I agree with you that luck is better than wilson. But you the your reasoning is completely stupid.
NFL Quarterbacks Discussion thread: 2013 Edition
- Thread in 'Sports & Training' Thread starter Started by 651akathepaul,
- Start date
I agree with you that luck is better than wilson. But you the your reasoning is completely stupid.
- Jan 30, 2007
- 3,177
- 1,338
What the hell type of logic is this?
LOL.
do work son
Banned
- May 22, 2010
- 17,118
- 5,185
Fwiw, I don't think I've seen Wilson get any protection this season
- Nov 18, 2007
- 28,291
- 9,565
Its funny you say that, because my 7-9 was the hardest part of the list for me. In fact, they could be interchangeable right now. I think Andrew Luck will no doubt be the better player when comparing him to Russell Wilson. But right now, its a lot closer than you are thinking.
- Dec 17, 2005
- 23,931
- 5,934
- Feb 6, 2007
- 76,444
- 36,437
Come on Shoes, you know you can't play nice with Luck involved.
Colts had the ball for 21 minutes. Bolts had it for 38. Colts had about 8 drops in that game as well. We all saw, we all watched that game on that Monday night and spoke on it. I didn't forget, apparently you did.
- Jan 30, 2007
- 3,177
- 1,338
You can feel what you feel about me, but that clownish logic has got to go.
I even addressed Luck for you in the WIR, but you dodged right out of that conversation.
Last edited:
- Apr 27, 2009
- 19,563
- 6,839
Come on Shoes, you know you can't play nice with Luck involved.
Colts had the ball for 21 minutes. Bolts had it for 38. Colts had about 8 drops in that game as well. We all saw, we all watched that game on that Monday night and spoke on it. I didn't forget, apparently you did.
But apparently you forgot that Seahawks had the ball for 22 minutes against STL while they had it for 37 as Wilson was behind the worst offensive line play this season. And wilson was a beast in the second half of the TB game
- Feb 6, 2007
- 76,444
- 36,437
I wasn't tryin to be flippish to you, in fact I forgot to get back to that post.
I actually understand what that meant about Luck.
Compare to LeBron. If Bron won just ONE title. Just one. Would he not have been considered a "let down"? He was "destined" for more. 3-4-5 etc. Not saying it's right, just how he's perceived.
Same with Luck, and Manning, and Elway. They were believed to be great from High School on up. College, draft, NFL, etc. They were expected, yes, EXPECTED to win multiple titles, they were and are, that great. So I kind of get that logic, if that makes sense.
How many drops in that StL game ***? Did they have 7-8?
- Dec 17, 2005
- 23,931
- 5,934
I'm just happy Rivers is back to playing at a Top 5 QB level. 
It's too bad it only took San Diego 5 years to realize what every other franchise in the league did a decade ago... Norv Turner was a horrible head coach :x
McCoy making the system much more simple has worked wonders. Rivers out there making chicken salad with chicken doo doo. A beat up, old past his prime Gates is looking fresh and serviceable again because of Rivers.
A slow, overlooked WR like Keenan Allen looks like he'd be a top 15 pick if we did the draft all over again, because of Rivers. (Don't get me wrong though, Keenan can ball... He knows how to get open even though he's slow).
If we had a defense we'd be a lot better than 5-4, but that's obviously a discussion for another thread.
It's too bad it only took San Diego 5 years to realize what every other franchise in the league did a decade ago... Norv Turner was a horrible head coach :x
McCoy making the system much more simple has worked wonders. Rivers out there making chicken salad with chicken doo doo. A beat up, old past his prime Gates is looking fresh and serviceable again because of Rivers.
A slow, overlooked WR like Keenan Allen looks like he'd be a top 15 pick if we did the draft all over again, because of Rivers. (Don't get me wrong though, Keenan can ball... He knows how to get open even though he's slow).
If we had a defense we'd be a lot better than 5-4, but that's obviously a discussion for another thread.
- Dec 1, 2012
- 23,318
- 11,740
How many sacks did Luck take in the San Diego game?
C'mon man.
C'mon man.
- Apr 27, 2009
- 19,563
- 6,839
IDK where you are getting 7-8 drops. they had four. Also im positive Luck had more than 2 seconds to throw the ball
- Jan 30, 2007
- 3,177
- 1,338
Nah, I don't see it. Franchise QB? yes. Generation changing QB? I'm not buying it.
This is a microwave style league right now where after 1 or 2 years, people are ready to put these young ones on a pedestal.
...and in the process knock down other young QBs for off the wall reasons such as you have down right now comparing Luck and Wilson.
Last edited:
- Dec 1, 2012
- 23,318
- 11,740
Correct. Let's let one of these guys win something first, or the hype is going to become unbearable.
- Dec 17, 2005
- 23,931
- 5,934
Shoes makes good points.
Too much credit and too much blame is given to all players in general based on their most recent level of play.
But on the other hand... Flacco is a Super Bowl winning QB who actually earned it with his play in the playoffs, and we still don't respect him
Too much credit and too much blame is given to all players in general based on their most recent level of play.
But on the other hand... Flacco is a Super Bowl winning QB who actually earned it with his play in the playoffs, and we still don't respect him
Last edited:
- Nov 15, 2007
- 9,026
- 3,043
Or you could realize winning is a team accomplishent and Luck is simply playing on a place of top 5 QB right now...
How many guys could have made that throw on the 2 point conversion? Maybe 3-4 other guys, let's be honest.
How many guys could have made that throw on the 2 point conversion? Maybe 3-4 other guys, let's be honest.
- Feb 9, 2009
- 9,626
- 787
Mind blown at Shoes being the voice of reason in this thread.
And I do agree with after the top 4 or 5 guys it's a big drop off and after the next 5 or 6 it's a even bigger drop off. Even with the backup QBs you pretty much have no chance if your starter goes down.
And I do agree with after the top 4 or 5 guys it's a big drop off and after the next 5 or 6 it's a even bigger drop off. Even with the backup QBs you pretty much have no chance if your starter goes down.
- Feb 12, 2005
- 60,665
- 32,367
Good stuff Dland.
The arguments with these are all fun, but when it pertains to the younger Q's, it's dually entertaining (seems inherent to want to search for the next great thing...In this case, QB) . There's so many variable unique to the teams they play on that it's impossible to form a consensus. And right now that's talking about Luck and Wilson specifically, even though it applies to everyone.
Last edited:
- Feb 12, 2005
- 60,665
- 32,367
Shoes definitely has a valid point.
That's part of it for sure. The majority of football fans (and not just our daily NT platform) will overblow one weeks performance, or lack there of, and then that is their "I told you so." For me, it was never about that though...Not in the short-term, at least. I have always been behind that group that wants to wait it out because so many things happen from week to week let alone year to year. On that front, while it's hard to substantiate anything right now, it's still fun discussions to have. And those that really dig getting into this (me), there's that competitive aspect of projecting something that you see or think you see to go ahead and make a claim or state your opinion when it isn't necessarily backed by anything or anyone. It's not easy to do, but it's enjoyable to try.
That's part of it for sure. The majority of football fans (and not just our daily NT platform) will overblow one weeks performance, or lack there of, and then that is their "I told you so." For me, it was never about that though...Not in the short-term, at least. I have always been behind that group that wants to wait it out because so many things happen from week to week let alone year to year. On that front, while it's hard to substantiate anything right now, it's still fun discussions to have. And those that really dig getting into this (me), there's that competitive aspect of projecting something that you see or think you see to go ahead and make a claim or state your opinion when it isn't necessarily backed by anything or anyone. It's not easy to do, but it's enjoyable to try.
Last edited:
- Feb 6, 2007
- 76,444
- 36,437
I keep tryin to get to you with this, but I keep getting derailed elsewhere.
Hey, everyone views things diff, I get that, but every draft guy I trust has said that Luck was their highest draft grade, basically all the way back to Elway.
Those are just words and evals, I get that. But it's the starting point for where a player/prospect is starting from. Same as a QB that gets picked #1 overall, or a 6th round QB that starts nowhere and rises up. Or a grocery bagger that becomes one of the best ever QB's.
I don't know if that makes Luck generation changing, or more like generation defining. I don't know. But he's the measure, the starting point imo.
Few weeks back, I heard a comment, didn't like it, chewed on it, and then started to slowly come around, and I dropped it in here as well.
We all expect him to be Peyton. Golden arm, computer brain, even drafted by the same team. But, Luck may not have the "care" to throw it around like Manning. Peyton was gonna get his numbers no matter who they played, who they faced, what the defense did, Peyton was getting his number. Luck, is not wired that way. He just does what is needed.
Sort of.....Troy Aikman-ish. Troy get you 5 TD's one game, and throw for 130 yards and no TD's the next while he feeds Emmitt play after play.
Luck will throw to his two tight ends sets. Then he'll move on to his #1 WR. Another game he goes with his #2 WR. Next game he feeds his RB and grinds the game out. Another game he'll win with his legs. He doesn't care how, he just gets wins. He doesn't have to get his 300 and 3 scores, he does whatever is needed.
I assume you know Aikman well. Maybe you like the comp, maybe you hate it. But you seem firmly stuck on praising Cam or whoever else, and claiming Luck is just some "flavor of the month" NT fan fav. Yet the football world was on Luck from go. Suck for Luck was not an NT term. That was a nationwide campaign. Everyone, EVERY one, was in on Luck as far back as his sophomore year. He didn't come out of nowhere, he's been hyped for years now.
Russ is great. Love watchin the kid play. But he's not Andrew Luck. I'm not putting him down or saying he's terrible, he's just not what Andrew is. And that's all I was saying about Dland's list. I can't get with having Wilson ahead of Luck, just can't do it.
- Nov 18, 2007
- 28,291
- 9,565
After thinking about it more, I agree with you CP.
air spider 777
Supporter
- Jul 5, 2005
- 5,835
- 5,244
MMG, bruh its ok. I thought you guys had that game won too.
And CP, I totally agree with you. Luck doesnt care about the stats. He just wants to get done what is needed to win. And like Aikman, he has the talent if he wanted and demanded, to put up the crazy Madden like numbers.
And not because Luck is on my team, I have had this opinion since he was a junior and senior in college, Luck is the real deal and his rookie season and now his play this year has placed him as the new bench mark for the new QB's. IMO its the kind of QB you need to win these days. Be able to throw the NFL throws and when needed, take off using his legs.
No disrespect to anyone else, but like I said, Luck is the benchmark. With that being said the other young cats are ballin' too, lets enjoy that!
- Feb 12, 2005
- 60,665
- 32,367
No takers. 
Last edited:
- Feb 6, 2007
- 76,444
- 36,437
651, I have Kap in the back of my mind. I remember all the talk week 2, I've just been waiting for more sample size to come in and collect.
Clearly, the GB game got to people and the truth is showing a bit more. But still plenty of time for the kid. And maybe he shows out in the playoffs again, not to mention getting Crabby back, get Davis healthy again, Boldin, Manningham, let him have his full complement of weapons before we write him off.
Certainly by year end we'll have more to go off of. Be patient.
Clearly, the GB game got to people and the truth is showing a bit more. But still plenty of time for the kid. And maybe he shows out in the playoffs again, not to mention getting Crabby back, get Davis healthy again, Boldin, Manningham, let him have his full complement of weapons before we write him off.
Certainly by year end we'll have more to go off of. Be patient.
- Feb 12, 2005
- 60,665
- 32,367
I agree CP. What I need to point out though, is that I never said Kaepernick wouldn't be successful at some point. Simply put, that I needed to see certain developments to prove he can achieve sustained success in the NFL and said the learning curve he would have to go through this year (especially with a hit to WR depth) would be a natural regression that he would just have to weather and learn from. I have now waited until week 11 and see it play out just about exactly as I said it would. Now other analysts are saying the same things that I wasn't afraid to say from the get-go.
He can just as well play the rest of his games this year as a top tier QB, but the only question is has he really learned and improved on the things he needed to? That's what we're waiting on, but it's evident that he did regress and is having substantial growing pains as a passer. No doubt.
From Trent Dilfer:
http://www.nfl.com/news/story/0ap20...epernick-responds-to-criticism-of-his-passing
I mean..this guy knows his stuff. He has access to the coaches tapes and is afforded the time to dig deeper into this. There's stats that may show Kaep is a good passer, but there are so many variables with all those that it can't be digest fully and expected to completely represent a quarteback as a true passer.
He can just as well play the rest of his games this year as a top tier QB, but the only question is has he really learned and improved on the things he needed to? That's what we're waiting on, but it's evident that he did regress and is having substantial growing pains as a passer. No doubt.
From Trent Dilfer:
http://www.nfl.com/news/story/0ap20...epernick-responds-to-criticism-of-his-passing
I mean..this guy knows his stuff. He has access to the coaches tapes and is afforded the time to dig deeper into this. There's stats that may show Kaep is a good passer, but there are so many variables with all those that it can't be digest fully and expected to completely represent a quarteback as a true passer.
