BringBackOrton Posted August 31, 2017 Share Posted August 31, 2017 (edited) How do you think the Packers would have done in the AFC south? The 2008 Packers played the AFC South funnily enough. Lost to the Texans, Jags and Titans. All with A A Ron. Luck has more 4th quarter comebacks and game winning drives in his career already than Rodgers. Edited August 31, 2017 by jmc12290 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BringBackOrton Posted August 31, 2017 Share Posted August 31, 2017 Andrew Luck was deemed to be the second coming. There is no denying this. So far the results are: He is a great dude, has a good arm and a good football sense when things are going his way. He has played in inarguably the weakest division the NFL has seen in decades. His team has squeaked by in this division a few times and lost other times. The arrows are pointing down and the Colts can't afford free agents because they are saddled with his contract. In crunch time, whether in the playoffs or individual games he has choked aplenty. His "career" at this point is a complete myth in terms of results. If it were to end today, he would likely be remembered as football's version of Sandy Koufax and he has done nothing to earn that. LOL. This is just sad. Luck has absolutely lived up to the hype. He was hyped as a quality QB out of the box. Can someone name the last #1 overall QB to go to the playoffs their first three seasons? Can someone name the last #1 overall QB to make a CCG in his third year starting? You'll be looking back before Peyton was drafted, at least. But, being the best #1 QB drafted in 20 years is being overhyped. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
4merper4mer Posted August 31, 2017 Share Posted August 31, 2017 (edited) The 2008 Packers played the AFC South funnily enough. Lost to the Texans, Jags and Titans. All with A A Ron. Luck has more 4th quarter comebacks and game winning drives in his career already than Rodgers. How did they do against the Colts? Edited August 31, 2017 by 4merper4mer Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BringBackOrton Posted August 31, 2017 Share Posted August 31, 2017 (edited) r How did they do against the Colts? They won. 1-3 in the AFC South baby! Go Rodgers! Edited August 31, 2017 by jmc12290 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
4merper4mer Posted August 31, 2017 Share Posted August 31, 2017 They won. 1-3 in the AFC South baby! Go Rodgers! You're right. Rodgers sucks. It's not like you're cherry picking results or anything. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BringBackOrton Posted August 31, 2017 Share Posted August 31, 2017 You're right. Rodgers sucks. It's not like you're cherry picking results or anything. What results would you like me to pull? Can we discuss how even though Andrew Luck has been the best #1 overall QB in 30 years, you consider him over hyped? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
4merper4mer Posted August 31, 2017 Share Posted August 31, 2017 LOL. This is just sad. Luck has absolutely lived up to the hype. He was hyped as a quality QB out of the box. Can someone name the last #1 overall QB to go to the playoffs their first three seasons? Can someone name the last #1 overall QB to make a CCG in his third year starting? You'll be looking back before Peyton was drafted, at least. But, being the best #1 QB drafted in 20 years is being overhyped. OK so let me get this straight. Best #1 overall QB in the last 20 years. That means he is better than: Goff Winston Newton Bradford Stafford Russell Alex Smith Eli Palmer Carr Vick Couch P Manning Maybe I missed someone else. You're defining "best" as "bringing your team to the playoffs for the first three years". It doesn't matter if your team was well established and tanked right before they got you? It doesn't matter if they played in a horrible division? It doesn't matter if you're a playoff turnover machine? It doesn't matter if All that matters is winning the AFC South 3 times. This makes you greater than both Mannings and their 4 Super Bowls. Are you are also better than Brady, Rodgers, Roethlisberger, and many many others because they were not drafted #1? They were not held in as high a regard as David Carr, Jamarcus Russell or Tim Couch so you must be better than them. Dude if you twist and turn and put in all sorts of stipulations you can make Tim Tebow look like the greatest QB ever. I mean show me another #25 overall with a middle name of Richard that averages 80 yards and a touchdown PER ATTEMPT in playoff overtimes. Luck? No. Brady? No. Unitas? Don't think so. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BringBackOrton Posted August 31, 2017 Share Posted August 31, 2017 (edited) OK so let me get this straight. Best #1 overall QB in the last 20 years. That means he is better than: Goff Winston Newton Bradford Stafford Russell Alex Smith Eli Palmer Carr Vick Couch P Manning Maybe I missed someone else. You're defining "best" as "bringing your team to the playoffs for the first three years". It doesn't matter if your team was well established and tanked right before they got you? It doesn't matter if they played in a horrible division? It doesn't matter if you're a playoff turnover machine? It doesn't matter if All that matters is winning the AFC South 3 times. This makes you greater than both Mannings and their 4 Super Bowls. Are you are also better than Brady, Rodgers, Roethlisberger, and many many others because they were not drafted #1? They were not held in as high a regard as David Carr, Jamarcus Russell or Tim Couch so you must be better than them. Dude if you twist and turn and put in all sorts of stipulations you can make Tim Tebow look like the greatest QB ever. I mean show me another #25 overall with a middle name of Richard that averages 80 yards and a touchdown PER ATTEMPT in playoff overtimes. Luck? No. Brady? No. Unitas? Don't think so. He's been better in his first 5 years than every QB on that list, yes. Peyton hadn't been to a Super Bowl, let alone won one yet. He threw 23 INT's on his way to 6-10 in year 4. You try to twist things to an absurd level. It's boring. Edited August 31, 2017 by jmc12290 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JM2009 Posted August 31, 2017 Share Posted August 31, 2017 He's been better in his first 5 years than every QB on that list, yes. Peyton hadn't been to a Super Bowl, let alone won one yet. He threw 23 INT's on his way to 6-10 in year 4. You try to twist things to an absurd level. It's boring. Bills could have won that division, esp in 2015. Bills beat the Colts and Luck. Even the better QBs need a supporting cast around them- unless of course it's TT-he has to do it all on his own or he is terrible-right? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aristocrat Posted August 31, 2017 Share Posted August 31, 2017 i am afraid what we will do if we get a franchise guy Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HappyDays Posted August 31, 2017 Share Posted August 31, 2017 I stand by that. It's not half as stupid as pretending Luck and Taylor suffer from the same deficiencies, which IS what Alphadawg7 (and presumably you too?) is saying. Alphadawg didn't say Luck and Tyrod suffer from the same deficiencies. He said, correctly, that people make the same excuses for their losses. Look in this thread. People saying Luck has a bad offensive line, bad coaching, bad defense, subpar offensive talent... Where have I seen this before? And people like you say these excuses don't count for Tyrod. Now of course these excuses are stronger for Luck - his offensive line is worse than Tyrod's, his defense is worse than Tyrod's, I'd say the offensive talent is about a wash but Tyrod has the far better running game. Coaching is a wash and Luck has had the easier schedule. Clearly there is a relationship between teams and QB performance but certain posters only apply that relationship when talking about QBs that don't play for the Bills. It's just funny to see the excuses pile up for Luck. Of course they are valid excuses, anyone can see Luck is good enough to take a good team to the Super Bowl. But there are valid excuses for Tyrod too. And saying you'd trade 4 1st round picks for a QB who has not shown he is elite at any point, who has abysmal stats in the 1st quarter, who throws too many picks, is ridiculous. It's much more ridiculous than anything Alphadawg has said and it tells me you don't really know how to build a team. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BringBackOrton Posted August 31, 2017 Share Posted August 31, 2017 Bills could have won that division, esp in 2015. Bills beat the Colts and Luck. Even the better QBs need a supporting cast around them- unless of course it's TT-he has to do it all on his own or he is terrible-right? I'm confused, is this the Andrew Luck thread? Take your constant propping up of a deficient QB elsewhere. 1 more year to go. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JM2009 Posted August 31, 2017 Share Posted August 31, 2017 I'm confused, is this the Andrew Luck thread? Take your constant propping up of a deficient QB elsewhere. 1 more year to go. My post was spot on. Post 171 was spot on too. Sorry. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HumbleAndHungry Posted August 31, 2017 Share Posted August 31, 2017 I would give both of our 1st rounders TODAY for luck Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oldmanfan Posted August 31, 2017 Share Posted August 31, 2017 Alphadawg didn't say Luck and Tyrod suffer from the same deficiencies. He said, correctly, that people make the same excuses for their losses. Look in this thread. People saying Luck has a bad offensive line, bad coaching, bad defense, subpar offensive talent... Where have I seen this before? And people like you say these excuses don't count for Tyrod. Now of course these excuses are stronger for Luck - his offensive line is worse than Tyrod's, his defense is worse than Tyrod's, I'd say the offensive talent is about a wash but Tyrod has the far better running game. Coaching is a wash and Luck has had the easier schedule. Clearly there is a relationship between teams and QB performance but certain posters only apply that relationship when talking about QBs that don't play for the Bills. It's just funny to see the excuses pile up for Luck. Of course they are valid excuses, anyone can see Luck is good enough to take a good team to the Super Bowl. But there are valid excuses for Tyrod too. And saying you'd trade 4 1st round picks for a QB who has not shown he is elite at any point, who has abysmal stats in the 1st quarter, who throws too many picks, is ridiculous. It's much more ridiculous than anything Alphadawg has said and it tells me you don't really know how to build a team. Good stuff Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BringBackOrton Posted August 31, 2017 Share Posted August 31, 2017 My post was spot on. Post 171 was spot on too. Sorry. Saying the sky is blue is also spot on. And about as exciting to read as yet another decent topic taken over by the CoT. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Augie Posted August 31, 2017 Share Posted August 31, 2017 I would give both of our 1st rounders TODAY for luck Heck, I'll throw in next year too! (Pending a physical.) But they wouldn't take it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Royale with Cheese Posted August 31, 2017 Share Posted August 31, 2017 You're right. Rodgers sucks. It's not like you're cherry picking results or anything. You've been cherry picking like crazy! WOW! He's been better in his first 5 years than every QB on that list, yes. Peyton hadn't been to a Super Bowl, let alone won one yet. He threw 23 INT's on his way to 6-10 in year 4. You try to twist things to an absurd level. It's boring. Yep. The majority of his posts are like this. He can't give anything with substance so his ploy is to go absurd. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GoBills808 Posted August 31, 2017 Share Posted August 31, 2017 Alphadawg didn't say Luck and Tyrod suffer from the same deficiencies. He said, correctly, that people make the same excuses for their losses. Look in this thread. People saying Luck has a bad offensive line, bad coaching, bad defense, subpar offensive talent... Where have I seen this before? And people like you say these excuses don't count for Tyrod. Now of course these excuses are stronger for Luck - his offensive line is worse than Tyrod's, his defense is worse than Tyrod's, I'd say the offensive talent is about a wash but Tyrod has the far better running game. Coaching is a wash and Luck has had the easier schedule. Clearly there is a relationship between teams and QB performance but certain posters only apply that relationship when talking about QBs that don't play for the Bills. It's just funny to see the excuses pile up for Luck. Of course they are valid excuses, anyone can see Luck is good enough to take a good team to the Super Bowl. But there are valid excuses for Tyrod too. And saying you'd trade 4 1st round picks for a QB who has not shown he is elite at any point, who has abysmal stats in the 1st quarter, who throws too many picks, is ridiculous. It's much more ridiculous than anything Alphadawg has said and it tells me you don't really know how to build a team. The 'excuses' are valid for Luck and not for Taylor. I'm sorry if that doesn't seem fair to you, but that's just how it is. With a great running game, competent offensive line and a #1 WR, Luck is probably the best QB in the league and Taylor is 7-9 with some of the worst passing stats in the NFL. So actually yes, you CAN make excuses for one and not the other when the evidence clearly suggests one QB would outperform the other if their circumstances were equal. It's not that hard to understand, and at this point I can only assume the two of you are being deliberately obtuse. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jasovon Posted August 31, 2017 Share Posted August 31, 2017 The 'excuses' are valid for Luck and not for Taylor. I'm sorry if that doesn't seem fair to you, but that's just how it is. With a great running game, competent offensive line and a #1 WR, Luck is probably the best QB in the league and Taylor is 7-9 with some of the worst passing stats in the NFL. So actually yes, you CAN make excuses for one and not the other when the evidence clearly suggests one QB would outperform the other if their circumstances were equal. It's not that hard to understand, and at this point I can only assume the two of you are being deliberately obtuse. If Luck were on this team in our division we would still not make the playoffs. If Tyrod were on the Colts in that division they would also be the same. I don't believe either QB is good enough to put a team on their back and take them to the playoffs or a super bowl because both have proven they are not. Both need a strong supporting cast, that is a fact. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts