Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Andrew Luck the 23rd ranked player in the nfl?

147 posts in this topic

Posted

Did you actually watch him play?

 

I don't think you did. Cause if so, you would know exactly what I'm talking about. 

 

And I like Luck. I'm a fan of his. But the truth is, he played very poorly against subpar competition, and was rescued by his defense in many of the Colts come from behind wins. Unfortunately, the hype is not equal to his play. Not at all. 

 

As far as that show: They chose to show what they wanted to show. Let's see what they say/what happens next year? You can ask Matthew Stafford and Andy Dalton that as an example. 

ive got the ticket, watched every game, the guy is great. again, you will look very uneducated denying his greatness. if you couldnt see it, i wont try to convince you, just hide and watch.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

Umm. No. Incorrect. This is a load of horseshiit masquerading as intelligent talk.

 

Luck played like hot  festering garbage for long stretches of the year. His post-snap progression reading is miles behind Cam, and his pre-snap reads weren't particularly great either. The comparisons between Luck and Peyton as a rookie are so unwarranted that I literally wonder if people actually have a f*cking clue what sport they are watching.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

you are clueless, you try to make a point using manning. did you even know what a football was in '98, mannings rookie season? let me school ya, not that it will do any good. manning went to the better team, with a solidified o-line, and the better running game. manning had hall of famer marshall faulk= 1319 rushing yards]- [luck had vic ballard=814 rushing yards]---- [ manning was sacked 22 times] [ luck was sacked 41 times] .--- [everybody talks about lucks 18 ints, manning had 28 ints his rookie season and manning threw 52 fewer passes]--- [ manning had 62 yds rushing, 0 rushing tds]  [ luck had 255 yds rushing, and 5 rushing tds]  -- [ manning had 1 game winning drive]--[ luck had 7 game winning drives, tying the all time record for all qbs.] --- [ manning had 3 wins] [ luck had 11]---  are you starting to get it yet?--- luck is the only qb taken with the first pick in the draft to post a winning record and make the playoffs. ill give you 1 more example to show you how much better luck was as a rookie-----[ the great marvin harrison playing with rookie qb peyton manning = 59 catches for 776 yards]---- [ the great reggie wayne playing with rookie qb andrew luck = 106 catches for 1319 yards]. if you dont have a clue about the nonsense you are spewing, and you dont have any idea what you are talking about, try doin a little research. as one of your fellow uneducated blowbuddies would say, ding, ding, ding, we have a winner!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

so you're one of the "quarterbacks win games by themselves" posters i take it

 

and expanding from your previous point about luck's schedule being weak and how it doesn't matter because they're all NFL teams, should the relative talent level of the team he landed on matter because "they're all NFL players"?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

so you're one of the "quarterbacks win games by themselves" posters i take it

 

and expanding from your previous point about luck's schedule being weak and how it doesn't matter because they're all NFL teams, should the relative talent level of the team he landed on matter because "they're all NFL players"?

i was responding to the fieryprophets post above mine, who had no idea what he was talking about. obviously you dont either. you might ought to read again. he was saying manning had a better rookie year, which is a complete falsehood, and i explained why. i cant make it any clearer to you people than that. you could try reading the post again, but it probably wont help. manning had the better run game, better offensive line, and luck had by far the better rookie season. there is an old saying that applies to panther nation, " convince a fool against his will, he's of the same opinion still." yall just dont get it! maybe andrew can educate you come september, but i seriously doubt it. good LUCK

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

another one that thinks they played a college schedule, wins are wins, you will look very uneducated denying luck's greatness. the colts are a serious super bowl contender this year.

You just played and revealed yourself Right here Bud (if you hadn't already)!! :thumbsd:   :stuff: :thumbsd:  

 

Please stop with the nonsense, trolling. Kindergarten class is over now. 

 

Now go back to Indianapolis. 

 

I [for one] am done!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

you are clueless, you try to make a point using manning. did you even know what a football was in '98, mannings rookie season? let me school ya, not that it will do any good. manning went to the better team, with a solidified o-line, and the better running game. manning had hall of famer marshall faulk= 1319 rushing yards]- [luck had vic ballard=814 rushing yards]---- [ manning was sacked 22 times] [ luck was sacked 41 times] .--- [everybody talks about lucks 18 ints, manning had 28 ints his rookie season and manning threw 52 fewer passes]--- [ manning had 62 yds rushing, 0 rushing tds] [ luck had 255 yds rushing, and 5 rushing tds] -- [ manning had 1 game winning drive]--[ luck had 7 game winning drives, tying the all time record for all qbs.] --- [ manning had 3 wins] [ luck had 11]--- are you starting to get it yet?--- luck is the only qb taken with the first pick in the draft to post a winning record and make the playoffs. ill give you 1 more example to show you how much better luck was as a rookie-----[ the great marvin harrison playing with rookie qb peyton manning = 59 catches for 776 yards]---- [ the great reggie wayne playing with rookie qb andrew luck = 106 catches for 1319 yards]. if you dont have a clue about the nonsense you are spewing, and you dont have any idea what you are talking about, try doin a little research. as one of your fellow uneducated blowbuddies would say, ding, ding, ding, we have a winner!

I thought you have been saying over and over again that there is no true talent discrepancy across the NFL. Now you are saying Luck has no talent around him.

Luckily for Luck he mostly played against teams that had less talent than the Colts.

In other words you can't have it both ways. You can't say that Luck's schedule was not easy because it is the NFL and then turn around and talk about a lack of talent on the Colts. Otherwise you are just undermining your own argument.

The fact of the matter is if you actually watched the Colts play you would know that he held the ball too long (typical of any rookie so not a slight at Luck), his arm strength is not where it needs to be, and his accuracy is not where it needs to be.

That is why he has a low completion % and that is why he got hit and sacked so much.

To me this biggest red herring you always hear about when people are making excuses for a QB. They always always always try to blame the O line or the WR. Some Panthers fans do the same thing with Can.

The Golden Calf of Bristol's nuthuggers would say the same poo when he was in Denver. Suddenly Manning gets there and the O-line and WRs look all world just like they do no matter who Manning's o-line and receivers are. Coincidence? Hmmmm...

Luck is going to be a good QB in this league. But I think we should wait until he actually is one before we put more batter on that cake.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

i was responding to the fieryprophets post above mine, who had no idea what he was talking about. obviously you dont either. you might ought to read again. he was saying manning had a better rookie year, which is a complete falsehood, and i explained why. i cant make it any clearer to you people than that. you could try reading the post again, but it probably wont help. manning had the better run game, better offensive line, and luck had by far the better rookie season. there is an old saying that applies to panther nation, " convince a fool against his will, he's of the same opinion still." yall just dont get it! maybe andrew can educate you come september, but i seriously doubt it. good LUCK

 

I didn't say anything about Peyton having a better rookie year. If you're going to argue the point make sure you actually comprehend the responses. What I said is that Luck's recognition skills are not in Peyton's league from when he was a rookie; and they're not. See, Luck seemed to have only threw "18" INTs, but when you factor in his dropped INTs his total balloons to 30. He routinely made stupid decisions and badly misread coverages, and sheer luck kept him from coming out even worse than he did. The fact that you can't see it shows your infinite lack of understanding of the game and that you really need to shut your mouth.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

Nothing sucks more than coming to this site and seeing the first thread about a player than isn't even on our team!

 

Mods should sticky a post just to avoid this.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

Hey guyz!  Guyz!  Luck had 7 game winningz drives beating teh record held by The Golden Calf of Bristol and Mark Sanchez.  Two guyz that are having a hard time getting/keeping ter jobz!!!111!1  He mus be teh GOAT!!111!

 

 

piccard-double-facepalm-o.gif

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

Odd these random new accounts are popping up to vehemently defend Luck.

Same ol' song.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

Hey guyz!  Guyz!  Luck had 7 game winningz drives beating teh record held by The Golden Calf of Bristol and Mark Sanchez.  Two guyz that are having a hard time getting/keeping ter jobz!!!111!1  He mus be teh GOAT!!111!

 

 

piccard-double-facepalm-o.gif

I like Luck. 

 

He had a lot of responsibility as QB, unlike many of the other Rookie ones, and Kaepernick. 

 

However, because of his reputation/anticipation, many observers overlooked his mediocre play in many of those miraculous wins. As you said, if it was a Sanchez or The Golden Calf of Bristol, their contributions would be overlooked. But because it's Luck, he's actually given credit for it, to keep up the myth/expectation that he's great already, when he's not. 

 

They're actually placing the cart before the wheel here, and hanging on/relying on his wins and comebacks. However, as you said, The Golden Calf of Bristol and Sanchez did the same, and where are they now??

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites