Jump to content


Photo
- - - - -

Andrew Luck the 23rd ranked player in the nfl?


  • Please log in to reply
146 replies to this topic

#121 I Mean He Was Found Guilty

I Mean He Was Found Guilty

    ayy lmao

  • ALL-PRO
  • 10,154 posts
  • LocationChapel Hill

Posted 17 June 2013 - 08:37 PM

if "wins" are all that really matters when talking about a quarterback then russell wilson is your guy.  he won a road playoff game whereas luck most certainly did not and notably did not look like a pile of poo doing it.



#122 tiger7_88

tiger7_88

    old skool SWAG

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,892 posts

Posted 17 June 2013 - 08:39 PM

Luck stepped up and led his team to 11 wins. 

 

 

@ Jacksonville Jaguars - 18/26, 227 yds, 0 TDs, 1 int

@ New England Patriots - 27/50, 334 yds, 2 TD, 3 ints

vs. Buffalo Bills - 20/37, 240 yds, 1 TD, 1 int

@ Detroit Lions - 24/54 391 yds, 4 TDs, 3 ints

vs. Tennessee Titans - 16/34, 196 yds, 1 TD, 2 int

@ Houston Texans - 13/27 - 186 yds, 2 TD, 0 int

@ KC Chiefs - 17/35, 201 yds, 1 TD, 0 int

vs. Houston Texans - 14/28, 191 yds, 2 TDs, 0 int

Wild Card game vs. Baltimore -  28/54, 288 yds, 0 TDs, 1 int

 

Total 2nd half of the season for Luck - 177/345 (51%), 2254 yds, 13 TDs, 11 ints

 

IMPRESSIVE LEADING.



#123 tiger7_88

tiger7_88

    old skool SWAG

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,892 posts

Posted 17 June 2013 - 08:41 PM

 The fact is Luck led his team, and they won. 

 

So you're one of those guys that still believes that The Golden Calf of Bristol is a better QB than Cam Newton, right?

 

Using your own self-professed standard of measurement, that would be an incontrovertible truth.

 

Right?



#124 tiger7_88

tiger7_88

    old skool SWAG

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,892 posts

Posted 17 June 2013 - 08:43 PM

 if Luck was our QB this year, we would have been in the playoffs.

 

 

Just... damn. :lol:



#125 I Mean He Was Found Guilty

I Mean He Was Found Guilty

    ayy lmao

  • ALL-PRO
  • 10,154 posts
  • LocationChapel Hill

Posted 17 June 2013 - 08:47 PM

Just... damn. :lol:

 

yeah we would have beaten the chiefs with a quarterback who completed less than 50% of his passes and only threw one touchdown

 

you could have put luck on the jaguars or chiefs and they would have gone to the playoffs because he's a "winning quarterback" am i right



#126 I Mean He Was Found Guilty

I Mean He Was Found Guilty

    ayy lmao

  • ALL-PRO
  • 10,154 posts
  • LocationChapel Hill

Posted 17 June 2013 - 08:53 PM

also cam was being "babied" when he wasn't allowed to change the play and had to run the zone read against an all out blitz with five linemen left in to block

 

edit:

 

warning QB being babied:

 

panthers-bucs-gif.gif



#127 nationofdomination

nationofdomination

    MEMBER

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 148 posts

Posted 17 June 2013 - 09:01 PM

Are you talking about the same game where Cam thre 3 TDs and had zero turnovers, and a 121 passer rating? And our defense allowed Brady effing Quinn to have a 132+ passer rating? That one? Hmm, I wonder who's to blame for that loss, geez, let me think, it's a real humdinger, this is.

 

Sometimes I wonder how people possess the brainpower to breathe. . .

yeah, its never cams fault, and luck cant play a lick, these comin years are gonna really be tough on you.



#128 CPF4LIFE

CPF4LIFE

    Senior Member

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,168 posts

Posted 17 June 2013 - 09:02 PM

Leads the team in passing, rushing, and TDs two years straight but is being "babied"..............LMAOOOO!. I get it now!



#129 I Mean He Was Found Guilty

I Mean He Was Found Guilty

    ayy lmao

  • ALL-PRO
  • 10,154 posts
  • LocationChapel Hill

Posted 17 June 2013 - 09:02 PM

yeah, its never cams fault, and luck cant play a lick, these comin years are gonna really be tough on you.

 

where do you get off blaming a loss on the quarterback when he had a damn near perfect game.

 

i want you to explain, in detail, why the chiefs loss was cam's fault.  i'll wait.



#130 nationofdomination

nationofdomination

    MEMBER

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 148 posts

Posted 17 June 2013 - 09:03 PM

When you have 10 games against:

 

Jax 2x

Tennessee 2x

Jets

Browns

Dolphins

Buffalo

Detroit

Kansas City

 

If you don't win 10 games against that schedule last year the coach should be fired on the spot.  It is a who's who of the worst teams in the league.

 

10 games against TERRIBLE competition.  The simple fact that the Colt's needed 7 game winning drives against that bad of competition should be concerning for Colt's fans.

 

The Panthers on the other hand.  In my opinion the NFC South and the NFC East are the best divisions in football top to bottom.  We got to play the NFC East last season.  So right off the bat 10 of our 16 games were against good competition, or at the very least very talented teams.

 

But lets remove Philly from that list because they were terrible.  So that is actually 9 games against pretty stiff and/or talented competition.  Then add Chicago, Denver, and Seattle as 3 of our other out of division games.

 

So 12 games against division rivals and top tier teams out of 16.

 

So summarize my point, the Colts had 10 of their 16 games against the pootiest teams in the NFL and the Panthers had 12 of their 16 against pretty damn good teams.

 

So to answer your question, yes there is a very big difference between the Colt's schedule and the Panther's schedule last season.

 



#131 I Mean He Was Found Guilty

I Mean He Was Found Guilty

    ayy lmao

  • ALL-PRO
  • 10,154 posts
  • LocationChapel Hill

Posted 17 June 2013 - 09:06 PM

Leads the team in passing, rushing, and TDs two years straight but is being "babied"..............LMAOOOO!. I get it now!

 

there are a few people here who charge that cam was "babied".  running mike martz esque bullshit with minimal protection for half the season in what's hard to not construe as an attempt to get your quarterback killed is a weird way to baby somebody.



#132 nationofdomination

nationofdomination

    MEMBER

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 148 posts

Posted 18 June 2013 - 05:12 AM

Yes. Lol.

 

And look how poorly Luck played in many of those wins and down the stretch? He continued the poor play in the playoffs, except he played against a decent team, and promptly lost. 

 

As far as 10-11 wins? Colts had some incredible good fortune to win that total (combined with their soft schedule). Call it inspiration, good coaching,  good fortune or playing bad teams; they won some crazy games nonetheless!

 

Don't be surprised if they win 5-8 games in 2013. 

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.



#133 nationofdomination

nationofdomination

    MEMBER

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 148 posts

Posted 18 June 2013 - 05:18 AM

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.



#134 nationofdomination

nationofdomination

    MEMBER

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 148 posts

Posted 18 June 2013 - 05:22 AM

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.
 



#135 nationofdomination

nationofdomination

    MEMBER

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 148 posts

Posted 18 June 2013 - 07:20 AM

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!




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users

Shop at Amazon Contact Us: info@carolinahuddle.com