Archived

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

Andrew Luck can't afford to fail.

120 posts in this topic

Posted

I don't like white people either.

That said, not sure if you saw last night but Luck can run and escape the pocket just as easily as Cam.

You're the only one talking about race.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

Don't understand where you get Luck is "lead-footed".

He's athletic and mobile in the pocket and has decent quicks in the open field. He seems pretty strong too.

His body movement is weird. Looks like he wasn't put on this earth to run.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

Luck also has a very high motor and intelligence and work ethic which is lacking in athletic QB's such as RG3, Geno Smith, EJ Manuel, Bridgewater etc. etc.

Luck also gives a calming vibe, which I don't get from any of those Qbs named. He does everything right and seems real, which can't be said about a lot of those other mobile qbs. He was asked after yesterdays game if the loss was bad & asked about the clinching INT. He said this loss is the worst because its fresh, & that's true. He also said you can't blame the WR for a lot of what happens because there is a lot of things that happen during the game in which the WR helps out the QB. I don't think the mobile QBs really understand the intangibles of the game as well as a Luck would. Also, the "mobile" Qbs are A, gonna have to be as big as Cam is, or B, theyll be playing with a serious injury some point early in their career. The positions gonna continue to be won by what goes on in the QBs head, the athletic stuff is cool & flashy, dunno if its a superbowl winning style though.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

Luck also has a very high motor and intelligence and work ethic which is lacking in athletic QB's such as RG3, Geno Smith, EJ Manuel, Bridgewater etc. etc.

Good one. Keep reaching.

 

NASA and Los Alamos is looking for the intelligent type, he should leave football for the athletic types like RG3, Geno, and Manuel, you know, the less intelligent types. Maybe while Luck is at it he could figure out why he looks like a Neanderthal. Lol

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

How do we know those things are lacking in RG3, Smith, Manuel, and Bridgewater?  

He is just pulling out his trump card. Who cares about intelligence, this is a sports where grown man hit each other senselessly. If someone is playing that sport they're probably at least a little dumb for even playing it. So it's more a comparison of who is less dumb rather than who is more intelligent. More like an oxymoron, like a smart janitor. Pretty funny, right?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

Luck is one of the last line of a dying breed of QB. The lead-footed, run like they're running on hot coal, pocket passers. I look around the college and even the high school landscape and it's my observation(and Trent Dilfer's) that the mobile QBs are taking over football. Not in number particularly but in quality NFL caliber talent. From 2011 to 2015, it is obvious that from all the top rated franchise caliber QB in the draft at least 1 or 2 dual threat. From 2011 to 2015 alone we had Cam, RG3, Kapaernick, Geno Smith, EJ manuel, Teddy Bridgewater, Tajh boyd, Brett Hundley, and Jameis Winston. And we're talking about every year here. Those guys are not just strong starters but dynamic franchising figure on and off the field. If this trend continue, what will happen to the Schaubs of the world whom 10 years ago were almost guaranteed a roster spot to just be a game manager.

 

What about T.Brady, P.Manning, were they really great or just product of playing against a bunch of Schaubs? You know, kind of like how so of Babe Ruth's number are questioned because his stats were garnered under a segregated leauge. What if Payton could run a 4.5, could he have won more than just one superbowl. Because I have watched so many of Peyton's game in the playoffs where he need just 3 yard to keep the drive alive but throws an in-completion because he couldn't run to save his life. Remember, a QB is an athlete too. Running and athlete goes hand in hand. Could Peyton have been the Michael Jordan of football instead of a constant debate? Because the Michael Jordan of football in the future will be able to do it all.

 

Now, back to my point, If Luck fails who is going to hold the torch for the so-called greats like Brady and Manning who are about to retire? I believe that is the lens that all the Luck supporters(not necessarily Colts fans) see this world of football. It's like, if Luck fails is there a place for us in this sport of football. Well, to those who see it that, for what it's worth, the QB position was NEVER necessarily meant as a niche for the the athletically challenged. Will football become a sports of athletic freaks like the NBA where no lead-footed, hot coal runners are allowed in? In conclusion, I can understand why the 'media' wants to hide or delay Luck's impending failure.

 

Luck will fail.

 

Dude, Andrew Luck is not a failure by any stretch of the imagination.  

 

I understand what you're trying to say (I think). But I disagree with your premise that pure pocket passers are somehow lesser QBs than more athletically gifted QBs. It all depends on the guy, and the situation.  Moreover, Luck is an athlete. He is not some lead-footed tortoise in the pocket that is unable to elude pressure by a step here or there, or straight take off down the field.

 

In my opinion, a better post would have been how the powers that be in the NFL been rethinking the role of mobile QBs, and their ability to effectively and successfully play the position.  Where you made your error was thinking that you have to put pure pocket passers down to prop up more mobile and athletic QBs that have ascended to a certain level of prominence in the league in recent years. 

 

There is room for both types of QBs, and particularly QBs that can do it all. But, at the same time, there will always be a place for pure pocket passers who are accurate and make good decisions.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

Seriously, why hasn't this trolling dipshit been banned yet?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

Lol NO RG3 was a track star! Luck is a very mobile qb tho. And has trucked a few people in his day. He's just not as elusive or powerful as Cam. he's more of an Aaron Rodgers type of runner.

Which is not saying much, of course.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

I just wanted to try the "race baiting troll" act out.

I feel dirty, not sure how KingCam keeps it up.

Well, you surely failed on that one.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

Luck to me is by far the best young QB in the NFL. 

What does that even mean? That's the point of this thread. You say it but you don't even know how to explain what makes him best. You say it just because you want it to be that way. But, what if he fails?

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

Dude, Andrew Luck is not a failure by any stretch of the imagination.

I understand what you're trying to say (I think). But I disagree with your premise that pure pocket passers are somehow lesser QBs than more athletically gifted QBs. It all depends on the guy, and the situation. Moreover, Luck is an athlete. He is not some lead-footed tortoise in the pocket the is unable to elude pressure by a step here or there, or straight take off down the field.

In my opinion, a better post would have been how the powers that be in the NFL been rethinking the role of mobile QBs, and their ability to effectively and successfully play the position. Where you made your error was thinking that you have to put pure pocket passers down to prop up more mobile and athletic QBs that have ascended to a certain level of prominence in the league in recent years.

There is room for both types of QBs, and particularly QBs that can do it all. But, at the same time, there will always be a place for pure pocket passers who are accurate and make good decisions.

Good post. Just be aware you're not talking to someone who's trying to make a sensible argument :lol:

3 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

The psychology seems to be that if the media says a particular QB has the "necessary tools to be the next great QB," then we must blindly believe them. The same thing applies when they say a certain QB needs to "prove himself" and they set out to endlessly scrutinize him.  

 

Case in point Luck and Cam and how they are treated by both the media and fans and to some degree, the teams. Trent Richardson was well worked out during the Colts game last night but are those in the media putting the lost of the team on Luck? NOPE! They are putting the team lost on Richardson and the rest of the team. Luck gets some blame too but more in regards to the team "not stepping up to help him." Folks buy into the BS and simply repeat the nonsense.

 

But when the Panthers lose, not only is it Cam's fault but some folks, including the media, will justify their feelings by ignoring the team endless mistakes and simply focus on picking Cam's game play apart. They then go into the usual: "he has accuracy and footwork issues, and needs to improve" nonsense. You will never hear anyone both in the media or fans, saying Smitty or the Panthers need to step up and help Cam, like they do with Luck.

 

And Cam isn't the only QB. There are a lot of QBs in this league who are way more talented than Luck but are not the "Chosen QBs" so they have to make their teams look good, not the other way around, and they have to "prove themselves" under endless scrutiny.  

Thank you sir for watching the same sports I'm watching.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites