PDA

View Full Version : Luck looks like Ryan Leaf


AmericanBroncFan
01-04-2011, 03:45 AM
He has that same face Leaf had. Is Luck going to implode the 1st time he has a bad game too?

footstepsfrom#27
01-04-2011, 03:58 AM
I ddn't see any Leaf-like characteristics last night, but I will say that I was not blown away like some people in here seem to be, gushing over this guy like he's the greatest thing they've ever seen. I saw a QB who had a dominant running game supporting him make a number of passes that frankly didn't look that great. His ball seemed to consistantly wobble somewhat, and in the TD throw down the middle, he underthrew it so much the receiver had to wait for it and had a defender been any nearer, he'd have been tackled before he scored or had the pass broken up. He completed a lot of passes, but mostly they were to wide open receivers. I didn't really see him doing anything that makes you stop and go "wow". He looks steady, but unspectacular. It's only one game and you certainly can't judge on the basis of that, but I'm left asking what the huge fuss was about at this point.

Bronco Yoda
01-04-2011, 04:07 AM
I'd rather have Cam Newton if I had to choose. But that's just me.

meangene
01-04-2011, 04:19 AM
I ddn't see any Leaf-like characteristics last night, but I will say that I was not blown away like some people in here seem to be, gushing over this guy like he's the greatest thing they've ever seen. I saw a QB who had a dominant running game supporting him make a number of passes that frankly didn't look that great. His ball seemed to consistantly wobble somewhat, and in the TD throw down the middle, he underthrew it so much the receiver had to wait for it and had a defender been any nearer, he'd have been tackled before he scored or had the pass broken up. He completed a lot of passes, but mostly they were to wide open receivers. I didn't really see him doing anything that makes you stop and go "wow". He looks steady, but unspectacular. It's only one game and you certainly can't judge on the basis of that, but I'm left asking what the huge fuss was about at this point.

My impressions exactly. I was underwhelmed considering the hype. And, Jaworski lost all credibility with me when he was gushing about him during a mediocre, at best, first half. It's like they want him to be great because he is highly rated whereas, with Tebow, it's the opposite. If that were Tebow last night, all the discussion would be about what he needed to work on.

footstepsfrom#27
01-04-2011, 04:27 AM
My impressions exactly. I was underwhelmed considering the hype. And, Jaworski lost all credibility with me when he was gushing about him during a mediocre, at best, first half. It's like they want him to be great because he is highly rated whereas, with Tebow, it's the opposite. If that were Tebow last night, all the discussion would be about what he needed to work on.
Very true. I also still do not get the wild eyed excitement over Jim Harbaugh. Yeah...he looks like a competent college coach who built a nice team in four years. But he's done this ONE TIME. In college coaching, you earn your place of respect for doing it over years, sometimes decades. We just got done paying for the mistake of hiring a guy with a very limited resume. Well this guy's got even less of a track record than McDaniels did. At least McD was on the staff with an NFL team that won Superbowls and he worked directly with the player most responsible. Harbaugh's primary claim to qualifications is that he was an NFL journeyman QB and he happens to have had two Heisman candidates on his team the last couple years. He may well be a good candidate but how do we know based on going 28-21 at the college level? He's very inexperienced at this point, and without the Luck factor, I have to ask if people would be this excited over him.

supermanhr9
01-04-2011, 06:00 AM
I couldn't agree more. Was watching highligths this morning, and was overall un-impressed. Meanwhile Trent Dilfer was slob knobbing him saying he's the greatest prospect he has seen perhaps ever, it is only setting this kid up for failure. Hate to say it, just looks like a panzy to me.

RhymesayersDU
01-04-2011, 06:03 AM
BREAKING: You can be a Tim Tebow fan and still think Andrew Luck is good.


Quite humorous that it's all Tim Tebow super fans doing everything they can to spin/downplay Luck's ability.

Just look at the avatars of the people who "aren't impressed" with Andrew Luck. Pretty obvious the agenda being pushed. I like Timmy Tebow too, I rock the avatar. But Andrew Luck is a good QB.

It's OK to say that, Tebow won't mind.

worm
01-04-2011, 06:11 AM
Leaf had the physical talent to be great....his jelly-fish mind and KC Chief like will and desire was his downfall.

Luck doesn't suffer from the same affliction. He will be great in the NFL (although he would definitely benefit from another year at Stanford). Go back and watch all his games.

Anybody evaluating him from one game or the way his face looks really should post less.

Kaylore
01-04-2011, 06:15 AM
BREAKING: You can be a Tim Tebow fan and still think Andrew Luck is good.

Thank you. Jeez the Tebow crowd is in full on hate mode if anyone mentions Luck. He wipes the floor with a very good Hokies team and suddenly it's "Luck is a product of a good team" and "Luck just threw to wide open guys." Boy guys, Luck sure is fortunate to have such a great team around him make up for all his mistakes. I mean we all know what a talent-stacked powerhouse Stanford always is.::)

There can be more than one good QB, and admitting someone is good doesn't make Tebow less good. Frankly it would have been nice to see Tebow hitting his "wide open receivers" two days ago.

meangene
01-04-2011, 06:15 AM
BREAKING: You can be a Tim Tebow fan and still think Andrew Luck is good.


Quite humorous that it's all Tim Tebow super fans doing everything they can to spin/downplay Luck's ability.

Just look at the avatars of the people who "aren't impressed" with Andrew Luck. Pretty obvious the agenda being pushed. I like Timmy Tebow too, I rock the avatar. But Andrew Luck is a good QB.

It's OK to say that, Tebow won't mind.

I didn't say he wasn't a good QB or that he won't be successful in the NFL. I just don't see where he is the can't miss, best prospect in years that he is being hyped to be. I also don't see where he is such a great prospect that, if given the chance, we draft him to be our QB over Tebow vs. drafting defense.
He is not on that level IMO.

Man-Goblin
01-04-2011, 06:17 AM
I don't see how anyone watched last night's game and didn't think Luck looked great. Especially in the 2nd half. Baffles my mind.

I will say this, though. Stanford has the best O-line in the nation and probably by a wide margin. It does make things a lot easier back there.

I just love how Harbaugh built that team, and at Standford no less where grade requirements make it even harder. They don't even look remotely like what what a Pac-10 team usually looks like. I really hope Elway and him hit South Beach and bonded big time last night.

Kaylore
01-04-2011, 06:20 AM
I didn't say he wasn't a good QB or that he won't be successful in the NFL. I just don't see where he is the can't miss, best prospect in years that he is being hyped to be. I also don't see where he is such a great prospect that, if given the chance, we draft him to be our QB over Tebow vs. drafting defense.
He is not on that level IMO.

Have you watched any of his games? It sounds like you're basing this opinion off two things: Last night's game and your love of Tebow.

I don't see how anyone watched last night's game and didn't think Luck looked great. Especially in the 2nd half. Baffles my mind.
It's easy. They are Tebow fans and are threatened by Luck. Now we get great analysis like "he looks like Ryan Leaf" and "he throws to open receivers." I bet the entire scouting department shook their heads in disgust each time he threw to an open receiver. He better get that worked out before he goes pro.

Oh, and Wisconsin has the best O-line in college. :)

jhns
01-04-2011, 06:22 AM
Stop picking on Luck! You're making his fans cry.

ayjackson
01-04-2011, 06:23 AM
Is Luck a product of a good team or is good is a product of a Luck-y team?

meh....that's all I got.

SoDak Bronco
01-04-2011, 06:24 AM
Wow he is the most ANTI-LEAF person I've seen. This anti-Luck rhetoric is really comical. If everyone's favorite coach Josh McD wouldn't have traded all those picks to get a QB last year (TEBOW or not), all these same posters would be willing to sell there first born to get Luck.

meangene
01-04-2011, 06:24 AM
Very true. I also still do not get the wild eyed excitement over Jim Harbaugh. Yeah...he looks like a competent college coach who built a nice team in four years. But he's done this ONE TIME. In college coaching, you earn your place of respect for doing it over years, sometimes decades. We just got done paying for the mistake of hiring a guy with a very limited resume. Well this guy's got even less of a track record than McDaniels did. At least McD was on the staff with an NFL team that won Superbowls and he worked directly with the player most responsible. Harbaugh's primary claim to qualifications is that he was an NFL journeyman QB and he happens to have had two Heisman candidates on his team the last couple years. He may well be a good candidate but how do we know based on going 28-21 at the college level? He's very inexperienced at this point, and without the Luck factor, I have to ask if people would be this excited over him.

I do agree that Harbaugh is this year's hot college coach and that he hasn't done it as a head coach for long at Stanford, but, he does have some NFL coaching experience and played for a lot of years as well. I did notice that Stanford had some excellent schemes and formations that resulted in huge gains in the run game and wide open receivers in the pass game. I don't think he ends up in Denver but I wouldn't be unhappy if he did.

Garcia Bronco
01-04-2011, 06:30 AM
Luck is good. He might be better than Tim, but how much better? Put a number on it.

meangene
01-04-2011, 06:31 AM
Have you watched any of his games? It sounds like you're basing this opinion off two things: Last night's game and your love of Tebow.

Yes, I have watched about a half dozen of his games over the last two years and I am basing my opinion on the games I have seen including last night. And, yes, I have become a big Tebow fan. I was on the fence with him until I saw how hard he worked between the Senior Bowl and his pro day last year and was blown away by the amount of improvement he made in such a short time. Everything he has done since being drafted - his attitude, work ethic and his on-field performance, though limited, has only solidified my opinion.

SoDak Bronco
01-04-2011, 06:35 AM
Luck is good. He might be better than Tim, but how much better? Put a number on it.

The old saying, there are a number of ways to skin a cat. Well, Tim can be an effective NFL QB. He does have some serious flaws, the extended delivery that gives CB's a chance to break on the ball, he isn't the most accurate QB, but he has the heart, will power, the "intangibles".

I'd say Luck is much much more accurate, has a stronger arm, just as agile in the pocket, and is a smart QB. Does he have the same "leadership" skills, that is maybe the only negative compared to Tebow.

If I had my choice I'd take Luck, but I think the next coach we bring in will have a major influence if Tebow is the guy or not.

hookemhess
01-04-2011, 06:37 AM
I really don't like the curdle in his voice. He sounds like Andre the Giant. PASS

NUB
01-04-2011, 06:43 AM
Hey guys!

Luck looks like Leaf? All right...

Whelp, see you later!

Rohirrim
01-04-2011, 06:45 AM
I'm going to love bumping all these Tebow knob-slobber threads in a couple of years. ;D

bowtown
01-04-2011, 06:45 AM
Very true. I also still do not get the wild eyed excitement over Jim Harbaugh. Yeah...he looks like a competent college coach who built a nice team in four years. But he's done this ONE TIME. In college coaching, you earn your place of respect for doing it over years, sometimes decades. We just got done paying for the mistake of hiring a guy with a very limited resume. Well this guy's got even less of a track record than McDaniels did. At least McD was on the staff with an NFL team that won Superbowls and he worked directly with the player most responsible. Harbaugh's primary claim to qualifications is that he was an NFL journeyman QB and he happens to have had two Heisman candidates on his team the last couple years. He may well be a good candidate but how do we know based on going 28-21 at the college level? He's very inexperienced at this point, and without the Luck factor, I have to ask if people would be this excited over him.

Yeah, he sure doesn't have Urban Meyer's record. Too bad Urban Meyer ISN'T INTERESTED IN COACHING. Yeesh.

bowtown
01-04-2011, 06:48 AM
luck is good. He might be better than tim, but how much better? Put a number on it.

8 better.

ColoradoDarin
01-04-2011, 06:51 AM
Luck looks like your mom.

BOOM!

Mediator12
01-04-2011, 06:52 AM
Wow, not convinced with Luck being one of the best QB prospects ever? Really sad, really, really sad.

This kid is a great QB in the making and has only played 3 years in college. He does not get to play in the spread and still sets the Stanford mark for TD's in a season. He made a ton of plays all season long when things broke down, he made plays from the pocket when they appeared, and he is mobile and can throw on the run fairly accurately. He is very accurate and on time with his throws, mentally he is very sharp and gets better as the game goes along. He adjusts to what the defense gives him and exploits the right matchups based on the play and defense.

I ask simply, what else do you want in an NFL QB?

bowtown
01-04-2011, 06:54 AM
Wow, not convinced with Luck being one of the best QB prospects ever? Really sad, really, really sad.

This kid is a great QB in the making and has only played 3 years in college. He does not get to play in the spread and still sets the Stanford mark for TD's in a season. He made a ton of plays all season long when things broke down, he made plays from the pocket when they appeared, and he is mobile and can throw on the run fairly accurately. He is very accurate and on time with his throws, mentally he is very sharp and gets better as the game goes along. He adjusts to what the defense gives him and exploits the right matchups based on the play and defense.

I ask simply, what else do you want in an NFL QB?

I'd prefer his hair be a lighter shade.

Rohirrim
01-04-2011, 06:55 AM
Wow, not convinced with Luck being one of the best QB prospects ever? Really sad, really, really sad.

This kid is a great QB in the making and has only played 3 years in college. He does not get to play in the spread and still sets the Stanford mark for TD's in a season. He made a ton of plays all season long when things broke down, he made plays from the pocket when they appeared, and he is mobile and can throw on the run fairly accurately. He is very accurate and on time with his throws, mentally he is very sharp and gets better as the game goes along. He adjusts to what the defense gives him and exploits the right matchups based on the play and defense.

I ask simply, what else do you want in an NFL QB?

You must seek the forgiveness of the Tebow for this post.

rbackfactory80
01-04-2011, 06:57 AM
8 better.

That's what I was thinking.^5

Mile High Shack
01-04-2011, 07:00 AM
this thread looks stupid, I haven't even read it

I don't think we should try to draft Luck, but there is no doubt in my mind that Luck is the real deal, he's awesome

Mile High Shack
01-04-2011, 07:01 AM
Wow, not convinced with Luck being one of the best QB prospects ever? Really sad, really, really sad.

This kid is a great QB in the making and has only played 3 years in college. He does not get to play in the spread and still sets the Stanford mark for TD's in a season. He made a ton of plays all season long when things broke down, he made plays from the pocket when they appeared, and he is mobile and can throw on the run fairly accurately. He is very accurate and on time with his throws, mentally he is very sharp and gets better as the game goes along. He adjusts to what the defense gives him and exploits the right matchups based on the play and defense.

I ask simply, what else do you want in an NFL QB?

exactly, this thread is dumb

mkporter
01-04-2011, 07:02 AM
I'm going to love bumping all these Tebow knob-slobber threads in a couple of years. ;D

Why?

worm
01-04-2011, 07:09 AM
"I ve coached against Brett Favre, McNabb, Aaron Rodgers, Matt Ryan in college; None of them are as good as Andrew Luck."

-Bud Foster, Virginia Tech Defensive Coordinator.



"He has that same face Leaf had."

-Orange Mane Analyst

ayjackson
01-04-2011, 07:10 AM
"I ve coached against Brett Favre, McNabb, Aaron Rodgers, Matt Ryan in college; None of them are as good as Andrew Luck."

-Bud Foster, Virginia Tech Defensive Coordinator.



"He has that same face Leaf had."

-Orange Mane Analyst

post of the year

ROFL!

Kaylore
01-04-2011, 07:15 AM
"I ve coached against Brett Favre, McNabb, Aaron Rodgers, Matt Ryan in college; None of them are as good as Andrew Luck."

-Bud Foster, Virginia Tech Defensive Coordinator.



"He has that same face Leaf had."

-Orange Mane Analyst

LOL

"He throws to the wide open receivers. Not impressed."

-Orange Mane Analyst.

Dedhed
01-04-2011, 07:19 AM
Yeah...he looks like a competent college coach who built a nice team in four years. But he's done this ONE TIME.

Twice actually. In his second year at the U of San Diego he led them to their first ever championship and led them to a repeat title in his 3rd year.

At Standford he inherited perhaps the worst team in college football and has made them better every single year he's been there. He led his team to the greatest upset in NCAA history (statistically measured), and just led them to an Orange Bowl victory.

ayjackson
01-04-2011, 07:22 AM
We have just witnessed the birth of the OMA.

Smiling Assassin27
01-04-2011, 07:24 AM
Bottom line for me: What I've seen of Luck is not enough to convince me that we should take him over a defensive draft rebuild.

Teams can win in this league with a good, but not great qb. They cannot win with a putrid defense.

ayjackson
01-04-2011, 07:24 AM
this thread looks stupid, I haven't even read it

I don't think we should try to draft Luck, but there is no doubt in my mind that Luck is the real deal, he's awesome

No chance of you reading the reply then?

I don`t think we should `try`to draft Luck, but I`d welcome him if he `tried`to get drafted by us.

Mediator12
01-04-2011, 07:25 AM
Twice actually. In his second year at the U of San Diego he led them to their first ever championship and led them to a repeat title in his 3rd year.

At Standford he inherited perhaps the worst team in college football and has made them better every single year he's been there. He led his team to the greatest upset in NCAA history (statistically measured), and just led them to an Orange Bowl victory.

Yep, he conveniently left off the USD narrative. He also developed Josh Johnson in to an NFL level QB at USD.

Play2win
01-04-2011, 07:26 AM
Leaf would have been at the local dive slammin' Labatts and getting into a fistfight AT HALFTIME...

I have watch Luck all year long, and from his first game on. He is really good, but I don't know if he is great. Against the talent he plays against, he comes up with many winning plays. Great plays. That might have as much to do with coaching as anything else, but he executes.

Nothing I have seen all year screams "Dump the greatness that could be Tim Tebow for the possibility and potential that could be Andrew Luck"

Oh, Gods, if Tim Tebow played in the PAC10, what fun that would have been!!!!!!!!

PAC10 is the absolute Funnest conf to watch bar none

GBˆ2

Rohirrim
01-04-2011, 07:26 AM
Why?

Luck looks like Ryan Leaf?

Please.

Rohirrim
01-04-2011, 07:29 AM
Bottom line for me: What I've seen of Luck is not enough to convince me that we should take him over a defensive draft rebuild.

Teams can win in this league with a good, but not great qb. They cannot win with a putrid defense.

I'll be curious to see how the Pats do after Brady hangs it up. And the Colts after Manning.

Wes Mantooth
01-04-2011, 07:31 AM
Is this thread really about who Luck looks like?

chawknz
01-04-2011, 07:32 AM
I'm happy we have Tebow.

Rohirrim
01-04-2011, 07:33 AM
Is this thread really about who Luck looks like?

I'll tell you who Luck looks like. He looks like the guy who plays the psychologist on that TV show Bones.

Play2win
01-04-2011, 07:36 AM
Also...

Everything in modern society is promotion. Everything. It is how money is made.

Everything IS Promotion.

zdoor
01-04-2011, 07:37 AM
Luck will likely be a very good pro QB. Regardless, I'd rather see us stay put and go D all the way. Every draft pick is a gamble and right now we without question, know where we are weakest and that is D. I'd rather see us invest in the D for a change...

Garcia Bronco
01-04-2011, 07:45 AM
8 better.

Out of 100? Out of 10? Because if it's 8 out-of-10 then you should support a change.

So do you really think Luck is 80 percent better than Tim?

Blart
01-04-2011, 07:50 AM
Every anti-Luck person has a Tebow avatar, hahaha

bowtown
01-04-2011, 07:54 AM
Out of 100? Out of 10? Because if it's 8 out-of-10 then you should support a change.

So do you really think Luck is 80 percent better than Tim?

No, I just think he's 8 better, and I'm not talking percentages or ratios. I'm really not willing to quantify any further than 8. We'll just have to wait and see.

Tombstone RJ
01-04-2011, 07:55 AM
BREAKING: You can be a Tim Tebow fan and still think Andrew Luck is good.


Quite humorous that it's all Tim Tebow super fans doing everything they can to spin/downplay Luck's ability.

Just look at the avatars of the people who "aren't impressed" with Andrew Luck. Pretty obvious the agenda being pushed. I like Timmy Tebow too, I rock the avatar. But Andrew Luck is a good QB.

It's OK to say that, Tebow won't mind.

I watched the entire game and what I was impressed with was the system Harbaugh developed (check out my avy).

Luck looked good, but IMHO, if anyone claims that he's not a system QB, they have their head in the clouds.

Luck is part of a fantastic system. He's nice, but I'm not sure if he's everything the hype machine is saying he is.

Smiling Assassin27
01-04-2011, 08:00 AM
I'll be curious to see how the Pats do after Brady hangs it up. And the Colts after Manning.

Brady was a 7th round pick, not a guy pegged for stardom. You're gonna compare the two?? Do you recall Tim Couch? Pegged for stardom. Akili Smith, Joey Harrington, Ryan Leaf, Cade McNown, et al? Some of these guys were pegged as well.

You have nothing to base your comparison to Manning on at this point, either. But all that aside, this TEAM needs a defense, plain and simple. In that 83 draft, you had a qb bonanza. 4 of the next 5 Super Bowl winners, however, didn't take a qb in that draft and drafted defensive studs and offensive linemen like Charles Mann, Darrell Green, Jimbo Covert, Terry Kinard, Don Mosebar, Leonard Marshall, Dave Duerson, etc. The Bears had McMahon and could've had Marino or Kelly--they passed. The Giants had Phil Simms--a guy that was beset by injuries the first 4 years of his career and also passed on Kelly and Marino. The Foreskins had a 35 year old Theismann and passed on moving up to get one of those guys and took Darrell Green instead.

You don't need Brady or Manning to win a super bowl, you don't need Luck either, IMO. YOu need a top-shelf defense, a top shelf OL, and reliable but unspectacular QB and RB. Having Brady or Manning would be nice but sacrificing defense in a defensively stacked draft would not be smart.

Tombstone RJ
01-04-2011, 08:00 AM
Wow, not convinced with Luck being one of the best QB prospects ever? Really sad, really, really sad.

This kid is a great QB in the making and has only played 3 years in college. He does not get to play in the spread and still sets the Stanford mark for TD's in a season. He made a ton of plays all season long when things broke down, he made plays from the pocket when they appeared, and he is mobile and can throw on the run fairly accurately. He is very accurate and on time with his throws, mentally he is very sharp and gets better as the game goes along. He adjusts to what the defense gives him and exploits the right matchups based on the play and defense.

I ask simply, what else do you want in an NFL QB?

He's a nice QB no doubt, but he is not the next Peyton Manning. Is he the next Matt Ryan? Pehaps yes, perhaps no.

Dedhed
01-04-2011, 08:05 AM
Luck has all the characteristics of a great QB, but still think it would be crazy to move up to get him.

Spend the next 2 years investing heavily on defense, and see what Tebow can develop into. If its clear at that point that his critics are right, then go after a top QB prospect and hopefully you have a defense that can help contribute to wins and make the youngsters job easier.

If we follow that model and Tebow turns out to be everything he was in college, then we're a playoff team in a couple of years.

Kaylore
01-04-2011, 08:07 AM
He's a nice QB no doubt, but he is not the next Peyton Manning. Is he the next Matt Ryan? Pehaps yes, perhaps no.

Way to go out on limb there...

ayjackson
01-04-2011, 08:07 AM
Brady was a 7th round pick, not a guy pegged for stardom. You're gonna compare the two??

You missed his point. He was making the point that you win championships with elite quarterbacks. It has nothing to do with what they were in college.

Gutless Drunk
01-04-2011, 08:08 AM
I'll be curious to see how the Pats do after Brady hangs it up. And the Colts after Manning.

A defense can get you a Super Bowl, A great QB keeps you in the Super Bowl conversation every year.

Balt
2000 12-4 Super Bowl Winner
2001 10-6
2002 7-9
2003 10-6
2004 9-7
2005 6-10
2006 13-3
2007 5-11
200811-5
2009 9-7

Ind
2000 10-6
2001 6-10
2002 10-6
2003 12-4
2004 12-4
2005 14-2
2006 12-4 Super Bowl Winner
2007 13-3
2008 12-4
2009 14-2 Super Bowl Loser

NE
2000 5-11
2001 11-5 Super Bowl Winner
2002 9-7
2003 14-2 Super Bowl Winner
2004 14-2 Super Bowl Winner
2005 10-6
2006 12-4
2007 16-0 Super Bowl Loser
2008 11-5
2009 10-6



That's why the QB is always more important. That is also why there is no way Carolina will pass on Luck and why we better hope Tebow can get to that level.

mikey555
01-04-2011, 08:09 AM
i'll tell you who luck looks like. He looks like the guy who plays the psychologist on that tv show bones.


THAT'S FUNNY AS HELL!!!Hilarious!Hilarious!Hilarious!

Tombstone RJ
01-04-2011, 08:14 AM
Way to go out on limb there...

Point being, he's not worth trading up to get him. Sorry I didn't make that clear. My other point is that I'm more for developing Tebow and building the defense rather than taking a chance on Luck.

Also, I do love Harbaugh's system. He gets more out of his talent than any other coach in the Pac 10 and Luck reflects that. Luck is the crown jewel of his system, but those kids were in no way more talented than the VT kids.

Beamer was out coached, period. If I was Beamer I would have ran the ball to the outside (off tackle) and killed the Cardinal with my speed. But for whatever reason, VT kept running the ball inside. Big mistake.

Rohirrim
01-04-2011, 08:15 AM
Brady was a 7th round pick, not a guy pegged for stardom. You're gonna compare the two?? Do you recall Tim Couch? Pegged for stardom. Akili Smith, Joey Harrington, Ryan Leaf, Cade McNown, et al? Some of these guys were pegged as well.

You have nothing to base your comparison to Manning on at this point, either. But all that aside, this TEAM needs a defense, plain and simple. In that 83 draft, you had a qb bonanza. 4 of the next 5 Super Bowl winners, however, didn't take a qb in that draft and drafted defensive studs and offensive linemen like Charles Mann, Darrell Green, Jimbo Covert, Terry Kinard, Don Mosebar, Leonard Marshall, Dave Duerson, etc. The Bears had McMahon and could've had Marino or Kelly--they passed. The Giants had Phil Simms--a guy that was beset by injuries the first 4 years of his career and also passed on Kelly and Marino. The Foreskins had a 35 year old Theismann and passed on moving up to get one of those guys and took Darrell Green instead.

You don't need Brady or Manning to win a super bowl, you don't need Luck either, IMO. YOu need a top-shelf defense, a top shelf OL, and reliable but unspectacular QB and RB. Having Brady or Manning would be nice but sacrificing defense in a defensively stacked draft would not be smart.

I wasn't comparing anybody to Brady or Manning, certainly not Luck or Tebow. I was saying that an elite QB is the first thing a team should have. In the NFL you're always losing players and plugging in new ones. You might have an awesome defense one year and lose a key piece next year, but an elite QB holds a team together. Look at all those years with Elway. Defenses came and went. So did players on offense. You're right, you don't need an elite QB to win a SB, but it sure as hell makes it easier. The Colts and Pats have systems built around their QBs. That's the keel that hold their ships together.

Kaylore
01-04-2011, 08:18 AM
Point being, he's not worth trading up to get him. Sorry I didn't make that clear. My other point is that I'm more for developing Tebow and building the defense rather than taking a chance on Luck.

Also, I do love Harbaugh's system. He gets more out of his talent than any other coach in the Pac 10 and Luck reflects that. Luck is the crown jewel of his system, but those kids were in no way more talented than the VT kids.

Beamer was out coached, period. If I was Beamer I would have ran the ball to the outside (off tackle) and killed the Cardinal with my speed. But for whatever reason, VT kept running the ball inside. Big mistake.

I don't have a problem with this idea. I admittedly was against drafting Tebow and still have my doubts about his long term success. However I do like him and enjoy the way the team plays when he's on the field. I also think it wouldn't hurt to give him at least one season to try and make something happen and see if he can be a legit starter.

I do like Luck as a pro-prospect more than Tebow, though. And I don't understand why Tebow fans feel the need to rip on Luck. Luck won't make it to us even if he comes out so there is no need to be threatened.

Tombstone RJ
01-04-2011, 08:19 AM
I wasn't comparing anybody to Brady or Manning, certainly not Luck or Tebow. I was saying that an elite QB is the first thing a team should have. In the NFL you're always losing players and plugging in new ones. You might have an awesome defense one year and lose a key piece next year, but an elite QB holds a team together. Look at all those years with Elway. Defenses came and went. So did players on offense. You're right, you don't need an elite QB to win a SB, but it sure as hell makes it easier. The Colts and Pats have systems built around their QBs. That's the keel that hold their ships together.

Well spoken. Is Luck that type of QB? Is Tebow that type of QB? Is it worth dumping Tebow and mortgaging the future to find out if Luck is that guy?

I'm not so sure it is.

Smiling Assassin27
01-04-2011, 08:21 AM
You missed his point. He was making the point that you win championships with elite quarterbacks. It has nothing to do with what they were in college.


And you missed mine. If that were the case, you'd have the overwhelming majority of superbowl winners have an elite qb. Do they?

You've got 44 to choose from. The only 'elites' that won a superbowl are:

Staubach
Bradshaw
Montana
Aikman
Favre
Elway
Warner
Brady
Manning
Brees
Roethlisberger

Between them, they have 23 titles--half of the 44. Now look at every Super Bowl winner and tell me which one had an ordinary defense.

Saints
Colts
Rams (though they were way underrated, IMO)

That's it. Every other Super Bowl winner had an elite defense. That is my point. Elite qb's can win you 12 games a season (assuming the other skill players are top shelf as well) but the thing that gets you to--and wins--superbowls is elite defense.

bowtown
01-04-2011, 08:21 AM
Luck sells drugs to 10-year-olds.

bendog
01-04-2011, 08:22 AM
I watched the entire game and what I was impressed with was the system Harbaugh developed (check out my avy).

Luck looked good, but IMHO, if anyone claims that he's not a system QB, they have their head in the clouds.

Luck is part of a fantastic system. He's nice, but I'm not sure if he's everything the hype machine is saying he is.

How can you call a guy who can make every throw and has touch and is mobile a system QB? He plays in a system, no doubt. Hopefully one that we'll see in Den.

Smiling Assassin27
01-04-2011, 08:26 AM
Well spoken. Is Luck that type of QB? Is Tebow that type of QB? Is it worth dumping Tebow and mortgaging the future to find out if Luck is that guy?

I'm not so sure it is.

While Elway was getting us to super bowls, teams like the skins and giants were winning them, falling to 10 wins or so, and then winning them again--without elite qb's. In fact, they really had pedestrian guys--Williams, Rypien, Hoss, Simms. What was the reason Elway did not win Super Bowls? He had no defense on par with these teams and it showed when the games were on the line. YOu can say the Broncos had some good defenses but none like the monsters in NY, WAS, CHI, and even SF.

Tombstone RJ
01-04-2011, 08:28 AM
How can you call a guy who can make every throw and has touch and is mobile a system QB? He plays in a system, no doubt. Hopefully one that we'll see in Den.

Yes, he can make every throw--in college ball. Some of those receivers were just WIDE open. I mean, no one was around those big white TEs (yes I'm saying white because I don't think they had fantastic speed) when Luck threw them the ball.

In other words, the system created the open lanes and Luck (to his credit) found the open WRs. Now, will he be able to do that in the NFL? Those throwing lanes are gonna be a lot smaller. Those windows will close a lot quicker.

Luck is good, but again, I don't know if he's as great as the pundits are making him out to be. I certainly don't know if he's worth what it will take to get him.

bendog
01-04-2011, 08:32 AM
He's worth the overall one pick. There's no bust factor. He has a legit NFL arm, mobility, pocket presence and is a leader. Stupid thread. The tebow boners are as desperate now as they were over McD.

Tombstone RJ
01-04-2011, 08:32 AM
While Elway was getting us to super bowls, teams like the skins and giants were winning them, falling to 10 wins or so, and then winning them again--without elite qb's. In fact, they really had pedestrian guys--Williams, Rypien, Hoss, Simms. What was the reason Elway did not win Super Bowls? He had no defense on par with these teams and it showed when the games were on the line. YOu can say the Broncos had some good defenses but none like the monsters in NY, WAS, CHI, and even SF.

Also, those teams had fantastic HCs and fantastic systems. Look at the coaches of two of those teams: Gibbs and Parcells. As for Chicago, they only won 1 SB and that was because of a fantastic defense.

Also, Parcells second SB victory also had a lot of luck. I mean, the Bills should have won that game...

jhns
01-04-2011, 08:32 AM
Tebow will be more successful than Luck. We have the better QB so who cares?

Smiling Assassin27
01-04-2011, 08:33 AM
Luck is good, but again, I don't know if he's as great as the pundits are making him out to be. I certainly don't know if he's worth what it will take to get him.

winner. i don't think anyone with an ounce of sanity is saying the guy's lame. the question is whether he is the next john elway or the next tim couch. the next question becomes, if he is the next elway, is it worth it to us to sacrifice picks, salary, and development on this guy given that our OL is mediocre and our defense is putrid? My view is that history points to foregoing the next elway and building the next Ravens D, Steelers D, Cowboys D, Bears D, or even Orange Crush D--defenses that took qb's, elite and pedestrian, to super bowl titles.

p.s. I forgot Steve Young on that list above.

Play2win
01-04-2011, 08:34 AM
THAT'S FUNNY AS HELL!!!Hilarious!Hilarious!Hilarious!

How so? And who the hell watches that show, anyway?!?

Smiling Assassin27
01-04-2011, 08:34 AM
Also, those teams had fantastic HCs and fantastic systems. Look at the coaches of two of those teams: Gibbs and Parcells. As for Chicago, they only won 1 SB and that was because of a fantastic defense.

Also, Parcells second SB victory also had a lot of luck. I mean, the Bills should have won that game...


The Bills should've scored more than 19, given the elite qb and incredible offense they had assembled, but didn't. Why? Giants D.

Play2win
01-04-2011, 08:35 AM
Luck sells drugs to 10-year-olds.

Is that what the kids are calling nowdays? ;D

Crushaholic
01-04-2011, 08:36 AM
I'll be extremely disappointed if we try to draft Luck, at the expense of our swiss cheese _efense...

BroncoDoug
01-04-2011, 09:10 AM
I'm still mad that we didn't trade up to get Peyton Manning when we had the chance, he looked like he was a sure fire HOF at the time!!

Steve Sewell
01-04-2011, 09:14 AM
"I ve coached against Brett Favre, McNabb, Aaron Rodgers, Matt Ryan in college; None of them are as good as Andrew Luck."

-Bud Foster, Virginia Tech Defensive Coordinator.



"He has that same face Leaf had."

-Orange Mane Analyst

You're going to get me in trouble at work for laughing.

Beantown Bronco
01-04-2011, 09:32 AM
He's a nice QB no doubt, but he is not the next Peyton Manning. Is he the next Matt Ryan? Pehaps yes, perhaps no.

For my money, Matt Ryan is the best comparison I can think of at this point. I really see a lot of similarities in their (college) games.

snowspot66
01-04-2011, 09:52 AM
I'll be curious to see how the Pats do after Brady hangs it up. And the Colts after Manning.

So you are telling us right now that Luck will be not only a Hall of Fame QB but in the discussion for greatest of all time?

Rohirrim
01-04-2011, 09:59 AM
So you are telling us right now that Luck will be not only a Hall of Fame QB but in the discussion for greatest of all time?

I was responding to this sentence: Teams can win in this league with a good, but not great qb. They cannot win with a putrid defense

By saying this: "I'll be curious to see how the Pats do after Brady hangs it up. And the Colts after Manning." .

It had nothing to do with Luck.

Reading comprehension: The lost art.

snowspot66
01-04-2011, 10:06 AM
I was responding to this sentence: Teams can win in this league with a good, but not great qb. They cannot win with a putrid defense

By saying this: "I'll be curious to see how the Pats do after Brady hangs it up. And the Colts after Manning." .

It had nothing to do with Luck.

Reading comprehension: The lost art.

Oh well excuse me. How dare I make the assumption that in a thread about Quarterbacks I assume you are comparing Quarterbacks.

And to answer your question they'll probably do poorly because they don't have elite defenses. They don't even have pretty good defenses. Pedestrian really.

srphoenix
01-04-2011, 10:12 AM
cant post a new thread for some reason right now, so here:

Fox Sports reported that Jerry Richardson, the owner of the Panthers, is hesitant and unlikely to trade the #1 pick.

In regards to next April's NFL Draft, it appears Carolina will be keeping the number one pick. Many draft analysts have said the obvious top selection appears to be Stanford QB Andrew Luck. Richardson said, "I think it would be somewhat unusual for us to trade down in this particular case."

He never said it won't happen, but it seems like Carolina is setting their sights on Luck.

http://www.foxcharlotte.com/sports/Carolina-Panthers-Owner-Jerry-Richardson-would-be-unusual-to-trade-first-pick-112873804.html

Thank God, now we can focus on getting defense and let our franchise QB Tebow do his thing... WIN GAMES.

razorwire77
01-04-2011, 10:15 AM
There can be more than one good QB, and admitting someone is good doesn't make Tebow less good. Frankly it would have been nice to see Tebow hitting his "wide open receivers" two days ago.

No. We must all hate Andrew Luck with ever fiber of our being, even though there is virtually no chance the Broncos being in a position to draft him. He is a Leaf faced, poopy pants who throws to open receivers. Every coach who coaches against him and nearly every pundit gushes over the kid, but he is overrated.

I'm really at a loss to figure out how anyone could possibly watch the 2nd half of last night's game, and come to the conclusion "omgz Luk is a pruject lolerz."

Tombstone RJ
01-04-2011, 10:17 AM
cant post a new thread for some reason right now, so here:

Fox Sports reported that Jerry Richardson, the owner of the Panthers, is hesitant and unlikely to trade the #1 pick.

In regards to next April's NFL Draft, it appears Carolina will be keeping the number one pick. Many draft analysts have said the obvious top selection appears to be Stanford QB Andrew Luck. Richardson said, "I think it would be somewhat unusual for us to trade down in this particular case."

He never said it won't happen, but it seems like Carolina is setting their sights on Luck.

http://www.foxcharlotte.com/sports/Carolina-Panthers-Owner-Jerry-Richardson-would-be-unusual-to-trade-first-pick-112873804.html

Thank God, now we can focus on getting defense and let our franchise QB Tebow do his thing... WIN GAMES.

Good news! Panthers take Luck with the number 1 pick and the Broncos then tade down because another team is all excited about Cam Newton!!

Sell it John, sell it!!

razorwire77
01-04-2011, 10:21 AM
cant post a new thread for some reason right now, so here:

Fox Sports reported that Jerry Richardson, the owner of the Panthers, is hesitant and unlikely to trade the #1 pick.

In regards to next April's NFL Draft, it appears Carolina will be keeping the number one pick. Many draft analysts have said the obvious top selection appears to be Stanford QB Andrew Luck. Richardson said, "I think it would be somewhat unusual for us to trade down in this particular case."

He never said it won't happen, but it seems like Carolina is setting their sights on Luck.

http://www.foxcharlotte.com/sports/Carolina-Panthers-Owner-Jerry-Richardson-would-be-unusual-to-trade-first-pick-112873804.html

Thank God, now we can focus on getting defense and let our franchise QB Tebow do his thing... WIN GAMES.

That could be a lot of smoke too though. It's not like he's going to come out and say "Well, we really don't want to break the bank signing a QB 1st overall when there will be a rookie cap in place in the next draft. It would be great if we could unload the pick, because we really don't want it."

snowspot66
01-04-2011, 10:23 AM
cant post a new thread for some reason right now, so here:

Fox Sports reported that Jerry Richardson, the owner of the Panthers, is hesitant and unlikely to trade the #1 pick.

In regards to next April's NFL Draft, it appears Carolina will be keeping the number one pick. Many draft analysts have said the obvious top selection appears to be Stanford QB Andrew Luck. Richardson said, "I think it would be somewhat unusual for us to trade down in this particular case."

He never said it won't happen, but it seems like Carolina is setting their sights on Luck.

http://www.foxcharlotte.com/sports/Carolina-Panthers-Owner-Jerry-Richardson-would-be-unusual-to-trade-first-pick-112873804.html

Thank God, now we can focus on getting defense and let our franchise QB Tebow do his thing... WIN GAMES.

He would be retarded to trade it. That franchise needs a face that can sell tickets and give fans hope.

If they did trade it they wouldn't trade it to us. They'd open up a bidding war with Buffalo, Arizona, and San Francisco. We'd have to give up so much to move up one spot we'd spend the next three years with a historically bad defense.

Beantown Bronco
01-04-2011, 10:29 AM
I wonder how the Carolina locals are responding to this. Essentially, they're declaring last year's 2nd rounder a bust and they don't have their 2nd rounder this year because they traded it to NE. He better be all he's cracked up to be because they need a lot of pieces and they're not going to get them from high draft picks.

SureShot
01-04-2011, 10:37 AM
If we draft luck I am going to sell my tickets and stop tailgating.

ayjackson
01-04-2011, 10:39 AM
The only 'elites' that won a superbowl are:

Young
Montana
Aikman
Favre
Elway
Warner
Brady
Manning
Brees
Roethlisberger



What you listed me there is what 90% of the past 20 Superbowls? Who are we missing Dilfer and Johnson?

Only teams in there with elite defences were TB, Baltimore and Pittsburg. Others definitely had good defences, though. I`d never argue that you can win without a good defence.

ZONA
01-04-2011, 10:43 AM
I watch alot of PAC10 football and have seen Luck play 8 times this year and he's looked good more then he's looked average. I think he's going to be a solid NFL QB but I was never one to jump on the "he's a once in a decade prospect" like some guys here at the mane have said. I honestly think the kids from Arizona and Oregon State have looked almost as good as Luck has, just a little more inconsistent is all, but they don't have the same Oline either. Not saying either of those 2 are just as good as Luck, just saying they have looked just as good at times and they're each playing with less talent on the Oline.

Agamemnon
01-04-2011, 10:43 AM
Luck looked like a top QB prospect. No doubt about it. That said, I still don't see what seperates him from all the top QB prospects of the past so that he's a "can't miss" pick.

Smiling Assassin27
01-04-2011, 10:43 AM
What you listed me there is what 90% of the past 20 Superbowls? Who are we missing Dilfer and Johnson?

Only teams in there with elite defences were TB, Baltimore and Pittsburg. Others definitely had good defences, though. I`d never argue that you can win without a good defence.


The Pats had elite level defenses for every super bowl win.

Gutless Drunk
01-04-2011, 10:45 AM
What you listed me there is what 90% of the past 20 Superbowls? Who are we missing Dilfer and Johnson?

Only teams in there with elite defences were TB, Baltimore and Pittsburg. Others definitely had good defences, though. I`d never argue that you can win without a good defence.

Last 20 years:

XXIV - 1/28/90
Joe Montana, San Francisco 49ers
XXV - 1/27/91
Jeff Hostetler, New York Giants
XXVI - 1/26/92
Mark Rypien, Washington Redskins
XXVII - 1/31/93
Troy Aikman, Dallas Cowboys
XXVIII - 1/30/94
Troy Aikman, Dallas Cowboys
XXIX - 1/29/95
Steve Young, San Francisco 49ers
XXX - 1/28/96
Troy Aikman, Dallas Cowboys
XXXI - 1/26/97
Brett Favre, Green Bay Packers
XXXII - 1/25/98
John Elway, Denver Broncos
XXXIII - 1/31/99
John Elway, Denver Broncos
XXXIV - 1/30/00
Kurt Warner, St. Louis Rams
XXXV – 1/28/01
Trent Dilfer, Baltimore Ravens
XXXVI - 2/3/02
Tom Brady, New England Patriots
XXXVII - 1/26/03
Brad Johnson, Tampa Bay Buccaneers
XXXVIII - 2/1/04
Tom Brady, New England Patriots
XXXVIX - 2/6/05
Tom Brady, New England Patriots
XL - 2/5/06
Ben Roethlisberger, Pittsburgh Steelers
XLI - 2/4/07
Peyton Manning, Indianapolis Colts
XLII - 2/3/08
Eli Manning, New York Giants
XLIII - 2/1/09
Ben Roethlisberger, Pittsburgh Steelers
XLIV - 2/7/10 (31)
Drew Brees - New Orleans Saints

So...what...4 of the winners had average type QB's? (Hostetler, Rypien, Dilfer & Johnson)

ayjackson
01-04-2011, 10:48 AM
The Pats had elite level defenses for every super bowl win.

Not sure about that. As a pats fan, I never felt those teams were regarded as elite defences. They were prepared and consistent and made big plays in big games, but there weren`t spoken of as shut-down defences.

Beantown Bronco
01-04-2011, 10:49 AM
So...what...4 of the winners had average type QB's? (Hostetler, Rypien, Dilfer & Johnson)

Tom Brady in his first SB win was not even average that season (or game).
Same for Big Ben in his first.

Just because they are stars today doesn't mean they were since day one.

ayjackson
01-04-2011, 10:50 AM
Last 20 years:

So...what...4 of the winners had average type QB's? (Hostetler, Rypien, Dilfer & Johnson)

Thanks for doing the research. 16 of the last 18.

Agamemnon
01-04-2011, 10:50 AM
Not sure about that. As a pats fan, I never felt those teams were regarded as elite defences. They were prepared and consistent and made big plays in big games, but there weren`t spoken of as shut-down defences.

That's because they weren't. They were top 10 defenses sure, but they weren't elite defenses. The Patriots won their Super Bowls by being good at everything rather than being elite at any one thing.

Agamemnon
01-04-2011, 10:53 AM
Last 20 years:

So...what...4 of the winners had average type QB's? (Hostetler, Rypien, Dilfer & Johnson)

Eli Manning goes on that list as well if you ask me. And neither Brady nor Roethlisberger were elite QBs for their Super Bowl wins.

Smiling Assassin27
01-04-2011, 10:56 AM
Last 20 years:

XXIV - 1/28/90
Joe Montana, San Francisco 49ers
XXV - 1/27/91
Jeff Hostetler, New York Giants
XXVI - 1/26/92
Mark Rypien, Washington Redskins
XXVII - 1/31/93
Troy Aikman, Dallas Cowboys
XXVIII - 1/30/94
Troy Aikman, Dallas Cowboys
XXIX - 1/29/95
Steve Young, San Francisco 49ers
XXX - 1/28/96
Troy Aikman, Dallas Cowboys
XXXI - 1/26/97
Brett Favre, Green Bay Packers
XXXII - 1/25/98
John Elway, Denver Broncos
XXXIII - 1/31/99
John Elway, Denver Broncos
XXXIV - 1/30/00
Kurt Warner, St. Louis Rams
XXXV – 1/28/01
Trent Dilfer, Baltimore Ravens
XXXVI - 2/3/02
Tom Brady, New England Patriots
XXXVII - 1/26/03
Brad Johnson, Tampa Bay Buccaneers
XXXVIII - 2/1/04
Tom Brady, New England Patriots )
XXXVIX - 2/6/05
Tom Brady, New England Patriots
XL - 2/5/06
Ben Roethlisberger, Pittsburgh Steelers
XLI - 2/4/07
Peyton Manning, Indianapolis Colts –
XLII - 2/3/08
Eli Manning, New York Giants
XLIII - 2/1/09
Ben Roethlisberger, Pittsburgh Steelers
XLIV - 2/7/10 (31)
Drew Brees - New Orleans Saints

So...what 4 of the winners had average type QB's (Hostetler, Rypien, Dilfer & Johnson)

Eli Manning's an elite qb? 15 of the 20 you've listed had elite defenses. And no, I'm not counting Denver's 2 defenses, though I could make an argument that they were elite. I'm not arguing that not having an elite qb on your team is bad. I'm arguing that Luck is not a sure thing and that, given denver's position, investing picks, salary, and potential FA's on an elite qb would negatively effect our ability to build an elite (not just 'good') defense. I'm not willing to go that route. It's just a philosophical difference, I guess.

ayjackson
01-04-2011, 11:02 AM
Eli Manning's an elite qb? 15 of the 20 you've listed had elite defenses.

I guess everybody`s going to have their own definitions of good, great, elite, so this is always going to be a fruitless agrument.

What`s the question anyway? Which is better, an elite defence with a league average QB or an elite QB with a league average defence?

I`ll take the latter because it`s what I`m used to.

Arkie
01-04-2011, 11:04 AM
The "best prospect in years" happens every year. Remember when Ditka thought Ricky Williams would be better than Walter Payton? Tim Couch and Akili Smith were the "best prospects" drafted ahead of Ricky that year. Remember when JaMarcus was going to revolutionize the game?

Gutless Drunk
01-04-2011, 11:05 AM
Eli Manning's an elite qb? 15 of the 20 you've listed had elite defenses. And no, I'm not counting Denver's 2 defenses, though I could make an argument that they were elite. I'm not arguing that not having an elite qb on your team is bad. I'm arguing that Luck is not a sure thing and that, given denver's position, investing picks, salary, and potential FA's on an elite qb would negatively effect our ability to build an elite (not just 'good') defense. I'm not willing to go that route. It's just a philosophical difference, I guess.

Yea..Eli is questionable..so what 16 of 21?
And I concur with you about the Luck situation
I just believe the QB is by far the most important position and/or factor in having a consistently contending team, especially in today's NFL. I wish it wasn't as I am sick to death of seeing the same teams all the time.
I don't see how you can look at that and think otherwise. A great defense can get you a Super Bowl. A great QB keeps you in the conversation for a decade. See:
Balt
2000 12-4 Super Bowl Winner
2001 10-6
2002 7-9
2003 10-6
2004 9-7
2005 6-10
2006 13-3
2007 5-11
200811-5
2009 9-7

Ind
2000 10-6
2001 6-10
2002 10-6
2003 12-4
2004 12-4
2005 14-2
2006 12-4 Super Bowl Winner
2007 13-3
2008 12-4
2009 14-2 Super Bowl Loser

NE
2000 5-11
2001 11-5 Super Bowl Winner
2002 9-7
2003 14-2Super Bowl Winner
2004 14-2 Super Bowl Winner
2005 10-6
2006 12-4
2007 16-0 Super Bowl Loser
2008 11-5
2009 10-6


That's is why Carolina cannot pass on Luck and why I hope Tebow is something special

footstepsfrom#27
01-04-2011, 11:07 AM
BREAKING: You can be a Tim Tebow fan and still think Andrew Luck is good.


Quite humorous that it's all Tim Tebow super fans doing everything they can to spin/downplay Luck's ability.

Just look at the avatars of the people who "aren't impressed" with Andrew Luck. Pretty obvious the agenda being pushed. I like Timmy Tebow too, I rock the avatar. But Andrew Luck is a good QB.

It's OK to say that, Tebow won't mind.
It has nothing to do with trying to pimp up Tebow, and I gave an honest interpretation of the game and his performance as I saw it. Is there anything I posted you actually disagree on? If so, what?

Mediator12
01-04-2011, 11:28 AM
I wonder how the Carolina locals are responding to this. Essentially, they're declaring last year's 2nd rounder a bust and they don't have their 2nd rounder this year because they traded it to NE. He better be all he's cracked up to be because they need a lot of pieces and they're not going to get them from high draft picks.

CAR is a QB away from the playoffs if they can keep steve smith healthy. Their Defense is top notch, their running game is only hampered by injury and no legit QB, and the Passing game sucked because they had trash at QB. If they get Luck, I would not be surprised to see them challenge in the NFCS next year. That's a real tough division if CAR gets a QB.

Mediator12
01-04-2011, 11:33 AM
I ddn't see any Leaf-like characteristics last night, but I will say that I was not blown away like some people in here seem to be, gushing over this guy like he's the greatest thing they've ever seen. I saw a QB who had a dominant running game supporting him make a number of passes that frankly didn't look that great. His ball seemed to consistantly wobble somewhat, and in the TD throw down the middle, he underthrew it so much the receiver had to wait for it and had a defender been any nearer, he'd have been tackled before he scored or had the pass broken up. He completed a lot of passes, but mostly they were to wide open receivers. I didn't really see him doing anything that makes you stop and go "wow". He looks steady, but unspectacular. It's only one game and you certainly can't judge on the basis of that, but I'm left asking what the huge fuss was about at this point.

You should of watched INDY play TEN last week. That is EXACTLY how Peyton Manning played, minus the mobility. He underthrew 2 wide open TD passes, missed a few short passes, and threw to all the open WR's. He does not throw the prettiest ball in the world, but it gets there when it should.

I will say this, Luck has more NFL tools than Manning did coming out and is extremely sharp mentally. That is why people say he is a great prospect. He is more NFL ready than Sam Bradford was last year and has much better tools to work with.

Now, Does DEN need him. NO. They do not. They Need DL. Marcel Dareus please if he declares.

Beantown Bronco
01-04-2011, 11:39 AM
CAR is a QB away from the playoffs if they can keep steve smith healthy. Their Defense is top notch, their running game is only hampered by injury and no legit QB, and the Passing game sucked because they had trash at QB. If they get Luck, I would not be surprised to see them challenge in the NFCS next year. That's a real tough division if CAR gets a QB.

Ummmm, what?!? You're thinking of the past I think. They were ranked 18th in the league in yards and 26th in points given up this year.

And their running game will be taking a hit most likely next year with the likely loss of Deangelo Williams.

A QB alone will not save them. Especially a rookie.

snowspot66
01-04-2011, 11:39 AM
CAR is a QB away from the playoffs if they can keep steve smith healthy. Their Defense is top notch, their running game is only hampered by injury and no legit QB, and the Passing game sucked because they had trash at QB. If they get Luck, I would not be surprised to see them challenge in the NFCS next year. That's a real tough division if CAR gets a QB.

Can't agree more.

Considering the results of recent top QB's picking up down teams and the fact that the NFC South has Brees, Freeman, and Ryan the Panthers absolutely must take Luck. The fans will go ballistic if they don't.

We have an extremely talented and athletic QB that could become a great QB in his own right and have no realistic chance at acquiring Luck and yet we are STILL having the retarded debate of Luck or Tebow.

There is just no way in hell Jimmy Clausen will prevent them from taking Luck.

Tombstone RJ
01-04-2011, 11:48 AM
Can't agree more.

Considering the results of recent top QB's picking up down teams and the fact that the NFC South has Brees, Freeman, and Ryan the Panthers absolutely must take Luck. The fans will go ballistic if they don't.

We have an extremely talented and athletic QB that could become a great QB in his own right and have no realistic chance at acquiring Luck and yet we are STILL having the retarded debate of Luck or Tebow.

There is just no way in hell Jimmy Clausen will prevent them from taking Luck.

If anything Clausen will push Luck to be better and vice versa. It's a good thing to have if you're the Panthers.

Mediator12
01-04-2011, 12:04 PM
Ummmm, what?!? You're thinking of the past I think. They were ranked 18th in the league in yards and 26th in points given up this year.

And their running game will be taking a hit most likely next year with the likely loss of Deangelo Williams.

A QB alone will not save them. Especially a rookie.

Dude, their defense was only that bad because their offense was dead last in points, 30th in TOP, and 31st in 3 and outs! They were also terrible in TO's for points. Their ST's also were poor giving up 30th ranked opposing field position.

That team has a solid core of players, and a QB puts them right back in the hunt for the playoffs IMHO.

Beantown Bronco
01-04-2011, 12:11 PM
Dude, their defense was only that bad because their offense was dead last in points, 30th in TOP, and 31st in 3 and outs! They were also terrible in TO's for points. Their ST's also were poor giving up 30th ranked opposing field position.

That's fine. We'll have to agree to disagree there.

I've seen "top notch" defenses overcome completely inept offenses to rank among the league leaders in all categories. Baltimore in particular and Pittsburgh made a living doing this earlier this decade. It didn't matter how long they were on the field or how many bad situations they were put in. The stepped up and dominated.

How much help are they really going to get from a rookie QB? Is that going to help their STs? Is that going to help their running game, especially once they lose Deangelo Williams?

With no other picks in the first two rounds this year, I just don't see how they're going to magically go from the worst team in the league to contender in a REALLY tough division, just because of a rookie QB.