Sort of like the Panthers have a superstar on their hands? You're pretty good at callin' this stuff.
Sort of like the Panthers have a superstar on their hands? You're pretty good at callin' this stuff.
This is totally new information, Blu. We never knew this about you. Why don't you go into detail, we'd love to hear this totally new information.
I guarantee that Cam Newton won't finish the season with more than 12 touchdown passes and won't win more than 2 games. I also guarantee that RGIII will end his first season struggling to throw more touchdowns than interceptions. Tom Brady is probably going to be traded at the end of the year because he just doesn't have what it takes anymore and Tony Romo will be MVP of the league. I like throwing out baseless guarantees too.
Also the Packers game was two weeks ago, the past two weeks we have struggled against the Jets and the Browns, and before the Packers game we struggled against the Bears, Vikings and the Jags. So far, the Packer game was an anomoly while 2nd half scoring struggles against the other 5 teams has been the norm.
I never once said we should get rid of Luck or even that he was bad. I've said, in other threads, he's blowing Peyton's rookie year out of the water. Rookie QB's nowadays are head and shoulders above the learning curve when compared to rookies in 1998. Luck will improve, but RIGHT NOW he has been out played by RGIII. That was the point I was making.
There's pretty good reason for his statistical numbers, which we've discussed in fairly long length here on these forums. If you're going to base your opinion of RG3 on passer rating and completion percentage, then congratz --- you've just bought into MIke Shanahan's simplied offensive system. Makes rookies look good. RG3 is a very good prospect, he's the 2nd best prospect in this draft. He also has a west coast and option- like style of offense to play in, which does exactly what you're seeing. He also has the #1 rusher in the league to hand the ball off to. He's also not faced very good passing defenses. He's also already missed time due to injury, and despite having an easier system and better supporting cast, he has more losses. We've gone over all of this. There's a lotta hype around that guy, it's gonna come down eventually.
If it were THAT easy, then every team in the league with a rookie QB would make their offense work that way. If it were that easy to look good in that offense, Rex Grossman, John Beck, D. McNabb, and whoever else Shannahan has had at QB while he's been there would look good. I'm a results type of guy. Idc if he's running a simplified offense, if it puts points on the board then what's it matter? One could argue the fact that if Griffin is more dangerous than Luck while running a simplified, dummied down offense, what's going to happen when he learns the entire playbook, runs a no huddle consistently, etc. YES he has a ground game to lean on. That is something nobody can deny. BUT the Colts ran the ball very well against the Browns yesterday, and still stalled offensively in the second half.
Alot like the Colts, the Skin's defense is one of the worst in the league, especially in the secondary. RGIII's only job is to direct the offense and put points on the board and he's got a top 5 offense without a number one, and maybe without a bonafide number two receiver.
Griffin has far less turnovers (5) to Luck's (11), better ypa (8.47 to 6.70), and total touchdowns (13 to 10). Also, the stats that you mention (QB rating, interceptions, and completion %) are pretty darn important when grading a QB. Those are the tools that we've used for years to grade QB's (along with 3rd down completion percentage/conversion rate) and now all of a sudden they don't mean as much?Quote:
See, this is a big fat myth. The only stats he's beating Luck in are rating, interceptions, and completion rate. Again, all point to the system he plays in. All the reasons I just stated above. He's not beating Luck in passing yards per game, he's not running a no-huddle, he's only using half the field, he's not making as many reads. He has the same # of passing touchdowns in 1 more game than Luck. RG3 has more rushing touchdowns --- while getting his *** handed to him repeatedly on those designed run plays.
Yes RGIII has a MUCH better running game (emphasis on the MUCH) but it's not like he has an offense loaded with firepower. His number one receiver is.....Fred Davis? His second receiver is Santana Moss. Also, much like the colts, the Redskins have been killed with injuries (Orakpo, Carriker, Garcon (lol), and now his leading receiver Davis) Yes the Colts went through an ENTIRE organizational overhaul, but if you're lauded as the best QB to come out of college in years, then I expect you to handle it--which to Luck's credit he has done very well so far. But I don't think he is the MAIN reason we are winning these games. A reason? Yes. The Main reason (ala Peyton Manning all those years) no. If he were, he'd be putting up insane numbers, he wouldn't be turning the ball over, etc.Quote:
The Colts are 3-3 and just like RG3, lost a game in the final seconds to a long bomb. So could be 4-2. Do you remember what the Colts did this off-season? They overhauled the entire organization. Look at what Luck has around him. Reggie Wayne. That's it. Where is Indy's rookie head coach? Fighting leukemia in a hospital. He has way more working against him, less to work with, and he's damn near 4-2, and even Luck will admit he's not played perfectly, which just goes to show how much of an impact this guy has even when he's not playing to his full potential. Who else are you going to point to for 3, almost 4 wins in 6 games?? Reggie Wayne? He's good, but he's not winning games by himself. It's Luck. He's made this team legit way quicker than we have any right to be. And his full potential is 2-3-4 years down the road --- at least. I think that's all that needs to be said.
Again, just because I say RGIII has outpreformed Luck, doesn't mean I think Luck has played poorly. I think Luck is good, and has been great given his circumstance. But RGIII has looked better, with only half a field and half the playbook.
I can appreciate you trying to be the impartial poster who balances out the trolling that compares Luck to Tebow and such, and with the Colts homers, but you're starting to slip more and more onto the side of those who continue to say a lot of things, hoping for something to stick.
Lets not forget that almost half of Luck's interceptions happened in the first game of his career against the Bears. Luck is also the first rookie quarterback EVER to top 1200 yards in his first 4 games. One more 300 yard game this season and he will tie Manning's record with four 300 yard games in a rookie season for the Colts. Something tells me that he's going to break that record with 10 more games remaining on the schedule. I don't want to say that Luck is going to be better than Manning but he is still having a hell of a start to a career and so is RGIII.
This isn't a huge deal, but making sensationalized statement to prove people's points is the biggest problem in this Luck vs. Griffin "debate".
Hey I mean anytime you can draft a guy that is going to turn 29 in his rookie season with your first round pick...you have to do it.
As for your last comment, I'm not hoping anything "sticks", I'm just calling it like I see it.
don't you think one reason Weeden fell so far was because of his age and not his talent level?
If you had 2 players of comparable talent level, then would you go with the 23 year old or the 29 year old?
Not saying the talent level of Weeden is comparable to Luck but may not be as far off as the draft position would otherwise indicate. Due to age, he won't likely have as long of a career as other rookies.
RG3 had some terrible mistakes, but I expect that from a rookie QB
Honestly I am a little surprised he has not had more. I remember saying that during the game.
I am not sure where this notion is coming from that we have a strong offense, but its laughable. Even moreso now that Davis is out for the year.
I swear a HS JV football team could beat our secondary. I hate our D coordinator and his repetitive stupid calls.
RG3 also made up for his stupid mistakes (really only the one I hated was the pick) with his nice plays, including a bomb (that was dropped), his 4th down play, and that damned nice pass to Santana.
You have statistically one of the best running backs in the NFL this season. That's pretty important.
Don't think anyone is saying your offense is "strong", but have you seen Indy's offense? It's literally Andrew Luck, Reggie Wayne, and then a buncha guys. Sometimes Donnie Avery resembles an NFL WR. Not saying that some of thes guys won't eventually develop, like our rookie TEs and WRs, but as of right now, it's a very raw, inexperienced, mistake-prone group of guys.
Allen and Fleener both look above average at TE already IMO.
I'll give you that Allen has looked better than your typical rookie TE. To say he's average as an experienced NFL veteran TE would be a big stretch. He'll get there, but he's not there right now. Fleener seems to be even behind him.
I found it difficult to take OlBlu seriously before, but after he used "Tony Romo" and "star" in the same sentence I've determined he believes the opposite of everything he posts and he's laughing his *** off at our reactions.
The only people who think Tony Romo is a "star" work at ESPN and the only "star" he'll ever be associated with is the one on the 50 yard line in his own stadium.
Fleener is on pace to get around 50 catches this season. That's pretty solid for a rookie tight end.
It's... okay. He's on pace for like 500 yards, too. Nothign earth-shattering, certainly not what we were hoping for as a round 2 draft pick. Zero touchdowns so far for a guy who was supposed to be a red zone freak.
Romo's stat say "star" and he is always mentioned as one of the top ten QBs in the league by any expert I read. I would be very excited if Luck EVER got close to being as good as Tony Romo....:cool: