Announcement

Collapse

The Rules of Pacers Digest

Hello everyone,

Whether your are a long standing forum member or whether you have just registered today, it's a good idea to read and review the rules below so that you have a very good idea of what to expect when you come to Pacers Digest.

A quick note to new members: Your posts will not immediately show up when you make them. An administrator has to approve at least your first post before the forum software will later upgrade your account to the status of a fully-registered member. This usually happens within a couple of hours or so after your post(s) is/are approved, so you may need to be a little patient at first.

Why do we do this? So that it's more difficult for spammers (be they human or robot) to post, and so users who are banned cannot immediately re-register and start dousing people with verbal flames.

Below are the rules of Pacers Digest. After you have read them, you will have a very good sense of where we are coming from, what we expect, what we don't want to see, and how we react to things.

Rule #1

Pacers Digest is intended to be a place to discuss basketball without having to deal with the kinds of behaviors or attitudes that distract people from sticking with the discussion of the topics at hand. These unwanted distractions can come in many forms, and admittedly it can sometimes be tricky to pin down each and every kind that can rear its ugly head, but we feel that the following examples and explanations cover at least a good portion of that ground and should at least give people a pretty good idea of the kinds of things we actively discourage:

"Anyone who __________ is a liar / a fool / an idiot / a blind homer / has their head buried in the sand / a blind hater / doesn't know basketball / doesn't watch the games"

"People with intelligence will agree with me when I say that __________"

"Only stupid people think / believe / do ___________"

"I can't wait to hear something from PosterX when he/she sees that **insert a given incident or current event that will have probably upset or disappointed PosterX here**"

"He/she is just delusional"

"This thread is stupid / worthless / embarrassing"

"I'm going to take a moment to point and / laugh at PosterX / GroupOfPeopleY who thought / believed *insert though/belief here*"

"Remember when PosterX said OldCommentY that no longer looks good? "

In general, if a comment goes from purely on topic to something 'ad hominem' (personal jabs, personal shots, attacks, flames, however you want to call it, towards a person, or a group of people, or a given city/state/country of people), those are most likely going to be found intolerable.

We also dissuade passive aggressive behavior. This can be various things, but common examples include statements that are basically meant to imply someone is either stupid or otherwise incapable of holding a rational conversation. This can include (but is not limited to) laughing at someone's conclusions rather than offering an honest rebuttal, asking people what game they were watching, or another common problem is Poster X will say "that player isn't that bad" and then Poster Y will say something akin to "LOL you think that player is good". We're not going to tolerate those kinds of comments out of respect for the community at large and for the sake of trying to just have an honest conversation.

Now, does the above cover absolutely every single kind of distraction that is unwanted? Probably not, but you should by now have a good idea of the general types of things we will be discouraging. The above examples are meant to give you a good feel for / idea of what we're looking for. If something new or different than the above happens to come along and results in the same problem (that being, any other attitude or behavior that ultimately distracts from actually just discussing the topic at hand, or that is otherwise disrespectful to other posters), we can and we will take action to curb this as well, so please don't take this to mean that if you managed to technically avoid saying something exactly like one of the above examples that you are then somehow off the hook.

That all having been said, our goal is to do so in a generally kind and respectful way, and that doesn't mean the moment we see something we don't like that somebody is going to be suspended or banned, either. It just means that at the very least we will probably say something about it, quite possibly snipping out the distracting parts of the post in question while leaving alone the parts that are actually just discussing the topics, and in the event of a repeating or excessive problem, then we will start issuing infractions to try to further discourage further repeat problems, and if it just never seems to improve, then finally suspensions or bans will come into play. We would prefer it never went that far, and most of the time for most of our posters, it won't ever have to.

A slip up every once and a while is pretty normal, but, again, when it becomes repetitive or excessive, something will be done. Something occasional is probably going to be let go (within reason), but when it starts to become habitual or otherwise a pattern, odds are very good that we will step in.

There's always a small minority that like to push people's buttons and/or test their own boundaries with regards to the administrators, and in the case of someone acting like that, please be aware that this is not a court of law, but a private website run by people who are simply trying to do the right thing as they see it. If we feel that you are a special case that needs to be dealt with in an exceptional way because your behavior isn't explicitly mirroring one of our above examples of what we generally discourage, we can and we will take atypical action to prevent this from continuing if you are not cooperative with us.

Also please be aware that you will not be given a pass simply by claiming that you were 'only joking,' because quite honestly, when someone really is just joking, for one thing most people tend to pick up on the joke, including the person or group that is the target of the joke, and for another thing, in the event where an honest joke gets taken seriously and it upsets or angers someone, the person who is truly 'only joking' will quite commonly go out of his / her way to apologize and will try to mend fences. People who are dishonest about their statements being 'jokes' do not do so, and in turn that becomes a clear sign of what is really going on. It's nothing new.

In any case, quite frankly, the overall quality and health of the entire forum's community is more important than any one troublesome user will ever be, regardless of exactly how a problem is exhibiting itself, and if it comes down to us having to make a choice between you versus the greater health and happiness of the entire community, the community of this forum will win every time.

Lastly, there are also some posters, who are generally great contributors and do not otherwise cause any problems, who sometimes feel it's their place to provoke or to otherwise 'mess with' that small minority of people described in the last paragraph, and while we possibly might understand why you might feel you WANT to do something like that, the truth is we can't actually tolerate that kind of behavior from you any more than we can tolerate the behavior from them. So if we feel that you are trying to provoke those other posters into doing or saying something that will get themselves into trouble, then we will start to view you as a problem as well, because of the same reason as before: The overall health of the forum comes first, and trying to stir the pot with someone like that doesn't help, it just makes it worse. Some will simply disagree with this philosophy, but if so, then so be it because ultimately we have to do what we think is best so long as it's up to us.

If you see a problem that we haven't addressed, the best and most appropriate course for a forum member to take here is to look over to the left of the post in question. See underneath that poster's name, avatar, and other info, down where there's a little triangle with an exclamation point (!) in it? Click that. That allows you to report the post to the admins so we can definitely notice it and give it a look to see what we feel we should do about it. Beyond that, obviously it's human nature sometimes to want to speak up to the poster in question who has bothered you, but we would ask that you try to refrain from doing so because quite often what happens is two or more posters all start going back and forth about the original offending post, and suddenly the entire thread is off topic or otherwise derailed. So while the urge to police it yourself is understandable, it's best to just report it to us and let us handle it. Thank you!

All of the above is going to be subject to a case by case basis, but generally and broadly speaking, this should give everyone a pretty good idea of how things will typically / most often be handled.

Rule #2

If the actions of an administrator inspire you to make a comment, criticism, or express a concern about it, there is a wrong place and a couple of right places to do so.

The wrong place is to do so in the original thread in which the administrator took action. For example, if a post gets an infraction, or a post gets deleted, or a comment within a larger post gets clipped out, in a thread discussing Paul George, the wrong thing to do is to distract from the discussion of Paul George by adding your off topic thoughts on what the administrator did.

The right places to do so are:

A) Start a thread about the specific incident you want to talk about on the Feedback board. This way you are able to express yourself in an area that doesn't throw another thread off topic, and this way others can add their two cents as well if they wish, and additionally if there's something that needs to be said by the administrators, that is where they will respond to it.

B) Send a private message to the administrators, and they can respond to you that way.

If this is done the wrong way, those comments will be deleted, and if it's a repeating problem then it may also receive an infraction as well.

Rule #3

If a poster is bothering you, and an administrator has not or will not deal with that poster to the extent that you would prefer, you have a powerful tool at your disposal, one that has recently been upgraded and is now better than ever: The ability to ignore a user.

When you ignore a user, you will unfortunately still see some hints of their existence (nothing we can do about that), however, it does the following key things:

A) Any post they make will be completely invisible as you scroll through a thread.

B) The new addition to this feature: If someone QUOTES a user you are ignoring, you do not have to read who it was, or what that poster said, unless you go out of your way to click on a link to find out who it is and what they said.

To utilize this feature, from any page on Pacers Digest, scroll to the top of the page, look to the top right where it says 'Settings' and click that. From the settings page, look to the left side of the page where it says 'My Settings', and look down from there until you see 'Edit Ignore List' and click that. From here, it will say 'Add a Member to Your List...' Beneath that, click in the text box to the right of 'User Name', type in or copy & paste the username of the poster you are ignoring, and once their name is in the box, look over to the far right and click the 'Okay' button. All done!

Rule #4

Regarding infractions, currently they carry a value of one point each, and that point will expire in 31 days. If at any point a poster is carrying three points at the same time, that poster will be suspended until the oldest of the three points expires.

Rule #5

When you share or paste content or articles from another website, you must include the URL/link back to where you found it, who wrote it, and what website it's from. Said content will be removed if this doesn't happen.

An example:

If I copy and paste an article from the Indianapolis Star website, I would post something like this:

http://www.linktothearticlegoeshere.com/article
Title of the Article
Author's Name
Indianapolis Star

Rule #6

We cannot tolerate illegal videos on Pacers Digest. This means do not share any links to them, do not mention any websites that host them or link to them, do not describe how to find them in any way, and do not ask about them. Posts doing anything of the sort will be removed, the offenders will be contacted privately, and if the problem becomes habitual, you will be suspended, and if it still persists, you will probably be banned.

The legal means of watching or listening to NBA games are NBA League Pass Broadband (for US, or for International; both cost money) and NBA Audio League Pass (which is free). Look for them on NBA.com.

Rule #7

Provocative statements in a signature, or as an avatar, or as the 'tagline' beneath a poster's username (where it says 'Member' or 'Administrator' by default, if it is not altered) are an unwanted distraction that will more than likely be removed on sight. There can be shades of gray to this, but in general this could be something political or religious that is likely going to provoke or upset people, or otherwise something that is mean-spirited at the expense of a poster, a group of people, or a population.

It may or may not go without saying, but this goes for threads and posts as well, particularly when it's not made on the off-topic board (Market Square).

We do make exceptions if we feel the content is both innocuous and unlikely to cause social problems on the forum (such as wishing someone a Merry Christmas or a Happy Easter), and we also also make exceptions if such topics come up with regards to a sports figure (such as the Lance Stephenson situation bringing up discussions of domestic abuse and the law, or when Jason Collins came out as gay and how that lead to some discussion about gay rights).

However, once the discussion seems to be more/mostly about the political issues instead of the sports figure or his specific situation, the thread is usually closed.

Rule #8

We prefer self-restraint and/or modesty when making jokes or off topic comments in a sports discussion thread. They can be fun, but sometimes they derail or distract from a topic, and we don't want to see that happen. If we feel it is a problem, we will either delete or move those posts from the thread.

Rule #9

Generally speaking, we try to be a "PG-13" rated board, and we don't want to see sexual content or similarly suggestive content. Vulgarity is a more muddled issue, though again we prefer things to lean more towards "PG-13" than "R". If we feel things have gone too far, we will step in.

Rule #10

We like small signatures, not big signatures. The bigger the signature, the more likely it is an annoying or distracting signature.

Rule #11

Do not advertise anything without talking about it with the administrators first. This includes advertising with your signature, with your avatar, through private messaging, and/or by making a thread or post.
See more
See less

Luck vs. RG3

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #76
    Re: Luck vs. RG3

    Biggest problem with Luck is that in some games he did not perform as well against pressure, specifically during blitzes. This did not happen all of the time, but it is the main area that I think he needs to work on to become an elite NFL QB.
    Why so SERIOUS

    Comment


    • #77
      Re: Luck vs. RG3

      Originally posted by aamcguy View Post
      Everytime I get concerned that the Colts won't take RG3 and we'll miss out... I go watch some Andrew Luck highlights. I see his aggressive dropback. I see how decides to throw the ball very quickly, with confidence. I see his comfort and control in the pocket. I see him outrun linemen and linebackers seemingly with ease. I see him run absolutely nasty play-action fakes and bootlegs. I see he is built like a tank.

      Griffin certainly is more athletic. He can certainly make all of the throws. But for me, he spends too much time with the ball thinking about what to do. Luck looks decisive.

      Oh, and then i watch the play where Luck levels the USC db hahaha
      I would be concerned if the Colts take RG3. He played in a kindergarten type system called the spread offense that shows the mismatch before every snap. He has basically easy throws to make time and again. He wont have those easy throws all the time in the NFL.
      Talent is not what separates the NFL QB's anyway. It is heart and brains. Luck has both. He has proven it. RG3 hasnt. Not saying he cant. He just has not done it.

      Comment


      • #78
        Re: Luck vs. RG3

        Originally posted by vapacersfan View Post
        None of that has anything to do with them sucking (I guess sucking all year is good business?) to have the number 1 pick. Which is the claim you made comparing them to the Redskins in the 1 versus 2 pick debate.

        Not that it matters....
        Really? You are taking things out of context. Stop.

        Comment


        • #79
          Re: Luck vs. RG3

          Originally posted by Jessen View Post
          Really? You are taking things out of context. Stop.
          Really?

          He said "The Colts have the one pick, the redskins have the two. Indy will get to choose an arguably better QB without giving up a single pick. That's good business there."


          I literally just copy and pasted from his last post....so no, I am not taking things out of context....so there is nothing for me to stop.................

          Comment


          • #80
            Re: Luck vs. RG3

            Originally posted by Really? View Post
            Biggest problem with Luck is that in some games he did not perform as well against pressure, specifically during blitzes. This did not happen all of the time, but it is the main area that I think he needs to work on to become an elite NFL QB.
            This is one of those things it would be great to have Saturday around for. At least he will have Wayne and Collie to help him out.
            Time for a new sig.

            Comment


            • #81
              Re: Luck vs. RG3

              Originally posted by troyc11a View Post
              I would be concerned if the Colts take RG3. He played in a kindergarten type system called the spread offense that shows the mismatch before every snap. He has basically easy throws to make time and again. He wont have those easy throws all the time in the NFL.
              Talent is not what separates the NFL QB's anyway. It is heart and brains. Luck has both. He has proven it. RG3 hasnt. Not saying he cant. He just has not done it.
              And just what has Luck done to "prove" that he has these qualities more than RGlll?
              Last edited by CreekShow; 03-29-2012, 03:11 PM.
              I Bleed Blue

              Comment


              • #82
                Re: Luck vs. RG3

                Originally posted by vapacersfan View Post
                Really?

                He said "The Colts have the one pick, the redskins have the two. Indy will get to choose an arguably better QB without giving up a single pick. That's good business there."


                I literally just copy and pasted from his last post....so no, I am not taking things out of context....so there is nothing for me to stop.................
                You're also focusing on 1 lil tidbit and continuing to rail on it, lol.... I think at this point you're just arguing for the sake of arguing. That point was hardly the most important one I was trying to get across, so let's move on.
                There are two types of quarterbacks in the league: Those whom over time, the league figures out ... and those who figure out the league.

                Comment


                • #83
                  Re: Luck vs. RG3

                  Originally posted by CreekShow View Post
                  And just what has Luck done to "prove" that he has these qualities more than RGlll?
                  I dunno, can you not just watch/observe someone and do an internal A/B comparison and come to that conclusion? Or do we gotta provide stats?
                  Last edited by Kid Minneapolis; 03-29-2012, 05:25 PM.
                  There are two types of quarterbacks in the league: Those whom over time, the league figures out ... and those who figure out the league.

                  Comment


                  • #84
                    Re: Luck vs. RG3

                    Originally posted by CreekShow View Post
                    And just what has Luck done to "prove" that he has these qualities more than RGlll?
                    Both have heart and brains but only one is NFL ready.

                    Here is a point from one sport writer that makes sense and has been expressed on PD multiple time.

                    Former NFL GM and CBSSports.com’s analyst Pat Kirwin forced me to watch some tape with him at the 2012 NFL combine this past weekend in Indianapolis. Pat wanted to see Luck and Griffin compete when both faced Oklahoma State. The idea is to compare apples to apples against a common opponent. It's a good way to gauge how each quarterback reacted, diagnosed reads against the same coverage’s and blitzes, what both were asked to do within their offensive game plan and how each player executed their game plan for an overall performance evaluation against Oklahoma State’s defense. Yes, it is only one game, but the offense of the Baylor Bears is vastly different than the Stanford Cardinal.

                    Luck easily moved in and out of all personnel groupings, from regular, heavy sets, thee wides, four wides and empty sets. Stanford also utilized many unbalanced sets where you overload the defense to one side. It was pretty easy to discern that Luck is comfortable from underneath the center or from shotgun calling protections, audibles, checks, and signaling routes to take advantage of coverage. Luck moves through his reads, in a progression system quickly, and many times went to his third option. It was actually scary watching some of Luck’s mannerisms because they were eerily similar to watching Peyton Manning perform.

                    Location and accuracy of his throws were impressive as I only documented one forced throw, which was intercepted. Luck does not have a stellar cast at receiver who separate and many times his tight end Coby Fleener, who many consider a top tight end prospect, was not even in the game. Luck is strong and hard to bring down like a Ben Roethlisberger. Oklahoma State defenders could be hanging on Luck or hitting him and he could still deliver the ball accurately.

                    Griffin’s offense is much more limited in terms of sets and spread option attacks often do not have a true wide receiver route tree. I thought it to be more concerning after interviewing Baylor's Kendall Wright, who is a top wide receiver prospect in this year’s draft, who said “we don’t have conversion routes in our offense or use a route tree.” A conversion route is a wide receiver route that adjusts depending on the coverage presented by the defense. An example would be a 12 yard out route called to a wide receiver in the huddle designed to attack off coverage. It will convert to a fade route/go route with an outside release versus a rolled up corner.

                    Therein lies the problem evaluating RGIII. Basically, there are no progression reads to evaluate. Everything is a “bubble screen or wide receiver screen” specifically called to one specific guy. I saw a two-man “smash route” principle where Griffin has to high/low the corner with his progression but that was about it. Worse yet, was Griffin threw a horrible interception in the red zone on a “pop pass.” Griffin’s lone designated receiver was covered and he still threw the ball leading to loss of points for the Bears' and an interception in the end zone.
                    http://www.csnchicago.com/blog/bears...3602659600-914
                    Luck was 67 out 69 in scoring in the red zone and only 2 misses were FG's. Thats really impressive and his TD to FG ratio is also very high.

                    Luck is ready RG3 isn't and more importantly the Colts don't have what RG3 needs. Two really good TE's and good bubble screen WR (Garcon) who can also run deep post routes.

                    Comment


                    • #85
                      Re: Luck vs. RG3

                      Originally posted by aamcguy View Post
                      This is one of those things it would be great to have Saturday around for. At least he will have Wayne and Collie to help him out.
                      Yup and Addai..
                      Why so SERIOUS

                      Comment


                      • #86
                        Re: Luck vs. RG3

                        Originally posted by Kid Minneapolis View Post
                        You're also focusing on 1 lil tidbit and continuing to rail on it, lol.... I think at this point you're just arguing for the sake of arguing. That point was hardly the most important one I was trying to get across, so let's move on.
                        I mean, I didn't see it as a little tid-but, but when comparing the two franchises if you want to ignore that then I will say lets just ignore all of last season, and the years the Colts won the SB as well

                        I kind of took that as the big important point you were trying to get across, but in the famous words on Sass....I mean Earl "lets please move on"

                        Comment


                        • #87
                          Re: Luck vs. RG3

                          Wonder if a lot of people here would knock RG3 if he was coming out another year, not the same year as a guy like Andrew Luck.

                          You can always find reporters who will take all diffrent sides to a story, but the majority of what I have read has said Luck in a franchise QB for the decaces, while Giffin is amazing QB who would probably be a #1 pick and a great one at that, but he just happens to be behind Luck.

                          I only watch Notre Dame football....and then a few other games throughout the year, but IMO both have the tools to succeed. It will come down to who is around them and who is given a chance to learn a little bit (though I bet both are thrown to the wolves)

                          Comment


                          • #88
                            Re: Luck vs. RG3

                            Originally posted by vapacersfan View Post
                            ............... Luck is a franchise QB for the decaces, while Giffin is amazing QB who would probably be a #1 pick and a great one at that, but he just happens to be behind Luck.
                            That's pretty much it. Luck is supposed to be the best (some say better) coming out of college since Peyton. RGIII is more of a Michael Vick, Steve Young, Andre Ware (who ?? - exactly) type QB. Some scramblers/runners convert to the NFL well, some don't. He sure will be fun to watch while he's trying to figure it out - and the NFL is trying to figure him out.

                            Comment


                            • #89
                              Re: Luck vs. RG3

                              Originally posted by PacerDude View Post
                              That's pretty much it. Luck is supposed to be the best (some say better) coming out of college since Peyton. RGIII is more of a Michael Vick, Steve Young, Andre Ware (who ?? - exactly) type QB. Some scramblers/runners convert to the NFL well, some don't. He sure will be fun to watch while he's trying to figure it out - and the NFL is trying to figure him out.
                              I would argue that Luck looks quite a bit better than Manning coming out of college. And that is saying a LOT. I absolutely love what Manning became in his career. Huge Manning fan.

                              Manning wasn't necessarily a once-in-a-generation QB when he came out. I still felt Manning was better than Leaf... the similarities to Leaf and RG3 aren't that far off, tbo, but don't let the RG3 fans hear that. But Manning wasn't Elway. He was very highly regarded, but had arm-strength concerns, happy feet, and "couldn't win the big one". He was also fairly immobile. He had flaws.

                              With Luck.... man you REALLY gotta nit-pick to find any flaws in his game. He can do it all. Everyone says he's the best since Manning --- I say the best since Elway. Even then, there's things that Luck does that Elway couldn't do. Elway had the cannon advantage...
                              There are two types of quarterbacks in the league: Those whom over time, the league figures out ... and those who figure out the league.

                              Comment


                              • #90
                                Re: Luck vs. RG3

                                Originally posted by Gamble1 View Post
                                Both have heart and brains but only one is NFL ready.

                                Here is a point from one sport writer that makes sense and has been expressed on PD multiple time.

                                Former NFL GM and CBSSports.com’s analyst Pat Kirwin forced me to watch some tape with him at the 2012 NFL combine this past weekend in Indianapolis. Pat wanted to see Luck and Griffin compete when both faced Oklahoma State. The idea is to compare apples to apples against a common opponent. It's a good way to gauge how each quarterback reacted, diagnosed reads against the same coverage’s and blitzes, what both were asked to do within their offensive game plan and how each player executed their game plan for an overall performance evaluation against Oklahoma State’s defense. Yes, it is only one game, but the offense of the Baylor Bears is vastly different than the Stanford Cardinal.

                                Luck easily moved in and out of all personnel groupings, from regular, heavy sets, thee wides, four wides and empty sets. Stanford also utilized many unbalanced sets where you overload the defense to one side. It was pretty easy to discern that Luck is comfortable from underneath the center or from shotgun calling protections, audibles, checks, and signaling routes to take advantage of coverage. Luck moves through his reads, in a progression system quickly, and many times went to his third option. It was actually scary watching some of Luck’s mannerisms because they were eerily similar to watching Peyton Manning perform.

                                Location and accuracy of his throws were impressive as I only documented one forced throw, which was intercepted. Luck does not have a stellar cast at receiver who separate and many times his tight end Coby Fleener, who many consider a top tight end prospect, was not even in the game. Luck is strong and hard to bring down like a Ben Roethlisberger. Oklahoma State defenders could be hanging on Luck or hitting him and he could still deliver the ball accurately.

                                Griffin’s offense is much more limited in terms of sets and spread option attacks often do not have a true wide receiver route tree. I thought it to be more concerning after interviewing Baylor's Kendall Wright, who is a top wide receiver prospect in this year’s draft, who said “we don’t have conversion routes in our offense or use a route tree.” A conversion route is a wide receiver route that adjusts depending on the coverage presented by the defense. An example would be a 12 yard out route called to a wide receiver in the huddle designed to attack off coverage. It will convert to a fade route/go route with an outside release versus a rolled up corner.

                                Therein lies the problem evaluating RGIII. Basically, there are no progression reads to evaluate. Everything is a “bubble screen or wide receiver screen” specifically called to one specific guy. I saw a two-man “smash route” principle where Griffin has to high/low the corner with his progression but that was about it. Worse yet, was Griffin threw a horrible interception in the red zone on a “pop pass.” Griffin’s lone designated receiver was covered and he still threw the ball leading to loss of points for the Bears' and an interception in the end zone.
                                http://www.csnchicago.com/blog/bears...3602659600-914
                                Luck was 67 out 69 in scoring in the red zone and only 2 misses were FG's. Thats really impressive and his TD to FG ratio is also very high.

                                Luck is ready RG3 isn't and more importantly the Colts don't have what RG3 needs. Two really good TE's and good bubble screen WR (Garcon) who can also run deep post routes.
                                Excellent quote, and exactly what I've seen and also what I've read. Shows exactly why Luck is so far ahead of RG3. When you break it down and don't get enamored with the stats and flashy plays... Luck truly has mastered his craft and has some incredible tools. RG3 has some... fool's gold about him. I still don't think he's a bad prospect, but I think his combine and pro day have sky-rocketed his value... and he's gonna get exposed in the NFL to some degree... what degree that is, I'm not sure.... he may overcome it... We just gotta wait and see. But Luck truly is pro-ready. Everything he does, it's like he's running an NFL offense. He sets up the offense, reads the defense like Manning.... has the strength of Roethlisberger to shrug off defenders.... the mobility of Aaron Rodgers... can make every throw in the book, put different touches on the ball.... not to mention an excellent demeanor.

                                Really really special.
                                There are two types of quarterbacks in the league: Those whom over time, the league figures out ... and those who figure out the league.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X