I don't get the hype here.  Bortles disappoints me.  He looks not very good.

 

 

It's true that Luck doesn't have a lot, but Peyton had comparable levels of talent and won with that team.  Luck isn't as good as Peyton and IMO, won't ever be.  He isn't capable of putting the team on his back, and when the division toughens up, the Colts will just be the second place team methinks.

 

What concerns me about Luck is his decision making and accuracy, I've watched a lot of Colts games this year and for a guy that graduated from Stanford in 3 years he struggles with his pre-snap reads, and it's consistent. This was apparent last week against the Bengals where he was unable to identify the blitz and threw into double and sometimes triple coverage on several occasions, If you look at the box score you'd think he had a good game, however most of those stats accumulated when the Bengals went to a prevent defense because they were up by 3 scores.



 

His career completion percentage is a hair over 56%, that's not good in today's NFL, especially considering his career YPA is 6.85, so it's not like his completion percentage is a product of him attempting low percentage throws downfield. I believe Luck will be a good QB for a very long time, but I don't see the "once in generation prospect" he was tabbed to be.

---

sounds like you have yourself a little problem there...

 

and I still stand by everything I said about Manning. Great QB do make those around them better. But they have to have some sort of good pieces on offense already. Which Peyton did, and which Luck does not. 

tbh i have to agree with you on luck though

brady may have had no receivers early on but he had a run game and the pats have over the last few years been a run run pass team helped by the fact that if you commit to the run brady will smash you

 

manning now has no oline but he has such a multitude of receivers to hit you will find one to hit

i mean take the 2009 colts a very good colts team pierre garcon reggie wayne dallas clarke that is quite a trio

 

luck right now has ty hilton and cobie fleener, thats about it his line cant keep him on his feet

and when they do his receivers drop it  plus his run game is eratic at best especially with t rich being a 3 yards per carry donkey

 

i think most qbs would struggle with that

---

Yes, that happens where theres no decent weapons on offense around you.

I always find it interesting that these are 'reasons' for some players and 'excuses' for others.

---

I always find it interesting that these are 'reasons' for some players and 'excuses' for others.

 

Give me an example of a QB that I am not giving the same benefit as I am for Andrew Luck. 

---

 

The Jaguars are in the process of building a contender.  QB is important, but it's not so important that we need to sacrifice.  There are many positions that still need to be addressed.  I'm just kinda getting bored of the MB drooling over the recent crop of QB's that are slated to be selected this year in the upcoming draft.  I'd much rather we focus on getting our O-Line and D-Line set up, QB will fall into position via the GM evaluation.

 

With that said, watching Mccarron against Auburn made me realize that there can be many QBs that have potential in this up coming draft.  If we select a read option QB, I'll be very skeptical.  I prefer a QB that sits in the pocket, makes his progression reads, and is accurate.  

 

I''m a old school football fan.  I find all this running QB non-sense to be short-sighted.

 (emphasis added)

 

I disagree with the sentiments expressed in the bold text.  Aside from the fact it represents a false either-or proposition (because there is no reason we can't bolster the lines and get a QB in the same draft), I think a QB is of utmost importance.

 

However, we are in complete agreement regarding the underlined text.  Mobility in a QB is nice to have, but it is useless without the ability to function effectively from within the pocket.

---

 

Worst to 1st.  Curse Reversed!

NOTHING changed.  What changed was the rhetoric.  Thank you for pointing this out.  I've been reading so many posters backtracking on QBs, what you just wrote points out the flaw in hinging all hope of one QB as "elite".

 

I've heard people speaking about Eli, Big Ben, Rivers, etc as elite QBs.  There are only 3 Elite QBs in the league.  

 

Just wondering:  which of Manning, Brady, Rodgers and Brees did you leave out?

---

Just wondering:  which of Manning, Brady, Rodgers and Brees did you leave out?

I would like to know this too. lol

---

Not really a surprise. This QB class is very deep of day 2 prospects.  

---

This is exactly what I, pirkster, and a small minority of other posters on this bored have been stressing all along. Our point has always been that "you don't reach for a QB just because he is a QB, especially when there are many other holes on our team and other elite prospects".

 

I can't count how many times I've heard "you take the QB every time" and "DEs don't take you to the Super Bowl", etc. etc. There have been enough top 5 QB flameouts recently to justify going a different route (Barr, Clowney, etc.). That being said, there are people who get paid a lot of money to make these decisions and if they feel confident with one of the QBs available at 5, I have no problem with it.

---