Or maybe you have an addiction you need help with? It's "pre" season, do you bet on a coin flip, too?

If you give me odds of over 2.0 I will bet on a coin flip sure.

---

Lol @ people downplaying the significance of Andrew luck. Its blasphemy you all even mention him in the same breath as Tannehill. Once they get luck some receiver help, Luck's numbers will blow up I'd imagine. 

 

Tannehill is a decent QB but Luck can win games by himself. This year you all will see the disparity between the two grow stats wise.

---

Lol @ people downplaying the significance of Andrew luck. Its blasphemy you all even mention him in the same breath as Tannehill. Once they get luck some receiver help, Luck's numbers will blow up I'd imagine. 

 

Tannehill is a decent QB but Luck can win games by himself. This year you all will see the disparity between the two grow stats wise.

 

The citing of Tannehill in this thread by Achilles was embarrassing, even for him. 

---

Lol @ people downplaying the significance of Andrew luck. Its blasphemy you all even mention him in the same breath as Tannehill
. Once they get luck some receiver help, Luck's numbers will blow up I'd imagine. 

 

Tannehill is a decent QB but Luck can win games by himself. This year you all will see the disparity between the two grow stats wise.

 

Forgive me Goodell, for I have sinned.

---

Lol @ people downplaying the significance of Andrew luck. Its blasphemy you all even mention him in the same breath as Tannehill. Once they get luck some receiver help, Luck's numbers will blow up I'd imagine.


Tannehill is a decent QB but Luck can win games by himself. This year you all will see the disparity between the two grow stats wise.

OK so again, I know you guys are all clairvoyant but all we can do is speculate. You and TMD both, I'm willing to do some sort of avatar bet or no post bet based on the tannehill vs luck debate.


I predict they will have similar stats this season. We can take a look around week 5 and 6 and see who was right.


If luck is so head and shoulders better, then it should be no contest.


So go ahead and come up with something and put up or shut up. Running your mouth with baseless facts and calling things blasphemy even though they're reality looks really stupid to those with their blinders off.

---

Coughlin when asked if winning will be a focus: "What the hell else is there? This is nice and dandy, but winning is what all this is about."

OK so again, I know you guys are all clairvoyant but all we can do is speculate. You and TMD both, I'm willing to do some sort of avatar bet or no post bet based on the tannehill vs luck debate.


I predict they will have similar stats this season. We can take a look around week 5 and 6 and see who was right.


If luck is so head and shoulders better, then it should be no contest.


So go ahead and come up with something and put up or shut up. Running your mouth with baseless facts and calling things blasphemy even though they're reality looks really stupid to those with their blinders off.

I think you should probably define 'head and shoulders better'.

 

Maybe:


3/5 of these stats after 6 games:


130+ More yards

2+ more touchdowns

2 fewer Interceptions or better

3+ % completion percentage better

6+ Quarterback Rating (NOT QBR)

---

I was wrong about Trent Baalke. 

I think you should probably define 'head and shoulders better'.


Maybe:


3/5 of these stats after 6 games:


130+ More yards

2+ more touchdowns

2 fewer Interceptions or better

3+ % completion percentage better

6+ Quarterback Rating (NOT QBR)

Youre right.


Completion percentage within 4% difference.


TD to into ratio within .4


And QB rating within 5 pts of each other.


If he surpasses tannehill in 2/3 of those marks for the season, then you guys are right and I'm wrong.

---

Coughlin when asked if winning will be a focus: "What the hell else is there? This is nice and dandy, but winning is what all this is about."

Numbers never lie unless you're Andrew Luck

---

Lol @ people downplaying the significance of Andrew luck. Its blasphemy you all even mention him in the same breath as Tannehill. Once they get luck some receiver help, Luck's numbers will blow up I'd imagine. 

 

Tannehill is a decent QB but Luck can win games by himself. This year you all will see the disparity between the two grow stats wise.

 

 

I think the Receivers aren't going to be the biggest  problem. The offensive line has been offensive so far the last couple seasons.

---

Luck needs more help than 3 1000 yard receivers and those great tight ends Colts Warriors tells us about?

---

Luck needs more help than 3 1000 yard receivers and those great tight ends Colts Warriors tells us about?

 

 

You do realize Bortles needs successful receivers, and receivers need a successful Bortles. Right?

 

If Gabbert could have had Rice, Moss, and Harrison .... finish the sentence.   

---

You do realize Bortles needs successful receivers, and receivers need a successful Bortles. Right?

 

If Gabbert could have had Rice, Moss, and Harrison .... finish the sentence.   

 

So you are saying the Colts great receivers are let down by their QB play?

 

Christ, don't let CW hear this trolling

---

Luck needs more help than 3 1000 yard receivers and those great tight ends Colts Warriors tells us about?

 

Did I ever say Luck needed anymore help?

 

Do you always pair questions to people when it doesn't pertain to them?

---

If Gabbert could have had Rice, Moss, and Harrison ....none of them would have ever made a pro-bowl.   

---

I was wrong about Trent Baalke. 

Did I ever say Luck needed anymore help?


Do you always pair questions to people when it doesn't pertain to them?

Yep. Well it seems you 2 homers disagree on something

---

Yep. Well it seems you 2 homers disagree on something

 

What?

---

The talent at receiver?


Not sure why I'm bickering. I'm pretty sure as soon as we unleash our qb we will be the best team in the AFC south and you guys will find out what it was like for us in the polian/manning years...

---

 

 

If Gabbert could have had Rice, Moss, and Harrison .... finish the sentence.   

 

....he might go from the worst QB of all time to a Garrard level QB. 

---

....he might go from the worst QB of all time to a Garrard level QB.

So neither your or basshunter wants to take the bet?


It's so blasphemous, should be an easy win for both of you right? Orrrrr you guys just gonna sit on your high horse spouting inaccuracies?

---

Coughlin when asked if winning will be a focus: "What the hell else is there? This is nice and dandy, but winning is what all this is about."

I don't think Luck is an average QB but I definitely don't think he's performed up to his hype. Whenever I watch him I see an above average QB with a good deep ball and athleticism. He doesn't scream HOFer to me, and I still think that if Bortles (or even RG3 for the matter) can attain his full potential he will at the very least be Luck's equal.

---

"Let us not become conceited, provoking and envying each other." Galatians 5:26

2015 NFL Draft - Analyzing Targets www.jungle.jaguars.com/index.php?/topic/7892-2015-nfl-draft-analyzing-targets/