Well nice to see the head is still in the sand Sammy. It felt like we would never beat you when Manning was your qb. With luck there is no fear in fact we probably find him the easiest to defend qb in the division.

6 quarters and still no points...

---

Well nice to see the head is still in the sand Sammy. It felt like we would never beat you when Manning was your qb. With luck there is no fear in fact we probably find him the easiest to defend qb in the division.

6 quarters and still no points...

True, Manning never would have let you finally win a AFCS division title. You can thank Chuck Pagano for that. Titans did their part ... as always.

---

What does Reggie have to do with this discussion?  Is your debating technique solely to talk in circles until the other poster gives up?     You used Ebron in your debate to prop up Bortles by comparing the lack of talent he had to work with at the TE position.  I pointed out Ebron was just a guy before playing with Luck, and didn’t think your use of Ebron supported your argument like you believed it had.  A good QB gets more out of the supporting cast around him than a mediocre QB does. Pretty simple observation if you ask me.

Ebron would still be the best TE on the jags roster. He also has a similar amount of yards as he had in Detroit just was more of a redzone target. 

Well by your theory Bortles made Allen Robinson and Allen Hurns obviously must be superior to Dak and Trubisky...

Which is funny because Trubisky is already better than Luck and Bortles

I take it you haven't actually watched Trubisky much then have you

---

Ebron would still be the best TE on the jags roster. He also has a similar amount of yards as he had in Detroit just was more of a redzone target. 

Well by your theory Bortles made Allen Robinson and Allen Hurns obviously must be superior to Dak and Trubisky...

Which is funny because Trubisky is already better than Luck and Bortles

I take it you haven't actually watched Trubisky much then have you

I will defer to you and your analysis it's always bang on... Low ints = good qb play like Tyrod even if no plays are made.

I know he's not a media favourite which is why you won't be a fan. He's not exactly surrounded by stars either

---

lastonealive, have you heard about that kid Andrew Luck being a pretty good Quarterback?

---

I take it you haven't actually watched Trubisky much then have you

I will defer to you and your analysis it's always bang on... Low ints = good qb play like Tyrod even if no plays are made.

I know he's not a media favourite which is why you won't be a fan. He's not exactly surrounded by stars either

You are aware that the media was a lot higher on Trubisky than Watson/Mahomes right? I didn't rate Trubisky much and preferred the other two. 

Eh yeah Trubisky has a really strong supporting cast. Great line, good Wrs, 2 above average backs, above average TE etc etc He played fine for his 2nd year in the league, just not as good as Luck did. The Bears offense as a whole was average with Mitch.

---

I will defer to you and your analysis it's always bang on... Low ints = good qb play like Tyrod even if no plays are made.

I know he's not a media favourite which is why you won't be a fan. He's not exactly surrounded by stars either

You are aware that the media was a lot higher on Trubisky than Watson/Mahomes right? I didn't rate Trubisky much and preferred the other two. 

Eh yeah Trubisky has a really strong supporting cast. Great line, good Wrs, 2 above average backs, above average TE etc etc He played fine for his 2nd year in the league, just not as good as Luck did. The Bears offense as a whole was average with Mitch.

I was a bit surprised he picked Trubisky to hang his hat on. I don't watch a lot of Bears games, so I considered that fact to be my lack of knowledge, and not just his lack of perception. Is Trubisky considered in the top 10 by those that work in the business? Or is this nothing more than a opinion of another over zealous fan trying to spin a debate in their favor? He is really good at doing that.

But, I still love him. Bless his little dark Luck hating heart.

---

You are aware that the media was a lot higher on Trubisky than Watson/Mahomes right? I didn't rate Trubisky much and preferred the other two. 

Eh yeah Trubisky has a really strong supporting cast. Great line, good Wrs, 2 above average backs, above average TE etc etc He played fine for his 2nd year in the league, just not as good as Luck did. The Bears offense as a whole was average with Mitch.

I was a bit surprised he picked Trubisky to hang his hat on. I don't watch a lot of Bears games, so I considered that fact to be my lack of knowledge, and not just his lack of perception. Is Trubisky considered in the top 10 by those that work in the business? Or is this nothing more than a opinion of another over zealous fan trying to spin a debate in their favor? He is really good at doing that.

But, I still love him. Bless his little dark Luck hating heart.

You see this all stems from a thread where he claimed that Bortles is "the top dog in the AFC South" over Luck and Watson. Even though that has been proven woefully incorrect he bashes Luck as he thinks if makes Bortles less bad.   

Trubisky had a monster 6 TD game Vs the Bucs awful defense but for the most part he was average at very best this year.

---

Trubisky is nothing special, he is just a better version of bortles than bortles.

---

I was a bit surprised he picked Trubisky to hang his hat on. I don't watch a lot of Bears games, so I considered that fact to be my lack of knowledge, and not just his lack of perception. Is Trubisky considered in the top 10 by those that work in the business? Or is this nothing more than a opinion of another over zealous fan trying to spin a debate in their favor? He is really good at doing that.

But, I still love him. Bless his little dark Luck hating heart.

You see this all stems from a thread where he claimed that Bortles is "the top dog in the AFC South" over Luck and Watson. Even though that has been proven woefully incorrect he bashes Luck as he thinks if makes Bortles less bad.   

Trubisky had a monster 6 TD game Vs the Bucs awful defense but for the most part he was average at very best this year.

I've been bashing luck since before Bortles was drafted. But thanks for the innacuracy.

Luck and Watson are overrated by the media no matter how good or bad bortles plays.

When I stated bortles was playing the best, he was. Then the oline died. Sure I wouldn't mind luck or Watson instead but luck isn't worth his contract and Watson will be horrendously overpaid too unless he turns into Mariota who everyone was hyping previously.

---

You see this all stems from a thread where he claimed that Bortles is "the top dog in the AFC South" over Luck and Watson. Even though that has been proven woefully incorrect he bashes Luck as he thinks if makes Bortles less bad.   

Trubisky had a monster 6 TD game Vs the Bucs awful defense but for the most part he was average at very best this year.

I've been bashing luck since before Bortles was drafted. But thanks for the innacuracy.

Luck and Watson are overrated by the media no matter how good or bad bortles plays.

When I stated bortles was playing the best, he was. Then the oline died. Sure I wouldn't mind luck or Watson instead but luck isn't worth his contract and Watson will be horrendously overpaid too unless he turns into Mariota who everyone was hyping previously.

What's the most you'd pay Andrew Luck per year?

---

Whatever the median price for a starting qb is these days. It's not like he's played well in playoffs or even made it there with regularity since he started losing polians stars.

Cutting Manning has been a disaster in hindsight for the colts as freeney recently said.

Glad we didn't give up picks and a Mega deal for Tyrod? Or you still on that bandwagon?

---

Whatever the median price for a starting qb is these days. It's not like he's played well in playoffs or even made it there with regularity since he started losing polians stars.

Cutting Manning has been a disaster in hindsight for the colts as freeney recently said.

Glad we didn't give up picks and a Mega deal for Tyrod? Or you still on that bandwagon?

 Median contract for non rookie contract starting QBs is around 22 million per year. Luck is on 24.   

The bandwagon of Tyrod being better than Bortles? Yes I am. I'd be happy to have him on the roster instead of Blake once he's a FA

---

Who said non rookie. I said median for a starting qb.

However that is just further proof we are probably better off with a rookie deal qb.

He was benched after two games for being terrible. So would you still give him the mega deal or were you wrong?

---

Who said non rookie. I said median for a starting qb.

However that is just further proof we are probably better off with a rookie deal qb.

He was benched after two games for being terrible. So would you still give him the mega deal or were you wrong?

Non rookie contract*. Because it's not really an accurate measure of what you'd have to pay a vet QB like Luck. I'd say the median including rookie contracts would be like 15 million.  

I'm not gonna be too harsh on Tyrod after not doing anything with the Browns. I know you tend to get very defensive in these threads when I bring up your old takes but what's this about a Tyrod mega deal?

---

OK I would pay Luck in the range of an Andy Dalton. Similar age skills etc if that makes you happy.

Not defensive at all. I'm happy to acknowledge that Blake regressed after the first quarter of season but my take was right at the time. I also believe Watson would have been poor in those circumstances as Luck was his 4th year with a poor oline. Blake just toughed it out a bit better so isn't allowed the injury excuse.

---

OK I would pay Luck in the range of an Andy Dalton. Similar age skills etc if that makes you happy.

Not defensive at all. I'm happy to acknowledge that Blake regressed after the first quarter of season but my take was right at the time. I also believe Watson would have been poor in those circumstances as Luck was his 4th year with a poor oline. Blake just toughed it out a bit better so isn't allowed the injury excuse.

I think you'll find 95% of NFL fans would disagree with you on that.   

Your take was incorrect when you made it , and it remains incorrect today. Watson has had one of the worst offensive lines in football the last two years and has still been far better than Blake. So the oline being an excuse for Blakes poor play doesn't fly in comparison to Watson.  

He's a bad QB who had bad situations that compounded his poor play. That's probably the fairest assessment anyone could give of Blake.

---

What's the most you'd pay Andrew Luck per year?

If you ask a fool a question, you will get a foolish answer. His hatred for Luck doesn't allow him to provide an unbiased answer. I've been there myself ... when I was a kid.

---

Not at all he's a solid starting qb and seems like a good guy.

He is just immune to criticism and hasn't lived up to his hype whatsoever particularly in big games.

Sam Bradford is another one where general consensus was way above his play and excuses constantly made when underperforming.

---

Not at all he's a solid starting qb and seems like a good guy.

He is just immune to criticism and hasn't lived up to his hype whatsoever particularly in big games.

Sam Bradford is another one where general consensus was way above his play and excuses constantly made when underperforming.

Sam Bradford? The guy people have been making fun of years for making so much money while not being good?  

Yeah I agree the media has been too soft on Lucks playoff games but also a lot of that is because he dragged those teams there despite serious flaws and lack of talent.

---