We are wasting a roster spot on #5

  1. You have chosen to ignore posts from zbellino. Show zbellino's posts

    Re: We are wasting a roster spot on #5

    In response to BabeParilli's comment:

    In response to zbellino's comment:

    [QUOTE]

     

    In response to BabeParilli's comment:

     

    [QUOTE]

     

     

    In response to zbellino's comment:

     

     

    [QUOTE]

     

     

     

     

    What are you Rusty?

    There is no anti-Tebow conspiracy. 

     

     

     

     



    I never said there was a conspiracy. Much of the NFL and many of the fans are tools who go into drama queen mode based on certain imagined things. No conspiracy there, just stupidity.

     

     

     

    Very much like when all the NFL and fan experts said Moss was washed up when BB brought him in from Oakland; No conspiracy, just stupidity.

     

     

     

     

     

    [/QUOTE]

    What imagined things are those? All the NFL people didn't say Moss was washed up. Some did. Moss also stuck with the first team that signed him. 

     

     

    Just because Tebow cannot play quarterback very well doesn't mean he was "blackballed" [again your words]. He couldn't win reps. That is all. No conspiracy. Someone gave him a shot. They gave him time on the field. They gave him second team reps. 

    He didn't get the offense. 

    Why is that a "drama-queen" thing?

    Tebow is a bad QB. That is all. You are way over thinking this. Are you Gators fan or something?

     

    [/QUOTE]


    There were plenty of NFL people who claimed Moss was washed up. Obviously not all thought that, because BB traded for him.

     

    Who gave Tebow a "shot"? Elway, LMAO? Rexy? Please. The jets were a circus clinging to their idiotic draft pick Sanchez.

    The only "shot" Tebow has had was in 2011, and all he did was have 6 game winning drives in 11 starts for Denver and win a playoff game for them in OT against the Steelers.

    I'm not a big college football fan, but I root for the Fighting Irish.

    I'm not necessarily a Tebow fan, nor do I project him as a successful NFL QB. I don't know what he is capable of. I just feel he has gotten a raw deal based on a spurious "eye test" and religious bigotry. I just don't like it when guys get written off based on BS rather than facts.

    [/QUOTE]

    But he was given a shot. 

    You are claiming he wasn't with literally zero evidence to the contrary other than to say he was "ill treated" or "black-balled" or something like that. 

    What evidence, hard evidence, is there that he wasn't given a shot. Was he not allowed to practice? Was he not given reps with the team?

    His defense, well, when Manning arrived (and they lost Dumervil) they were one of the top units in the league again. 

    The vaunted Denver rushing attack didn't help them at all. They were basically a bad offense that had a bunch of opportunities to score because they had a really good defense. 

    The truth is ... Tebow played a good few games early on ... then faded hard. His final 8 starts were abysmal, lodging just 11 TDs to 10 turnovers and an abysmal 69 rating, while Denver floundered, scoring about 13.5 points per game, and won games on outstanding defensive efforts, including one game with more points by the defense than the offense.

    The NFL saw the read-option, they adjusted and dared Tebow to throw. The Denver offense sputtered. This is why he isn't being given a chance to start somewhere.

    IF he were decent even, someone with a bad quarterback would put him in the mix.  

     
  2. You have chosen to ignore posts from BabeParilli. Show BabeParilli's posts

    Re: We are wasting a roster spot on #5

    In response to zbellino's comment:

    In response to BabeParilli's comment:

    [QUOTE]

     

    In response to zbellino's comment:

     

    [QUOTE]

     

     

    You said this:


    Tebow took the job away from Orton who is considered a decent if not stellar NFL QB.

     

     

     



    And that can be taken literally as him not being stellar but merely decent.

     

     

    I can understand how you might see that as me implying that it was debatable that Orton was stellar. But I wasn't implying that. He clearly has never been stellar.

     

     

    [/QUOTE]

     

    Yeah, because it's most often used to describe the possibility of the latter in a weaker-stronger relationship.  

    [/QUOTE]


    I understand it is most often used that way. I meant it the other way. I was not and am not saying Orton was or is a star. My apologies for the misunderstanding. Fair enough?

     

     
  3. You have chosen to ignore posts from BabeParilli. Show BabeParilli's posts

    Re: We are wasting a roster spot on #5

    In response to zbellino's comment:


    But he was given a shot. 

     

    You are claiming he wasn't with literally zero evidence to the contrary other than to say he was "ill treated" or "black-balled" or something like that. 

    What evidence, hard evidence, is there that he wasn't given a shot. Was he not allowed to practice? Was he not given reps with the team?



    He had a shot with the dysfunctional jets? He threw 8 passes and completed 6 of them. Where's the "shot"?

     
  4. You have chosen to ignore posts from zbellino. Show zbellino's posts

    Re: We are wasting a roster spot on #5

    In response to BabeParilli's comment:

    In response to zbellino's comment:

    [QUOTE]

     


    The guy who had a higher completion percent and was throwing more difficult passes. That's Luck, btw. 

     

    You really are a Tebow apologist man. 

    Are you a born again Christian or a Gators fan? Why won't you answer this question?

     



    If completion% was the end all of quarterbacking then your point would be well taken. Fact is, I hold the ability to take care of the ball in much higher esteem than a few percentage points of completion%. And Tebow took better care of the ball.

     

    Already said I'm not a Gators fan. I am a Christian for sure though. I would not really fall into the "Evangelical" or "Born Again" camp though. Tebow's Christianity might affect my perceptions of him as a person, but certainly not as a player.

    Moss isn't a Christian (that I am aware of) and I still defend him for the same reasons I defend Tebow. Randy gets the same kind of fan BS raw deal Tebow gets.

    [/QUOTE]


    I see the as completely separate. Randy didn't get a raw deal at all, he just got old. He's getting his limited reps in SF now.

    Tebow on the other hand, has been given more than anyone who did little to deserve it. He shouldn't likely have been drafted that high to begin with, but was. He was given the keys to an offense built after him, and was not good. Then he was given a chance to compete for a QB job elsewhere and couldn't win it. 

    If New England is his last stop, he's had a very charmed run for someone with so little talent. 

     

     
  5. You have chosen to ignore posts from BabeParilli. Show BabeParilli's posts

    Re: We are wasting a roster spot on #5

    In response to zbellino's comment:

     

    The truth is ... Tebow played a good few games early on ... then faded hard. His final 8 starts were abysmal, lodging just 11 TDs to 10 turnovers and an abysmal 69 rating, while Denver floundered, scoring about 13.5 points per game, and won games on outstanding defensive efforts, including one game with more points by the defense than the offense.

     



    Let's talk truth. The truth is Tebow had 4 of his 6 INTs for the entire year in one game against the Bills. What that means is that in the rest of his games he had an INT once in every 120.5 attempts. That is awesomely taking care of the ball.

    The truth also is that Tebow took a 1-4 team and won 7 of the next 8 games.

    And the Broncos did fade in the last 3 games badly with their D getting ravaged by Brady and Ridley, then C J Spiller. Tebow wasn't the only deficiency in that fade by any means. As I mentioned before, Tebow played significantly better in the road and two of those games were at home. I have no idea why he played better on the road, but maybe being around Horseface is the answer.

     

     
  6. You have chosen to ignore posts from MoreRings. Show MoreRings's posts

    Re: We are wasting a roster spot on #5

    In response to PatsEng's comment:

    In response to MoreRings' comment:

     

     

    I agree.  Opposing DC must love the thought of TT replacing TB.  What a gift. How much could the possibly be preparing for the 3rd string QB?

     

     



    What I don't get is why people think the option is such a difficult thing to plan for and why it's so mysterious. Yes at first teams had to figure it out but last year and the year before not only the Pats but teams around the league showed how to do it. You have your DE disengage from his blocker and hold his ground spying the runner. He doesn't engage just has to hold his position to prevent the runner from advancing until help in the form of a LB comes. Than one stays at the line while the other advances in the runners throwing lane. The only way the option works is if the DE gets agressive and doesn't play his position or if the runner can actually throw the ball. It worked not once not twice but 4 times against Tebow when the Pats faced him in 11' and 12'. Nink and Jones both held their ground at the line and forced Tebow to make a play which more often than not he couldn't. Not that hard to plan for or execute.

     



    As a gimmick it works sometimes.  Dead giveaway when you substitute a QB

     
  7. You have chosen to ignore posts from MoreRings. Show MoreRings's posts

    Re: We are wasting a roster spot on #5

    In response to BabeParilli's comment:

    In response to MoreRings' comment:

     

    In response to PatsEng's comment:

     

     

    In response to zbellino's comment:

     

    Knowing BB, it's a host of small reasons that justify it. 

    1.) He helps them scout teams with running Qbs. 

    2.) He makes teams have to prepare *something* in case he plays, because the O is so different with him in it, even if it's overall very inferior. Any resources a team wastes are wasted. All the Pats need to do is flash one or two option plays, and opposing teams have to prepare like they have many more.

    3.) He contributes on special teams/depth at FB etc. Using him on punt protection, though, is something I'll add they can continue to work on. Because he is expendable, you don't worry about him getting injured, but he can throw a lot better than a RB, and run a lot better than a QB, and has a frame that could block. Trick plays could be an option. 

    I'd cut him too and get a real third stringer, but hey that's me. 

     



    The 2nd point I see where people are coming from but in reality no team is going to plan for a couple tricks plays when they are facing Brady. If I was the opposing DC I'd actually hope BB took Brady off the field and brought Tebow in, not be worried how to plan for it. I'd just tell my guys if both are on the field 1 guy has to watch Tebow for the draw otherwise treat it the same as if Ridley or Vereen were back there and Brady might throw the ball and dare BB to use a plan which Tebow threw it. I honestly don't think any DC would give more than 30mins to planning for Tebow at any point during the week as I doubt BB gave more than that when Tebow was on the Jets.

     

     

     


    I agree.  Opposing DC must love the thought of TT replacing TB.  What a gift. How much could the possibly be preparing for the 3rd string QB?

     

     




    I doubt very much the opposing team would like to see Tebow rather than Brady late in the third quarter down say 31 - 10. Much simpler for them to have Brady in just handing off to burn clock and stop the run than to have to worry about an extra option of Tebow running as well as the backs.

     

    And if you think a 31 - 10 lead late in the 3rd is safe then you must not have seen our D or running game in situations like that much.

     



    That almost sounds like Rusty.

     
  8. You have chosen to ignore posts from MoreRings. Show MoreRings's posts

    Re: We are wasting a roster spot on #5

    In response to BabeParilli's comment:

    Interestingly, in the one season Denver let him play much Tebow had....

     

    An 88.5 passer rating (near top 10 that year) with 9 TDs and 3 INTs.

     

    Of course that was in 7 away games where he didn't have Horseface Elway looking down on him after throwing him under the bus to the press. It is absolutely disgraceful the way this guy was treated in Denver. And it's borderline disgraceful the way he gets treated right here.

     

     



    How come nobody in the league wanted TT until the Pats picked him up? Answer: he cant play

     
  9. You have chosen to ignore posts from MoreRings. Show MoreRings's posts

    Re: We are wasting a roster spot on #5

    In response to Muzwell's comment:

    Not endorsing Tebow, but Babe has a point about Luck. Yes, his team won games but maybe in spite of him. He really wasn't any good. But the media falls all over themsleves to say how great he was. There was even MVP talk! What?

    If Brady played like him last year, we'd be marching on Foxboro with torches and pitchforks demanding they start Mallett. 

    23 passing TDs (plus 5 rushing) and 23 turnovers, 54% completions, 76.5 QB rating (below Gabbert!). Brutal.




    Luck in year 1, TT in year 4.

     
  10. You have chosen to ignore posts from MoreRings. Show MoreRings's posts

    Re: We are wasting a roster spot on #5

    In response to zbellino's comment:

    In response to PatsEng's comment:

     

    In response to zbellino's comment:

     

     

    Knowing BB, it's a host of small reasons that justify it. 

    1.) He helps them scout teams with running Qbs. 

    2.) He makes teams have to prepare *something* in case he plays, because the O is so different with him in it, even if it's overall very inferior. Any resources a team wastes are wasted. All the Pats need to do is flash one or two option plays, and opposing teams have to prepare like they have many more.

    3.) He contributes on special teams/depth at FB etc. Using him on punt protection, though, is something I'll add they can continue to work on. Because he is expendable, you don't worry about him getting injured, but he can throw a lot better than a RB, and run a lot better than a QB, and has a frame that could block. Trick plays could be an option. 

    I'd cut him too and get a real third stringer, but hey that's me. 

     

     



    The 2nd point I see where people are coming from but in reality no team is going to plan for a couple tricks plays when they are facing Brady. If I was the opposing DC I'd actually hope BB took Brady off the field and brought Tebow in, not be worried how to plan for it. I'd just tell my guys if both are on the field 1 guy has to watch Tebow for the draw otherwise treat it the same as if Ridley or Vereen were back there and Brady might throw the ball and dare BB to use a plan which Tebow threw it. I honestly don't think any DC would give more than 30mins to planning for Tebow at any point during the week as I doubt BB gave more than that when Tebow was on the Jets.

     




     

    No one "fears" the option offense. But you do need to prepare for it. Defending the option means taking a step back to the 1960s on defense and gap control. Players don't do this naturally. 

    Yeah, Tebow is overall ineffective, but as a trick play he wastes some time for other teams in preparation. NE always has (more in the past) run trick plays, and that is half the reason. Teams have to prepare for it, which wastes resources. 

    I just think about it that way. Run it once or twice just to show you might. Or don't. It's a smidge of added value for a guy who is really going to be a punt protector at best. 



    Trick plays work when the same personnel is on the field.  Not when you substitute your "trick play QB"

     
  11. You have chosen to ignore posts from MoreRings. Show MoreRings's posts

    Re: We are wasting a roster spot on #5

    In response to BabeParilli's comment:

    In response to zbellino's comment:

     


    But he was given a shot. 

     

    You are claiming he wasn't with literally zero evidence to the contrary other than to say he was "ill treated" or "black-balled" or something like that. 

    What evidence, hard evidence, is there that he wasn't given a shot. Was he not allowed to practice? Was he not given reps with the team?

     



    He had a shot with the dysfunctional jets? He threw 8 passes and completed 6 of them. Where's the "shot"?

     




    He couldnt beat out Sanchez, how is he going to put TB on the bench.

     
  12. You have chosen to ignore posts from Muzwell. Show Muzwell's posts

    Re: We are wasting a roster spot on #5

    In response to MoreRings' comment:

    In response to Muzwell's comment:

    [QUOTE]

     

    Not endorsing Tebow, but Babe has a point about Luck. Yes, his team won games but maybe in spite of him. He really wasn't any good. But the media falls all over themsleves to say how great he was. There was even MVP talk! What?

    If Brady played like him last year, we'd be marching on Foxboro with torches and pitchforks demanding they start Mallett. 

    23 passing TDs (plus 5 rushing) and 23 turnovers, 54% completions, 76.5 QB rating (below Gabbert!). Brutal.

     




    Luck in year 1, TT in year 4.

     

    [/QUOTE]

    I never compared Luck and Tebow. Others are doing that. I'd take Luck over Tebow every day of the week, if those are my only choices. Of course he's better.

    All I'm saying is that Luck actually kind of sucked last year, by just about any statistical measure you care to use, except Ws and Ls. Again, if Brady performed like that, he'd have been run out of town. 

    I get that Luck was a rookie and will improve and yada, yada, and for that reason he needs to be cut some slack. But that does not transform the year he had into a good season, because it was not. No way he deserves the over the top praise that he got from the media.

    He just wasn't very good, that's my point. If you want to say he was good for a rookie, fine, whatever.

    Not comparing him to anybody. Well RGIII was a lot better and Russell Wilson too...is that fair?

     
  13. You have chosen to ignore posts from BabeParilli. Show BabeParilli's posts

    Re: We are wasting a roster spot on #5

    In response to MoreRings' comment:


    I doubt very much the opposing team would like to see Tebow rather than Brady late in the third quarter down say 31 - 10. Much simpler for them to have Brady in just handing off to burn clock and stop the run than to have to worry about an extra option of Tebow running as well as the backs.

     

    And if you think a 31 - 10 lead late in the 3rd is safe then you must not have seen our D or running game in situations like that much.

     

     

     



    That almost sounds like Rusty.

     

     



    Rusty ever says our D is an issue?

     
  14. You have chosen to ignore posts from wozzy. Show wozzy's posts

    Re: We are wasting a roster spot on #5

    Most of you know how much I love running the ball, in the playoffs you HAVE to be able to pass, Tebow can't pass; game over.

     
  15. You have chosen to ignore posts from Muzwell. Show Muzwell's posts

    Re: We are wasting a roster spot on #5

    I'll compare Luck to Matt Cassell in 2008. Statistically Luck passed more and for more yards but Cassel was better in just about every other way, unless ball security is irrelevant. Better completion percentage, passer rating, TD/Int ratio (23/18 for Luck, 21/11 for Cassel). Same W-L record (11-5). 

    Sure, Luck was a rookie, but Cassel had never started a game since high school. 

     
  16. You have chosen to ignore posts from TrueChamp. Show TrueChamp's posts

    Re: We are wasting a roster spot on #5

    Wow, this kid certainly does illicit some strong feelings on this board.

    I stand by what I said when we signed him. BB just got a typical BB guy, hard working, high character, versatile(BB's words not mine) and has won championships and lead his NFL team to a playoff win.

    In regard to my debate with Eng, I want to point out that I was absolutely cherry picking stats and I said was before hand. it was in response to Eng asking me why this kid is a good pick up without talking about his leadership and high character which was a cherry picked argument.

    In 16 starts with the Broncos, Tebow threw for over 2,200 yards, ran for almost a 1000 with 5 ypc average, scored 27 tds, threw 9 int's, fumbled lots, I think over 12 without checking. He only completed 47% of his throws. He lead his Broncos team on a complete turn around and it was visible to any objective fan watching those games that his teammates believed in him on the field. I understand the defensive argument that they all of a sudden got a lot better, but thats usually do to a spark in the locker room....

    In any case he has real negatives (screwed up throwing motion leading to terrible accuracy) and real positives(intangibles,, and very good runner) I think given his qualities and the fact he is now being coached by the guy who drafted him with the greatest talent evaluator of our era(BB) he is a good addition as a 3rd string QB with zero monetary commitment.

        







    "Defense Wins Championships"
     
  17. You have chosen to ignore posts from UD6. Show UD6's posts

    Re: We are wasting a roster spot on #5

    In response to MoreRings' comment:

    In response to Muzwell's comment:
    [QUOTE]

     

    Not endorsing Tebow, but Babe has a point about Luck. Yes, his team won games but maybe in spite of him. He really wasn't any good. But the media falls all over themsleves to say how great he was. There was even MVP talk! What?

    If Brady played like him last year, we'd be marching on Foxboro with torches and pitchforks demanding they start Mallett. 

    23 passing TDs (plus 5 rushing) and 23 turnovers, 54% completions, 76.5 QB rating (below Gabbert!). Brutal.

     




    Luck in year 1, TT in year 4.

     

    [/QUOTE]

    Luck was on a team that was previously 2-14 with a new HC (who got Cancer during the season), new OC, new GM and 70% roster turnover. Was Luck flawless - not by any stretch of the imagination, but he did engineer 4 4th quarter comebacks and 7 game winning drives. 

    I believe there are very few QB's that could have succeeded as Luck did (as a rookie) and guided his team to the playoffs. 

    We'll know more this year, but given all of the obstacles, Luck had an impressive rookie year.

     
  18. You have chosen to ignore posts from UD6. Show UD6's posts

    Re: We are wasting a roster spot on #5

    In response to Muzwell's comment:

    I'll compare Luck to Matt Cassell in 2008. Statistically Luck passed more and for more yards but Cassel was better in just about every other way, unless ball security is irrelevant. Better completion percentage, passer rating, TD/Int ratio (23/18 for Luck, 21/11 for Cassel). Same W-L record (11-5). 

    Sure, Luck was a rookie, but Cassel had never started a game since high school. 



    Cassell was not a rookie.  He'd worked in the system.  Cassell took over an offense that will rank as one of the greatest in history.  Excellent receivers, all-pro offensive line, best HC in football, etc. etc. etc.

    Luck took over a team that was previously 2-14.  the roster had 70% turnover.  the new HC developed leukemia and was sidelined.  the new OC had to also act as HC.  There was a new DC, a new GM, new system, and low expectations. 

    Comparing Cassell and Luck is apples and oranges. 

     
  19. This post has been removed.

     
  20. You have chosen to ignore posts from MoreRings. Show MoreRings's posts

    Re: We are wasting a roster spot on #5

    In response to BabeParilli's comment:

    In response to MoreRings' comment:

     


    I doubt very much the opposing team would like to see Tebow rather than Brady late in the third quarter down say 31 - 10. Much simpler for them to have Brady in just handing off to burn clock and stop the run than to have to worry about an extra option of Tebow running as well as the backs.

     

    And if you think a 31 - 10 lead late in the 3rd is safe then you must not have seen our D or running game in situations like that much.

     

     

     



    That almost sounds like Rusty.

     

     

     



    Rusty ever says our D is an issue?

     




    It was a joke Vito.  Do you really think opposing teams would rather see TT than TB. Really?

     
  21. You have chosen to ignore posts from MoreRings. Show MoreRings's posts

    Re: We are wasting a roster spot on #5

    In response to UD6's comment:

    In response to MoreRings' comment:

     

    In response to Muzwell's comment:

     

     

    Not endorsing Tebow, but Babe has a point about Luck. Yes, his team won games but maybe in spite of him. He really wasn't any good. But the media falls all over themsleves to say how great he was. There was even MVP talk! What?

    If Brady played like him last year, we'd be marching on Foxboro with torches and pitchforks demanding they start Mallett. 

    23 passing TDs (plus 5 rushing) and 23 turnovers, 54% completions, 76.5 QB rating (below Gabbert!). Brutal.

     

     




    Luck in year 1, TT in year 4.

     

     



    Luck was on a team that was previously 2-14 with a new HC (who got Cancer during the season), new OC, new GM and 70% roster turnover. Was Luck flawless - not by any stretch of the imagination, but he did engineer 4 4th quarter comebacks and 7 game winning drives. 

     

    I believe there are very few QB's that could have succeeded as Luck did (as a rookie) and guided his team to the playoffs. 

    We'll know more this year, but given all of the obstacles, Luck had an impressive rookie year.



    Honestly, if you had to pick right now Luck or Tebow to QB the Colts for the next 10 years, who would it be dogg?

     
  22. You have chosen to ignore posts from BabeParilli. Show BabeParilli's posts

    Re: We are wasting a roster spot on #5

    In response to UD6's comment:

    In response to MoreRings' comment:

    [QUOTE]

     

    In response to Muzwell's comment:

    [QUOTE]

     

     

    Not endorsing Tebow, but Babe has a point about Luck. Yes, his team won games but maybe in spite of him. He really wasn't any good. But the media falls all over themsleves to say how great he was. There was even MVP talk! What?

    If Brady played like him last year, we'd be marching on Foxboro with torches and pitchforks demanding they start Mallett. 

    23 passing TDs (plus 5 rushing) and 23 turnovers, 54% completions, 76.5 QB rating (below Gabbert!). Brutal.

     

     




    Luck in year 1, TT in year 4.

     

     

     

    [/QUOTE]

    Luck was on a team that was previously 2-14

    [/QUOTE]


    Right troll, we all know they tanked the season to get Luck if the first place.

     
  23. You have chosen to ignore posts from BabeParilli. Show BabeParilli's posts

    Re: We are wasting a roster spot on #5

    In response to MoreRings' comment:

    In response to BabeParilli's comment:

    [QUOTE]

     

    In response to MoreRings' comment:

     


    I doubt very much the opposing team would like to see Tebow rather than Brady late in the third quarter down say 31 - 10. Much simpler for them to have Brady in just handing off to burn clock and stop the run than to have to worry about an extra option of Tebow running as well as the backs.

     

    And if you think a 31 - 10 lead late in the 3rd is safe then you must not have seen our D or running game in situations like that much.

     

     

     



    That almost sounds like Rusty.

     

     

     



    Rusty ever says our D is an issue?

     

     




    It was a joke Vito.  Do you really think opposing teams would rather see TT than TB. Really?

     

    [/QUOTE]


    Yes, I really think in situations where they know we are going to run they may well rather see Brady because he is very likely not going to pass and anybody can hand off.

    I absolutely would from late in the 3rd quarter with a 20 point lead throw TT out there with a clock eating run attack mixed with the occasional keep them honest TT pass/run option. Obviously if the drive came down to a 3rd and 9+ yards I would probably shuttle Brady back in. Not only could this be more effective in that situation than just having Brady hand off, but it would perhaps save some wear and tear on the aging HOFer.

     

     

     
  24. You have chosen to ignore posts from BabeParilli. Show BabeParilli's posts

    Re: We are wasting a roster spot on #5

    In response to UD6's comment:

     

    Luck took over a team that was previously 2-14.  the roster had 70% turnover.  the new HC developed leukemia and was sidelined.  the new OC had to also act as HC.  There was a new DC, a new GM, new system, and low expectations. 

     



    Funny how you dig like a little weasel for every scrap of context you can to prop up Luck, but ignore every pertinent fact when it comes to spygate. You are the same old dishonest lying Colts troll you have always been.

     

     
  25. You have chosen to ignore posts from UD6. Show UD6's posts

    Re: We are wasting a roster spot on #5

    In response to MoreRings' comment:

    In response to UD6's comment:
    [QUOTE]

     

    In response to MoreRings' comment:

     

    In response to Muzwell's comment:

     

     

    Not endorsing Tebow, but Babe has a point about Luck. Yes, his team won games but maybe in spite of him. He really wasn't any good. But the media falls all over themsleves to say how great he was. There was even MVP talk! What?

    If Brady played like him last year, we'd be marching on Foxboro with torches and pitchforks demanding they start Mallett. 

    23 passing TDs (plus 5 rushing) and 23 turnovers, 54% completions, 76.5 QB rating (below Gabbert!). Brutal.

     

     




    Luck in year 1, TT in year 4.

     

     



    Luck was on a team that was previously 2-14 with a new HC (who got Cancer during the season), new OC, new GM and 70% roster turnover. Was Luck flawless - not by any stretch of the imagination, but he did engineer 4 4th quarter comebacks and 7 game winning drives. 

     

    I believe there are very few QB's that could have succeeded as Luck did (as a rookie) and guided his team to the playoffs. 

    We'll know more this year, but given all of the obstacles, Luck had an impressive rookie year.

     



    Honestly, if you had to pick right now Luck or Tebow to QB the Colts for the next 10 years, who would it be dogg?

     

    [/QUOTE]

    LOL

     
Sections
Shortcuts

Share