Is Belichick in Andrew Luck's Head?

[ausbacker]

And he most likely just watched the highlights on ESPN

Just like Mazz and how he barley watches any of the games yet has an opinion about everything

I like Luck. I happen to believe he has a bright future in the NFL but from my observations, he's more Brett Favre than Tom Brady. He can be rattled and forced into long stretches of poor decision making. Ironically, if you go back and look at some of his college tape, this was evident at Stanford.

The problem defending Luck is he's equally capable of blowing a game apart with marvellous throws as he is to crap the bed in the space of 10 minutes. It's my hope that the Patriots get out to an early lead and force Luck to chase the game.

 

[RobertWeathers]

I like Luck. I happen to believe he has a bright future in the NFL but from my observations, he's more Brett Favre than Tom Brady. He can be rattled and forced into long stretches of poor decision making. Ironically, if you go back and look at some of his college tape, this was evident at Stanford.

The problem defending Luck is he's equally capable of blowing a game apart with marvellous throws as he is to crap the bed in the space of 10 minutes. It's my hope that the Patriots get out to an early lead and force Luck to chase the game.

Luck is on a pace to throw for almost 5500 yards, 46 TDs and complete 64% of his throws for a team that gives up 23ppg. Thats pretty close to MVP stuff...

I think you are being overly critical.

 

[Brady_to_Moss]

I like Luck. I happen to believe he has a bright future in the NFL but from my observations, he's more Brett Favre than Tom Brady. He can be rattled and forced into long stretches of poor decision making. Ironically, if you go back and look at some of his college tape, this was evident at Stanford.

The problem defending Luck is he's equally capable of blowing a game apart with marvellous throws as he is to crap the bed in the space of 10 minutes. It's my hope that the Patriots get out to an early lead and force Luck to chase the game.

He has a very bright future and will win a SB IMO...but still has wayyy too many bad passes that go for INTs and Pts for the other teams. He cuts that down and he will be dam near unstoppable

 

[ausbacker]

Luck is on a pace to throw for almost 5500 yards, 46 TDs and complete 64% of his throws for a team that gives up 23ppg. Thats pretty close to MVP stuff...

I think you are being overly critical.

Most of the time, I couldn't give a stuff about fantasy football statistics. Fantasy is fantasy and football is football.

 

[RobertWeathers]

Most of the time, I couldn't give a stuff about fantasy football statistics. Fantasy is fantasy and football is football.

Thats not fantasy football. That is production. Hes 28-13 as a starter for a team with a very average defense.

 

[patsfanincleveland]

So, Luck would have the same stats had he played back when Ty Law and Rodney Harrison were knocking the hell out of the WR and it wasn't a penalty to look at a QB in a mean manner? Seriously? His stats aren't at ALL skewed by playing entirely in a time when the rules are completely different?

Talk about clueless.

I could care less about stats. That's obvious since I mentioned absolutely nothing about stats.

Stats are for the clueless in clown car. That explains your fixation on them.

Outside of a need to lower average IQ, it's impossible to determine what exactly you are trying to accomplish.

 

[rochrist]

I could care less about stats. That's obvious since I mentioned absolutely nothing about stats.

Stats are for the clueless in clown car. That explains your fixation on them.

Outside of a need to lower average IQ, it's impossible to determine what exactly you are trying to accomplish.

I'm not trying to accomplish anything, and I'm not sure why you're being a ****. I didn't attack you.
You listed some guys, all of whom played during the first half of the decade when the rules were significantly different and made life harder for passers. I observed that if Luck played under those same rules, he probably wouldn't have had the same results that he's getting playing in the new age pass friendly NFL. For some reason, that got your panties in a twist. I didn't say your binky was a bad QB. I think he's a very good QB.

Also. 'Brady was coming off a fluke Super Bowl win...'? Really? You sure you don't want to change your name to luckfanincleveland?

 

[ausbacker]

Thats not fantasy football. That is production. Hes 28-13 as a starter for a team with a very average defense.

Why are you talking to me like I don't think Luck is a good Quarterback with a bright future?

 

[RobertWeathers]

Why are you talking to me like I don't think Luck is a good Quarterback with a bright future?

Because you are characterizing Luck as an erratic gunslinger and I don't think that is accurate.

Most of the time, I couldn't give a stuff about fantasy football statistics. Fantasy is fantasy and football is football.

I cited a unreal pace of production and you dismiss it as my throwing out fantasy football numbers. Facts are facts.

I like Luck. I happen to believe he has a bright future in the NFL but from my observations, he's more Brett Favre than Tom Brady.

This is your opinion but the numbers do not support you claim. In TBs first 4 years his INT %was 2.6. Luck's is 2.3. For his career, Favre is 3.3

He can be rattled and forced into long stretches of poor decision making. Ironically, if you go back and look at some of his college tape, this was evident at Stanford.

What is your definition of long stretches of poor play?

At Stanford, in over 1000 throws he threw 22 picks. Thats pretty good.

Quarterbacks that are 28-13 as starters that average 31ppg that produce at his level do have long stretches of poor play.

 

[ausbacker]

Because you are characterizing Luck as an erratic gunslinger and I don't think that is accurate.

You're welcome to that appraisal. I'm fine characterising Luck as a gunslinger because he most definitely shows those traits.

I cited a unreal pace of production and you dismiss it as my throwing out fantasy football numbers. Facts are facts.

No, you cited numbers. Matthew Stafford put up MVP numbers in 2011.

This is your opinion but the numbers do not support you claim. In TBs first 4 years his INT %was 2.6. Luck's is 2.3. For his career, Favre is 3.3

In Brady's first 4 seasons as the starter, he won 3 Super Bowls. Football also looked after defenses when Favre and Brady were starting out. Comparing early season career numbers is not indicative of the current handcuff NFL defenses are forced to play under.

What is your definition of long stretches of poor play?

Long stretches of poor play is my definition of long stretches of poor play.

At Stanford, in over 1000 throws he threw 22 picks. Thats pretty good.

Yes, they are. That's why he went number 1. You're also ignoring the fact that he blew up in key moments of big games.

Quarterbacks that are 28-13 as starters that average 31ppg that produce at his level do have long stretches of poor play.

Yes, that's why I said I think he has a bright future in the NFL.

 

[RobertWeathers]

You're welcome to that appraisal. I'm fine characterizing Luck as a gunslinger because he most definitely shows those traits.

We'll disagree here. Gunslingers are careless with the football and throw and unreal number of INT's. Luck simply does not fall in that category.

No, you cited numbers. Matthew Stafford put up MVP numbers in 2011.

My numbers were an unreal pace of production. Stafford did have MVP numbers for sure and his team when to the playoffs IIRC.

In Brady's first 4 seasons as the starter, he won 3 Super Bowls.

Defense, special teams and a running game helped. Brady immensely. Something Luck doesn't really have...

Football also looked after defenses when Favre and Brady were starting out. Comparing early season career numbers is not indicative of the current handcuff NFL defenses are forced to play under.

Gunslingers and QBs who throw a ton of picks existed in the 60s, 70s, 80s 90s and today. The QB is either good at avoiding interceptions or he isn't.

Long stretches of poor play is my definition of long stretches of poor play.

Whats that? A game? A quarter? Has Brady ever had bad stretches in his career? Montana?

Yes, they are. That's why he went number 1. You're also ignoring the fact that he blew up in key moments of big games.

Name a college QB who did not have tough moments. Luck went 23-3 at Stanford w/ 2 BCS bowl appearances. He carried that team. In my opinion you are being incredibly critical.

Yes, that's why I said I think he has a bright future in the NFL.

Agreed. Hes one of the best now and you make it out to be that he is not.

 

[patsfanincleveland]

I'm not trying to accomplish anything, and I'm not sure why you're being a ****. I didn't attack you.
You listed some guys, all of whom played during the first half of the decade when the rules were significantly different and made life harder for passers. I observed that if Luck played under those same rules, he probably wouldn't have had the same results that he's getting playing in the new age pass friendly NFL. For some reason, that got your panties in a twist. I didn't say your binky was a bad QB. I think he's a very good QB.

Also. 'Brady was coming off a fluke Super Bowl win...'? Really? You sure you don't want to change your name to luckfanincleveland?

Refer to my original post.

Today, the NFL has the "big four" QB's....Manning/Brady/Rogers/Brees

Look where their careers were midway through season 3 vs where Luck is.

I could care less about stats........Luck has done better at this point at establishing himself as an elite QB.

 

[rochrist]

Refer to my original post.

Today, the NFL has the "big four" QB's....Manning/Brady/Rogers/Brees

Look where their careers were midway through season 3 vs where Luck is.

I could care less about stats........Luck has done better at this point at establishing himself as an elite QB.

And my original point was that those other 4 QBs would ALSO have greatly inflated numbers (that you don't care about but I'm not sure what you're using to gauge his performance then, since it can't be postseason play) if they had played their entire careers under the rules in play now.

TL;DR You're comparing apples and oranges.

Note: That does not mean that I disagree that Luck is going to go down as a great QB.

 

[ausbacker]

Agreed. Hes one of the best now and you make it out to be that he is not.

********. You've invented this crap of your own doing.

 

[Oswlek]

Refer to my original post.

Today, the NFL has the "big four" QB's....Manning/Brady/Rogers/Brees

Look where their careers were midway through season 3 vs where Luck is.

I could care less about stats........Luck has done better at this point at establishing himself as an elite QB.

Brees is out of that group if his play this year is any indication.

 

[RobertWeathers]

********. You've invented this crap of your own doing.

Why would I make that up? Go back and read your posts objectively. Nothing you have said supports your assertion that Luck is a gunslinger who has had many bad stretches in games and has on numerous occasions blown games for his team by making critical mistakes in key situations. You come across as having a pre-conceived notion of what kind of QB he is when the facts do not support your claims.

Once you support why he is gunslinger (and what your definition of one is), the times he has had long stretches of bad QB play and establish the frequency of him blowing games, I'd be happy to debate the topic further. Good day.

 

[ausbacker]

Why would I make that up? Go back and read your posts objectively. Nothing you have said supports your assertion that Luck is a gunslinger who has had many bad stretches in games and has on numerous occasions blown games for his team by making critical mistakes in key situations. You come across as having a pre-conceived notion of what kind of QB he is when the facts do not support your claims.

Once you support why he is gunslinger (and what your definition of one is), the times he has had long stretches of bad QB play and establish the frequency of him blowing games, I'd be happy to debate the topic further. Good day.

I did, you made that up conveniently ignoring the fact that I stated several times I believe Luck has a bright future.

I won't be wasting my time replying to you further. You're only interested in mistruths when your position is debated.

 

[RobertWeathers]

I did, you made that up conveniently ignoring the fact that I stated several times I believe Luck has a bright future.

I won't be wasting my time replying to you further. You're only interested in mistruths when your position is debated.

Everything you said about Luck- other than the fact that he has a bright future is wrong and you are too misinformed to defend your own ridiculous statements.

 

[Dexter]