Ambrose83
Active member
- Joined
- Jan 14, 2015
- Messages
- 1,786
- Reaction score
- 4
And that tells you all you need to know about the "talent" around Andrew Luck. Not good enough to beat the Jaguars in regulation.[/quote]
And they were barely good enough to beat the Titans with Andrew Luck, because the defense kept the game within reach despite Luck's best effort to throw it away. This week, the Offense played relatively mistake free and didn't put the defense in a poor position all game, but didn't put up a lot of points.[/quote]
Titans are probably better than the Jags, and the Colts were on the road...not really an apples to apples comparison there.[/quote]
I don't know. A 40 year old QB who hasn't played a meaningful snap in 3 years and has zero chemistry with the team just took that no talent team to a win.
Excuse it away all you want but the reality is pretty obvious to anyone not blinded by media hype and Luck love.
If anything this shows how poor his division is and how inflated Luck's stats and wins really are.[/quote]
I'm not excusing anything away...and I didn't start the thread. And I'm DEFINITELY not blinded by the Luck media hype....I was at the game when the Rams demolished the Colts two years ago.
I still think he's a top 5 QB in the NFL right now. He's playing poorly, but he's better than Carson Palmer, who is playing lights out. He also played two of the top 5 defenses in the NFL in the Bills and Jets....then led the offense to 28 points against the Titans and a come from behind win, despite his mistakes and the Colts defense which is not very good.
Just calling it like I'm seeing it...games started by Luck, two out of three on the road and two against very good defenses. He's struggled, but that doesn't mean he's not a great player.[/quote]
" struggling" and having the worst passer rating in the NFL and 7 ints to 5 tds is a completely diff thing.. and that bills d? the one that got ran over by the pats and the one that looked average at best at home against the giants? they are not in the same class as the hawks.
And they were barely good enough to beat the Titans with Andrew Luck, because the defense kept the game within reach despite Luck's best effort to throw it away. This week, the Offense played relatively mistake free and didn't put the defense in a poor position all game, but didn't put up a lot of points.[/quote]
Titans are probably better than the Jags, and the Colts were on the road...not really an apples to apples comparison there.[/quote]
I don't know. A 40 year old QB who hasn't played a meaningful snap in 3 years and has zero chemistry with the team just took that no talent team to a win.
Excuse it away all you want but the reality is pretty obvious to anyone not blinded by media hype and Luck love.
If anything this shows how poor his division is and how inflated Luck's stats and wins really are.[/quote]
I'm not excusing anything away...and I didn't start the thread. And I'm DEFINITELY not blinded by the Luck media hype....I was at the game when the Rams demolished the Colts two years ago.
I still think he's a top 5 QB in the NFL right now. He's playing poorly, but he's better than Carson Palmer, who is playing lights out. He also played two of the top 5 defenses in the NFL in the Bills and Jets....then led the offense to 28 points against the Titans and a come from behind win, despite his mistakes and the Colts defense which is not very good.
Just calling it like I'm seeing it...games started by Luck, two out of three on the road and two against very good defenses. He's struggled, but that doesn't mean he's not a great player.[/quote]
" struggling" and having the worst passer rating in the NFL and 7 ints to 5 tds is a completely diff thing.. and that bills d? the one that got ran over by the pats and the one that looked average at best at home against the giants? they are not in the same class as the hawks.
