- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
1
Posted on 9/28/15 at 7:38 am to CocoLoco
quote:
I am pointing out that luck is the superior player
Superior passer, yes. Superior QB, probably but arguable. Superior football player, I say no.
You're ignoring the fact that Cam has played injured a lot and how his offensive weapons have steadily dropped off and how that can hinder progression.
Ask yourself how Luck would fare with the teams Cam has had. Ask yourself how Cam would do with the players Luck has had to throw to. Ask yourself how both would with an elite team like the Cardinals. Yeah, Luck would have better passing numbers but I think it'd be closer than you're willing to admit.
Even with lesser passing stats, I think Cam could take the same team as Luck and produce better overall results and and a better record. If I have to choose a QB to lead my team to a championship, or even win just one game, I'm picking Cam over Luck. That's the true measure of a QB.
Posted on 9/28/15 at 7:41 am to CocoLoco
quote:Luck has the counting stats as they throw a lot. If you break down the actual numbers, they're not nearly as far apart as it's made out to be.
Cam was brought up in here, who is not close to being in the elite range
Posted on 9/28/15 at 7:41 am to CocoLoco
Wilson and Tannehill to this point have been better so that makes 10. However, I do think Luck will one day be at the top, people are trying to say he is there already are wrong IMHO
Posted on 9/28/15 at 7:44 am to lsupride87
quote:Tannehill hasn't been better than Luck by any objective measure, fwiw.
Wilson and Tannehill to this point have been better so that makes 10
Posted on 9/28/15 at 7:45 am to shel311
quote:Look, when I first heard it I thought it was crazy. No chance. Then I read PFF breakdown on why he has been up to this point and I tend to agree with them now. Just go look it up. Sometimes perception isnt reality
Tannehill hasn't been better than Luck by any objective measure, fwiw.
ETA: Basically Luck is a turnover freaking machine that can throw out the worst half/games imaginable. If he cleans that up he will be on a completely different level than Tannehill
This post was edited on 9/28/15 at 7:48 am
Posted on 9/28/15 at 7:52 am to BowlJackson
What about Cam having a top tier defense to help?
Luck has not had that. Luck has made the playoffs each year, and has won 3 playoff games. Cam has made it twice with one win. I don't think his weapons have been that incredible, certainly not a Julio, Antonio Brown, etc type of receiver. TY is solid, Johnson appears to be done, Wayne was on his last legs. Moncrief might be legit, but it's a small sample size. Gore is the first good RB he's had, and he's over 30 and not what he used to be. Yea Luck has had better offensive weapons, but Cam has had a much better defense. You have to take that into consideration.
Luck has not had that. Luck has made the playoffs each year, and has won 3 playoff games. Cam has made it twice with one win. I don't think his weapons have been that incredible, certainly not a Julio, Antonio Brown, etc type of receiver. TY is solid, Johnson appears to be done, Wayne was on his last legs. Moncrief might be legit, but it's a small sample size. Gore is the first good RB he's had, and he's over 30 and not what he used to be. Yea Luck has had better offensive weapons, but Cam has had a much better defense. You have to take that into consideration.
This post was edited on 9/28/15 at 7:53 am
Posted on 9/28/15 at 7:52 am to BowlJackson
quote:
Superior QB, probably but arguable. Superior football player, I say no.
This doesn't make any sense unless you want to use Cam Newton at other positions.
Posted on 9/28/15 at 8:00 am to BhamDore
quote:Water is wet.
Andrew Luck is not Elite
Posted on 9/28/15 at 8:06 am to castorinho
Consider Tim Tebow. Great football player, mediocre QB. Cam is a great football player, good QB.
You're an Oklahoma fan so I'll use Jason Long and Sam Bradford as examples. Both are better QBs than Tebow, but neither are as good of football players as Tebow.
Make sense?
You're an Oklahoma fan so I'll use Jason Long and Sam Bradford as examples. Both are better QBs than Tebow, but neither are as good of football players as Tebow.
Make sense?
Posted on 9/28/15 at 8:15 am to BowlJackson
quote:
Consider Tim Tebow. Great football player, mediocre QB
quote:Not sure it could make less sense if you tried, to be honest.
Make sense?
Tebow was a bad NFL football player.
Great football players don't usually become analysts at 25 years old because no one wants them on their team.
Posted on 9/28/15 at 8:21 am to CocoLoco
The Panthers had that top defense for one season, and it doesn't change the fact that Cam still didn't have any weapons.
He is the passing threat AND the running threat for the Panthers.
He is the passing threat AND the running threat for the Panthers.
Posted on 9/28/15 at 8:25 am to tigerclaws15
quote:
Think tom Brady or Peyton or Rodgers or Brees are supreme athletes. No they are smart, accurate qbs
Brees is actually a pretty phenomenal athlete FWIW.
And Rodgers has the best pocket presence I've EVER seen. Its unreal.
Posted on 9/28/15 at 8:54 am to BowlJackson
Ok, the stratosphere comment I made earlier in this thread was a little much. But while Cam is one of the strongest arms in the league, and he's a little bit more mobile than Luck, there are diminishing returns at a certain point at the position once you get past the prospect stage IMO. His touch is poor and his mechanics and footwork are known to be pretty bad. Luck is fricking up a lot right now but naturally has better touch and a quicker release, which is more important than brute arm strength (not a deficiency for Luck) and mobility (also not a problem for him).
The reality is that Luck is a Top 10 QB in the league, and while he might not quite be deserving of the subjective "elite" category yet, he's not very far off. He led the league in passing TDs last year with 40 and nearly hit 5,000 yards in his 3rd season as an NFL QB. For all the talk about his INTs, he's still at a 1.82 ratio throughout his young career thus far. His completion percentage has steadily improved as he's progressed. He has weapons but his OL is obviously garbage. This thread is definitely an overeaction.
The reality is that Luck is a Top 10 QB in the league, and while he might not quite be deserving of the subjective "elite" category yet, he's not very far off. He led the league in passing TDs last year with 40 and nearly hit 5,000 yards in his 3rd season as an NFL QB. For all the talk about his INTs, he's still at a 1.82 ratio throughout his young career thus far. His completion percentage has steadily improved as he's progressed. He has weapons but his OL is obviously garbage. This thread is definitely an overeaction.
This post was edited on 9/28/15 at 8:57 am
Posted on 9/28/15 at 9:12 am to SabiDojo
Steve Smith was better than any weapon Luck has had.
"The Cam had/has no weapons" narrative is bs.
Luck's #1 is a #2 on most NFL teams and #3 on a few.
AJ is toast and Wayne was also old too.
The Colts OL is hot garbage and to not protect your #1 investment is a yuuuuge mistake by that organization.
"The Cam had/has no weapons" narrative is bs.
Luck's #1 is a #2 on most NFL teams and #3 on a few.
AJ is toast and Wayne was also old too.
The Colts OL is hot garbage and to not protect your #1 investment is a yuuuuge mistake by that organization.
Posted on 9/28/15 at 9:28 am to Lou Pai
quote:If we disregard hype and solely look at production and efficiency, he is very far off.
and while he might not quite be deserving of the subjective "elite" category yet, he's not very far off.
Posted on 9/28/15 at 9:34 am to shel311
Yeah he's been overhyped (SI last year), but the numbers he put up last year were very good. Where would you put him?
Posted on 9/28/15 at 9:38 am to Lou Pai
quote:If I'm taking the QB I want for the next 10 years, he's my guy.
Yeah he's been overhyped (SI last year), but the numbers he put up last year were very good. Where would you put him?
But solely based on what has happened, there's probably 8 QBs I want ahead of him if I had to play 1 game right now, that's just randomly guessing the number though.
Luck falls right around the Matt Ryan/Cam Newton range IMO.
This post was edited on 9/28/15 at 9:41 am
Posted on 9/28/15 at 9:47 am to shel311
They want to talk about Lucks weapons. What about Cam having the superior defensive unit as well as multiple running backs that are better than anything Luck has had. Ask any NFL GM if they had to pick one qb to lead their team, who do you think would be the choice.
Posted on 9/28/15 at 9:49 am to tigerclaws15
quote:Every GM is wrong sometimes too in their valuations, that's not a good way to look at it.
Ask any NFL GM if they had to pick one qb to lead their team, who do you think would be the choice
Page 5 of 7
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News