Just Joshin' Posted December 27, 2017 Posted December 27, 2017 On 12/16/2017 at 5:43 PM, JohnBonhamRocks said: Dawkins makes him expendable, plus he's missed half the games the past 2 years and has a $14.45 M cap hit next year. I'm not saying run him out of town, but I also want a franchise QB. Dawkins may make him expendable but Mills makes him an asset.
H2o Posted December 27, 2017 Posted December 27, 2017 2 hours ago, wppete said: Make the trade for Luck! There are starting to be rumblings he may need a 2nd shoulder surgery.
Green Lightning Posted December 28, 2017 Posted December 28, 2017 7 hours ago, Dalton said: Dawkins may make him expendable but Mills makes him an asset. Well put and I agree.
JohnBonhamRocks Posted December 28, 2017 Posted December 28, 2017 21 hours ago, Dalton said: Dawkins may make him expendable but Mills makes him an asset. Would rather have to search for a replacement RT, which given Mills' poor play we would need to do regardless, than keep searching for a franchise QB.
dave mcbride Posted December 28, 2017 Posted December 28, 2017 (edited) 23 hours ago, Alphadawg7 said: The NFL is littered with the bodies of careers that seemed promising and started hot. THE ONLY THING anyone can EVER say positive about Luck all last occurred over 3 years ago. And Colts have not had a winning record since Lucks 3rd year in the league in 2014. The year before they had Luck, they had a starting QB who didn't deserve to be on an NFL roster, let alone starting. So its exact polar opposites created a massively exaggerated impact. Even in 2015 without Luck and a decent backup QB, that backup had a BETTER record than with Luck. More on 2015: 2-5 with Luck and 5-3 with Hasselbeck with the SAME exact roster. The Colts were in the weakest division in the NFL when Luck came into it. That division isn't weak anymore. And when he "turned" those Colts around...what did he do next? Completely fall apart in the playoffs EACH of those THREE years. Never once posting more TD's than INT's in each of those playoff years. His play SUBSTANTIALLY dropped off in every measurable way in the playoffs when he was facing better completion. So sorry, Luck hasn't done anything in 3 years but produce a losing record, struggle to stay on the field, and continue is HIGH turnover ratio while also the Colts did NOT sniff the playoffs. Everyone likes to point to the turnaround in record after drafting Luck...who cares, the guy he replaces isn't even in the NFL anymore and had no business starting. If you put the absolute worst QB into a starting role, that team won't win. I mean look at SF this year...1 win team all year...they get Jimmy and now are 4-0 with the EXACT same roster where Marquise Goodwin is his top WR. Not saying Luck had nothing to do with the turnaround, but the difference was so dramatic because of how BAD the previous guy was. So Luck gets grossly over exaggerated from that point on despite doing squat in three playoff runs (actually pretty bad), struggling to win with the Colts once the division he is in got better, and never got his turnovers under control. And now, he can't even stay on the field to go with all that and carries a NASTY cap killing contract. By no means am I saying he is a terrible QB, I am merely stating he is grossly over exaggerated to levels he has not yet reached and has a contract that vastly over pays for what he is doing on the field. Not that I put much stock in qb win-loss records, but Luck had a winning record last year as the Colts' starting qb (8-7). I'm admittedly a fan of his and think that his ability to lead THAT garbage organization to 3 consecutive 11-5 seasons is one more impressive accomplishments in recent years. Edited December 28, 2017 by dave mcbride
Alphadawg7 Posted December 28, 2017 Posted December 28, 2017 (edited) 4 hours ago, dave mcbride said: Not that I put much stock in qb win-loss records, but Luck had a winning record last year as the Colts' starting qb (8-7). I'm admittedly a fan of his and think that his ability to lead THAT garbage organization to 3 consecutive 11-5 seasons is one more impressive accomplishments in recent years. I was referencing his record over the last 3 years when I made that comment. I know my post sounds hyper negative on Luck, but its not like I think Luck is terrible by any means. I think his CONTRACT is terrible. The thing is, when you go back and look at the turnaround in Lucks rookie year, its HEAVILY skewed by how atrocious the QB position was the year before. Again I point out how bad SF was before Jimmy and is now undefeated and 4-0 with Jimmy and he is still learning his offense and teammates. When your starting QB is atrocious, your team will struggle to win. So were the Colts really just a 2 win TEAM...or was the QB position so bad it drove them into the ground? Its not like they had someone like Tyrod and won just 2 games then drafted luck and went to double digit wins. Their QB position was one of the worst the NFL has seen in the last 20 years the year before they drafted Luck. And that division was also one of the weakest divisions in the NFL those first 3 years. And QB's are supposed to get better as they move forward. Luck hasn't shown a lot of growth. Each of the 3 playoff years he was personally terrible. His turnover rate is still Cutler-esque. The Colts had a better record without him then with him in 2015. And because he won't change how he plays he can't even stay on the field either. I get why you are a fan, many are...and I have nothing against him, but I just feel that his legend is greater than his resume to this point. And his contract is one of the worst in the NFL...a cap choking contract for a guy who can't stay on the field whose best seasons all occurred over 3 years ago. Edited December 28, 2017 by Alphadawg7
RobH063 Posted December 28, 2017 Posted December 28, 2017 On 11/16/2017 at 9:25 PM, dayman said: On 11/16/2017 at 9:23 PM, Buffalo716 said: It would still take a kings ransom to pull Andrew Luck Would it? Just b/c the owner is an insane opioid addict? I'm not seeing Luck pulling the same value it would take to move up to get a top 5 QB at this point... Luck might be had for a 4th and a bag of Oxy 1
BringBackOrton Posted December 28, 2017 Posted December 28, 2017 46 minutes ago, Alphadawg7 said: I was referencing his record over the last 3 years when I made that comment. I know my post sounds hyper negative on Luck, but its not like I think Luck is terrible by any means. I think his CONTRACT is terrible. The thing is, when you go back and look at the turnaround in Lucks rookie year, its HEAVILY skewed by how atrocious the QB position was the year before. Again I point out how bad SF was before Jimmy and is now undefeated and 4-0 with Jimmy and he is still learning his offense and teammates. When your starting QB is atrocious, your team will struggle to win. So were the Colts really just a 2 win TEAM...or was the QB position so bad it drove them into the ground? Its not like they had someone like Tyrod and won just 2 games then drafted luck and went to double digit wins. Their QB position was one of the worst the NFL has seen in the last 20 years the year before they drafted Luck. And that division was also one of the weakest divisions in the NFL those first 3 years. And QB's are supposed to get better as they move forward. Luck hasn't shown a lot of growth. Each of the 3 playoff years he was personally terrible. His turnover rate is still Cutler-esque. The Colts had a better record without him then with him in 2015. And because he won't change how he plays he can't even stay on the field either. I get why you are a fan, many are...and I have nothing against him, but I just feel that his legend is greater than his resume to this point. And his contract is one of the worst in the NFL...a cap choking contract for a guy who can't stay on the field whose best seasons all occurred over 3 years ago. He wasn't terrible in the playoffs. He had a couple bad games. There is a difference.
Chicken Boo Posted December 29, 2017 Posted December 29, 2017 (edited) My gut is that Luck can be had and acquiring him would not command a king's ransom, given his contract and the shoulder injury. I'm not a big fan of Luck, but the Bills have more talent than any team he has played for in Indy. Edited December 29, 2017 by Chicken Boo
BuffaloRebound Posted December 29, 2017 Posted December 29, 2017 This seems like a case where if Luck is actually on trade block he's definitely damaged goods or lost his love for the game.
Buffalo03 Posted December 29, 2017 Posted December 29, 2017 Andrew Luck is overrated. For the millionth time 1
Cugalabanza Posted December 29, 2017 Posted December 29, 2017 The Luck idea is not so crazy. If the right deal presents and the shoulder checks out, I could see it being good.
klos63 Posted December 29, 2017 Posted December 29, 2017 18 hours ago, Chicken Boo said: My gut is that Luck can be had and acquiring him would not command a king's ransom, given his contract and the shoulder injury. I'm not a big fan of Luck, but the Bills have more talent than any team he has played for in Indy. If he's 100% healthy, the trade would command a king's ransom. If there are major concerns about his shoulder, I can't see any team trading for him.
26CornerBlitz Posted December 29, 2017 Posted December 29, 2017 1 minute ago, klos63 said: If he's 100% healthy, the trade would command a king's ransom. If there are major concerns about his shoulder, I can't see any team trading for him. I'd be surprised if Ballard dealt him if he's back to good health.
klos63 Posted December 29, 2017 Posted December 29, 2017 1 minute ago, 26CornerBlitz said: I'd be surprised if Ballard dealt him if he's back to good health. I totally agree. We are only talking about this because some poster decided to start a thread on it. It would be crazy for the Colts to trade him if he's healthy. 1
Recommended Posts