This is a serious question, are you "TylerSash" ?
I have no idea what your question means. Considering you think it's a hilarious slam to call someone asian like you did in the Jeremy Lin thread I am not surprised.
This is a serious question, are you "TylerSash" ?
Just another, currently banned, poster who was quick to call people idiots.
I have no idea what your question means. Considering you think it's a hilarious slam to call someone asian like you did in the Jeremy Lin thread I am not surprised.
"How good can Luck be when Wake Forest held him to 17 points. Wake Forest!"
As you're insinuating, I agree that the points against is not a good barometer. But Stanford scored 68 points against Wake Forest two years ago when they played, not 17. I think Stanford's lowest point total in a game this past season was 28.
I've just heard it said many times on espn and during games. Not saying he is more ready just that he is a better pocket passer. Luck likes to leave the pocket often as he likes roll out passes.I am not saying that this isnt true, but where did you get this information? Based on what I have read most pro scouts agree that Andrew Luck is the most NFL ready QB since John Elway. He played in a pro style offense, and against better defenses than RG3. They are similar in arm strength, luck would have an edge in accuracy (I know they had similar complete percentages, but RG3's spread O focused on short to intermediate routes), and RG3 is the better athlete. Both can be successful QBs in the NFL, but it seems like Luck would carry the least risk as his transition to the NFL would present less of a learning curve.Actually most pro scouts consider RG3 to be a far superior pocket passer.
"How good can Luck be when Wake Forest held him to 17 points. Wake Forest!"
As you're insinuating, I agree that the points against is not a good barometer. But Stanford scored 68 points against Wake Forest two years ago when they played, not 17. I think Stanford's lowest point total in a game this past season was 28.
This is where I got the info that says it was Wake beating Stanford 28-17, but as you correctly stated I just brought it up to show how irrelevant it is.
Stanford Cardinal vs. Wake Forest Demon Deacons - Recap - September 12, 2009 - ESPN
Griffin wore superman socks to heisman ceremony....I take Luck everytime. If im spending millions I want a qb that doesn't have a massive ego. A student of the game...aka not jamarcus russell
Personally, I'd take Griffin. His upside is quite a bit higher than Luck's (which is really saying something). Luck is probably the safer pick, which is why he'll go #1. But if someone were to trade up for Griffin, someone who could afford to keep him on the bench for a couple years, then he could be a great one. Just think: a guy with his arm strength, accuracy, athleticism, and smarts holding a clipboard behind Peyton in Miami for a couple years? That's a deadly recipe for the rest of the NFL.
This is the trap I fell for in Ryan Leaf you see the big arm, the mobility, the size and you become mesmerized by it......You take the safer pick, you take the better version of Matt Ryan and you build around it for the next decade.
The key difference between Griffin and Leaf is the mental and personality aspect. Griffin, IMO, is the TOTAL package, skill and intangibles. So is Luck. Leaf didn't have the intangibles.
I didn’t read this whole thread but the same things that I continually marvel at are present in here. He has a higher ceiling…?!?! Based on what, being fast and athletic….? He isn’t a no-brainer QB….I think he has a shot for sure, but there have been better, more polished, just as athletic QB’s fail before…..Really the same things we process to come up with our beliefs about our coaches and teams are the same that are prevalent in here…..
If Peyton Manning, Dan Marino, Joe Montana and Tom Brady were all coming out tomorrow with RG3 everyone & their dog would be saying RG3 has a better upside…?! And I say based on what…..and what proof is there that he is smarter than Mike Vick, who I personally love….he is at least accountable like most aren’t ….and clearly not a better athlete. Its highly debatable he throws a better ball for that matter. And with all Vicks tools, it isn’t his legs that win games, Peyton Manning and Tom Brady will always be better NFL QB’s than guys like RG3, until they prove otherwise.
And for that matter spread QB’s have a loooonnnngggg uphill battle in the NFL.
I didn’t read this whole thread but the same things that I continually marvel at are present in here. He has a higher ceiling…?!?! Based on what, being fast and athletic….? He isn’t a no-brainer QB….I think he has a shot for sure, but there have been better, more polished, just as athletic QB’s fail before…..Really the same things we process to come up with our beliefs about our coaches and teams are the same that are prevalent in here…..
If Peyton Manning, Dan Marino, Joe Montana and Tom Brady were all coming out tomorrow with RG3 everyone & their dog would be saying RG3 has a better upside…?! And I say based on what…..and what proof is there that he is smarter than Mike Vick, who I personally love….he is at least accountable like most aren’t ….and clearly not a better athlete. Its highly debatable he throws a better ball for that matter. And with all Vicks tools, it isn’t his legs that win games, Peyton Manning and Tom Brady will always be better NFL QB’s than guys like RG3, until they prove otherwise.
And for that matter spread QB’s have a loooonnnngggg uphill battle in the NFL.
Earned his bachelor's degree in Political Science in just 3 years at Baylor
On track to complete his master's degree next spring
This is an age issue I am twice your age as you get older you become more conservative, you take less risk. I see a guy that has been groomed to be a NFL QB since he was 8 versus a converted track star.
How did that work out for Mike Nolan and the 49ers who took the sure thing in Alex Smith over Aaron Rodgers?
Really, really....this is what we are going to use...I suppose you realise Ted Bundy and Charles Mason both about a 160 IQ, right?!