Take more money to play with a playoff team after being tired of losing or take less for an 8-8 team?
Andrew Luck is closer to elite than Tannehill, but talk about being overrated. Hes a great young QB, but He's a turnover machine...
If I was starting a franchise right now and I could pick any player in the league, Andrew Luck would be at or near the top of my list.
Well then your calling our qb a turnover machine as well cause they have the same amount of picks after three years.. They're young qbs, one is 25 the other 26, those are necessary ints.. Your just used to one throwing some picks in the playoffs.. Its pretty cool Ryan is ascending like he is and I'm truly hopeful he adds one key element to his game..if he does that, excitement level will be thru the roof.
Why should we not praise or criticize who we think was most responsible for an outcome? Coaches aren't and shouldn't be immune to that. As to praise/criticism of coaches vs. their records, it's not as clear cut. I think fans rate coaches based on their perception of expected talent level on the team. Case in point: remember Wannstedt? We were more successful under Wannstedt in his first 4 years, averaging over 10 wins per season, than in any previous 4 year period since the early-to-mid 80's when Marino was at his best! Yet there is great vitriol towards Wannstedt not only today but back then. And what about Barry Switzer and why people think he won the SB with the Cowboys? So many think he was a bad NFL head coach even though he had winning seasons in his first few years and of course won the SB. Funny that JJ was the coach before both of them, and many say these coaches were just piggybacking off of JJ's good drafting etc.. Point is, I think fans are right to criticize coaches, and I don't think it's the record per se that matters as much as whether we think we're underperforming based on the perceived talent level of the team.
Im not big on criticizing coaches until they have had their fair amount of time reshaping a roster for the very reasons you mention so I agree to an extent, however, there are times that I see pretty glaring weaknesses and strengths with the amount of access we have to conform an opinion based on what our instincts and life experience tell us..
For the money wtf cares? I love AJ but at their current level, the tank is damn close to Jennings but the difference monetarily is more dramatic.
Luck is the only QB under 30 I would choose over Tannehill. To me, RT has Pro Bowl potential, but Luck has tier 1 HOF potential.
I would too, but he's not anywhere close to the best QB in the NFL. He's treated like he's Aaron Rodgers. He's no where close.
Usually I'm all about the homegrown talent, but when you look at the factors, both of their ages, both of their salaries, one who has a connection to the team schematically, and the fact that Lazor seems to want the ball spread around.
I would take Russell Wilson over Tannehill. I also think that Derek Carr is worth monitoring, I like very much what I've seen so far. If I do fantasy football or fan duel this year I'll have a sharp eye on a combo of Amari Cooper and Derek Carr, Cooper looks good to go as a rookie.
Also, look at Tanne's record against luck. I know it's a team game, but.. Tannehill has also managed to out duel Luck in an away game for the Dolphins. In their latest match up in 2013, he led the Dolphins to a thrilling 24-20 victory against Luck and the Colts in Indianapolis. Their other head-to-head match up was in the 2012 season, where Luck and the Colts pulled off a narrow 23-20 victory due in part to Adam Vinatieri’s 43-yard field goal with less than six minutes left in the game.
Dude, Tannehill is panning out, but the class of the young guns is Luck and Wilson. They're the real deal.
The defensive scheme in the second half of the 2012 game was baffling. Our DBs played so far off of the LOS that all Luck needed to do was throw short completions on third down and move the chains time after time. It made me scream. Sean Smith dropped at least one easy INT in that game that would have changed things too.
Personal preference, I guess. I like Wilson, and he does well in their system, but if I'm starting a team and running the offense the way I want it to run, he's absolutely not my guy. I don't want improv and running around. I want a trigger man who gets the job done time after time.
either Luck or Wilson you can easily build around so I don't choose the system first, choose the great player, then build around the qb..
The 2012 loss might have been when Lamar Miller dropped an easy pass in the left flat that would have probably gone for a TD, i don't remember. But it doesn't matter- the body of work as a whole, the efficiency and 4th quarter comebacks, escapability and ability to elongate a play all of it, Luck is the class of the young guns. Hands down.
No debate. I too think Luck is very good. I also like Wilson. I think Luck is the real deal, but.... he does play in a much much easier division than does Tanne. Just sayin'
Personally, I think in year one, that they rallied around, and played hard for Bruce Arians and Luck was Lucky to have had him in his first year...That guy can coach.
Like I said, Andrew Luck is closer to elite than Tannehill. No debating that at this very moment. Specifically regarding Andrew Luck and his body of work, he gets hyped up far beyond what he's achieved. To date, he's thrown 16 INT in two out of three seasons. And has self destructed in the playoffs with a ton of turnovers. It certainly helps him to play in the AFC south, a crap division where he can cake walk to a division title. He's a great young QB that shouldn't be placed on the same level of Rodgers, Manning, Brady, or Brees. And there's a bunch more QB's who I would argue are currently better at this moment.
he gets hyped up because he and wilsons current pace in their first three seasons are on record pace relative to other hall of fame qbs no? Luck has had 0 run game in his short career..plus I'm not sure what Qbs you think are better than him at the moment but the only ones I would think would be Brady, Rogers, Berger...he's def in my current top 5 and for sure the number one pick in the NFL current player draft, and from watching him play for all these years, bringing up division opponent toughness seems like a reach.
You're debating me on something we agree with. Andrew Luck is a great young QB. Based on what he's achieved thus far, he's been hyped up to a level I don't think he's currently at. He may be the best in the league 3-5 years from now, but as of the 2014 season, I don't automatically put Indy in the Superbowl just because Luck is the QB. He was lucky to have gotten to the AFC championship game competing against a lame Peyton Manning in the divisional round. If not for Peyton's injury, Denver wins going away. Too much firepower against and Luck only managed a 77 QB rating and a couple of picks. Colts lucked out (no pun intended) and then got MURKED in the AFC championship game. As for QB's I'd rank ahead of Luck, I don't see how you don't include Peyton and Brees. I wouldn't choose either to build a franchise around at this point, but they're certainly class of the field candidates. Drew Brees might be the most unappreciated QB in the NFL. Maybe NFL history... The guy has a track record that's insane over the last 7 seasons. Brees is averaging 37 TD's, 5,000 yards, and 68% competition over that time period. Does it every year like clockwork. And outside of Jimmy Graham, the saints don't exactly have a ton of play makers. Drew Brees IS the NO Saints. They're nothing without him. Rodgers, Brees, Manning, Brady, Romo, Big Ben, M. Ryan (another unappreciated QB), Wilson, are the guys I think are currently better than Andrew Luck. I think Luck can surpass Ryan, Wilson, and Big Ben in the near future, but as of this second, for one season and one season only, I'd rank them ahead of Luck.
