(07-27-2015, 10:35 PM)bfine32 Wrote: My $0.02 on Luck. I have him at #3 and there are a number of sites (ESPN, MSN, MMQB) that concur. I also think I have seen him as low as 6. If criteria was to start a franchise today i would only take Rogers ahead of him. FWIW. I'd take Big Ben over Manning or Brees.

So I don't think anyone is wrong for having him inside of or outside of the top 4. IMO he's inside.

(07-27-2015, 04:17 PM)Shake n Blake Wrote: Toast said "A top 5-10 range QB. (However you define and rank this.)"

I don't think most NFL fans view Luck as top 4 QB yet. 

Aaron Rodgers
Tom Brady
Peyton Manning
Drew Brees

Those are still the big 4 for now. They all have rings and they've all been elite for years. Luck is well on his way, but he still turns the ball over a lot (16 int's + league high 13 fumbles) and he doesn't have the ring yet. He's never had a completion % higher than 61.7. To me, he's just outside the top 4, in the same group as Rivers, Ben and Romo.

(07-27-2015, 10:37 PM)djs7685 Wrote: That's belittling to someone of Luck's caliber.

It would be like saying Tiger Woods in his prime was "pretty good" or something along those lines. Everything is relative. Being top 10 and the next elite QB is a great accomplishment for most QBs, but it's borderline insulting to a guy that's clearly ahead of almost all of his peers.

If you asked me if I'd rather have Luck or Brady, Manning, or Brees for a single year or career or any amount of time, you probably wouldn't like my answer, but I'd bet it would go along with a lot more NFL owners, GMs, and coaches than you may want to believe.

Luck isn't just the future, he's the present too. Peyton Manning is my favorite player in the NFL (fun fact of the day) and I'm a huge Brady fanboy too. I don't even really like Luck, but I believe Andrew is probably the best in the league right now other than Aaron Rodgers, and I don't even know how wide that gap is to be perfectly honest.

(07-28-2015, 12:38 AM)RoyleRedlegs Wrote: Luck hasn't hit his prime. He's just getting started. 

You are on crack if you seriously think saying he's the next elite QB is in anyway insulting. 

You sound like the nutjob Dalton homers. Who you hate. 

(07-24-2015, 02:01 AM)Wes Mantooth Wrote: You can choose TWO of the following additions to this team.  Whatcha got?

-A top 5-10 range QB.  (However you define and rank this.)
-Any offensive player from any other team, outside of QB.
-Any defensive player ever.  In the history of the league.
-Any Bengals great that's not a QB.  Ever.  Whoever you like.
-Any current NFL coach.
-Yourself.  You're paid your current salary for whatever you do.  But you get to experience being part of the team for one full year.
-Turd Furgeson.

Make your picks, and please name your hypothetical choice.  Hopefully this is a little fun, just trying to create some talking points.

(07-24-2015, 04:13 PM)Benton Wrote: 1. Sam Wyche (any non-QB Bengal great)
2. Lawrence Taylor (any defensive player)

(07-27-2015, 01:12 PM)djs7685 Wrote: If you're just poo-pooing on him poo-pooing on your selection of Andrew Luck, that's fine, but it doesn't make someone's opinion invalidated just because they feel Andrew Luck doesn't fit the criteria. I bet you'd find many, many more people that would agree with him that Luck is top 4.

Toast did originally state "however you define and rank this", but don't be surprised when somebody doesn't agree with your assessment of a top QB in the league.

(07-28-2015, 11:04 AM)Stewy Wrote: #1 - He drew first blood giving an unsolicited opinion on my selection, I responded in kind.  Get over it.
#2 - After reading many responses, you are clearly wrong considering the bolded portion above.  Looks like you and JC are on an island.

(07-28-2015, 11:23 AM)djs7685 Wrote: http://mmqb.si.com/2015/07/03/nfl-quarterback-rankings

http://www.msn.com/en-us/sports/nfl/men-under-center-ranking-each-nfl-teams-qb-situation-for-2015/ss-BBjMlU2#image=32

http://abcnews.go.com/Sports/2015-nfl-qb-tier-rankings/story?id=32652348&page=3 (ESPN's insider list)

Silly me for not listening to a handful of Bengals' fans instead of using these sources when I speak of what people generally think about a player  

(07-27-2015, 11:01 PM)blt4584 Wrote: I would probably put Luck above Manning right now. Peyton has the legacy, but I wouldn't be surprised if he ends up looking pretty average this season.

(07-28-2015, 08:58 PM)Shake n Blake Wrote: That's quite possible, but it's speculating. Based on their production from last year, I can't put Luck ahead of Manning yet.

Just my opinion.

(07-28-2015, 10:27 PM)blt4584 Wrote: That's understandable.

I saw two very different Peyton Mannings last year. First half of the season Peyton looked real good while the second half version looked worn down.

(07-28-2015, 06:49 PM)Shake n Blake Wrote: From the ABC article you listed:

"The five voters who placed Luck in the second tier cited a few reasons. Some thought Luck needed to do a better job protecting the football. Others pointed to Luck's underwhelming resume in the postseason. Luck also benefits from playing in a weak division."

There are other sources who agree that Luck is not quite top 4 yet, including:

the Indianapolis Star (you'd think they'd be biased) - http://www.indystar.com/story/sports/nfl/2015/07/17/nfl-qb-ranks-andrew-luck-aaron-rodgers-peyton-manning-drew-brees-tom-brady/30294161/

USA Today - http://sportswire.usatoday.com/2015/07/17/qb-rank-nfl-quarterbacks-rankings/

Fansided - http://fansided.com/2015/06/20/nfl-quarterback-power-rankings/5/


Some might view Luck as a top 4 guy already. I respect that, but I think it's it a bit early for that. Rodgers, Brady, Peyton and Brees all posted phenomenal stats last year and they're all proven in the playoffs. As much grief as Peyton takes for choking, he took the Broncos to the SB just a couple seasons ago. Luck has been pretty bad in the playoffs to be honest.

It's my opinion that he's not top 4 yet, and it's not a ridiculous opinion. Some have him in there, some don't. Both sides have valid points.

(07-29-2015, 08:56 AM)djs7685 Wrote: I find it interesting that for some reason you quoted a part of the article I posted even though it doesn't go against my point whatsoever. 5 of the 35 (14%) of the voters put Luck out of the 1st tier. That means that 86% put Luck in tier 1, that's sort of proving my point, no? Brady and Rodgers were the only unanimous 1st tier QBs, so using the logic that 5 voters put Luck out of the 1st tier somehow goes against what I've been saying, that means that Brees and Manning aren't 1st tier either. The fact is, the other 30 guys must have ranked Luck awfully high for him to still end up as number 3 (the highest average vote for any non-unanimous 1st tier QB), and if you read the quotes, there are at the very least, a couple of those polled that put Luck at #1 even ahead of Rodgers.

As far as your links go, I must apologize, but I'll take the opinion of NFL personnel directors, GMs, coaches, and coordinators over a random newspaper or two and a blog I've never heard of.

I can't bash the other elite QBs for having good teams because it's not really their fault, but you have to be impressed that Luck turned a shitty team into an immediate contender. That's what elite QBs do, and that's exactly what he did.

There is a lot of opinion involved, and we can agree to disagree on the matter, but as I said before, there are more reputable sources that list Luck in the top 4 opposed to the ones listing him outside of it. I don't know if it's a "ridiculous opinion" that he's not top 4, but there are clearly more people in the football world that agree with my perspective, but their word isn't gospel either.

Hell, I disagree with a lot of the NFL Top 100 players, and that's voted on by NFL guys, albeit players and not coaches and personnel directors, but it's at least a similar situation. All is good.