SonnyCID
Conocido Miembro
Kid's great. On Seattle he'd have 3 Super Bowls.
Sure...
Russell Wilson has the edge over Andrew Luck through first four seasons
Kid's great. On Seattle he'd have 3 Super Bowls.
Kid's great. On Seattle he'd have 3 Super Bowls.
Fair points but sooner or later, his play on the field has to reflect the expectations.
He also gets too much criticism. His contract per year may sound high, but hell, it's not that much for 3 years, 75 million? Texans paid 60+ for Oz? LOL. Luck is a much better QB IMO, but then I am wrong most of the time, so there is that...
Spoken like a true football fan. NFL GMs aren't fans though.
I also understand why you are championing this rationale. It's the position you find the team you root for currently in. I'm going to need to see a Mark Sanchez caliber QB win a Super Bowl (I know, I know...Trent Dilfer...).
Has anyone ever made more money off a 4-game run?
How do you back up your claim or is it just weak trolling?Kid's great. On Seattle he'd have 3 Super Bowls.
Show me a mediocre QB being paid say 14% of the cap that has won a Super Bowl.
Conversely, you could also say - Luck would be road pizza playing behind Seattle OL.
Same subjective crap, from another slant.
They've both had terrible lines. Only Wilson had a great running back and defense.
and indeed Luck was road pizza last year...
It's a circular argument EN, subjective and equally unprovable (whichever side of the roof you're on)
Eli Manning says hi.
Actually Manning accounted for 11.5% of the Giants cap in 2011.
Can't find anything for 2007, but considering he was on his rookie deal (6/54), I doubt it was anywhere near 14% of the cap.
I was referring to 2011. I don't think there is a huge difference between 11.5% and 14%.
And honestly I am only half serious as I think the 2011 team was arguably the luckiest team to ever win a Super Bowl.