I don't think Love will last until 13

[twfish]

2 hours ago, WarGhost21 said:

There certainly is a decent chance that he goes before our 1st pick. However, based on a talent perspective and how raw he is, he's a 3rd round caliber player at best. There is a reason why I don't want a QB round 1, and it is because this class isn't that good at the position. 

 

I have Burrow and Herbert graded as mid-late firsts, Tua would be there too if not for injury, and every other QB has a 3rd round grade or lower. After those top 3, I rank them as such:

 

Jacob Eason (3)

Jake Fromm (3)

Jordan Love (3-4)

Anthony Gordon (3-4)

Jalen Hurts (3-5)

Kellen Mond (4-5)

 

And then the rest after that can be mixed around however you please. It's a poor talent class at the position, either pick one Round 2 or don't pick one at all.

Burrow a mid first talent? The heisman winner and one of the most polished passers that has came out that i can remember. Please explain another player that is going have an impact on a team like he will

[Moosejawcolt]

3 hours ago, DougDew said:

I think this QB class is BETTER than the 2018 class that saw 3 QBs go top 3 and then Allen at 7 after a trade up.

 

In the poll thread, I said that 5 QBs will go before pick 13 and I'm sticking to it.

 

for now

 

Agreed but I didn't think the 2018 class was thst great.   

[Restinpeacesweetchloe]

3 minutes ago, Moosejawcolt said:

Young qbs fail if u don't build around them.  Dungy said years ago that exact thing.  U need the pieces so it doesn't put to much pressure on them.  Continue to build the D.  Add some play makers. Now give Brissett another year and let's see  these guys develop.  If Brissett sucks, then draft a guy in 2021 as he is coming to a talented team. Just my thought.

You don’t wait on a QB if one is right there for your taking. You never know when another one is going to be in your grasps to get.

[#12.]

16 minutes ago, stitches said:

Jacoby is worse at his job than every single other starting position on this team(

 

Not sure if it's true, but during the season I considered whether that might be true or not.  

 

 

 

 

[stitches]

17 minutes ago, Moosejawcolt said:

The D is horrendous.  We need 2 starting DT's.  Is the secondary going to improve or so we need to draft a corner? Are we going to need a new LT? We could also use a DE.  This D was bad the last half of the season.  I thought if anything the D would get better as the year progressed as they were young.   They didn't. It was almost epic bad they were.

I agree the D was not great the last 4-5 games(they actually were pretty good until that meltdown in the Tennessee game), I disagree that it was horrendous, though. I think people underestimate how good they were the first half of the season. We do need some game changers at 3T or EDGE(hopefully Kemoko can stay healthy). The DBs are inconsistent and we don't really have a surefire CB1, but Rock had a relatively good promising rookie season for the responsibility he was given off the jump. Tell showed some promise too... Willis surprised me with how ready and solid he was. I wouldn't mind reinforcing that unit, but IMO the problem of that unit right now is more that it's young than it's bad. BTW if anything IMO the last month or so of the season, it was the vets that didn't perform as well as they had to, rather than the youngsters. The vets on the DLine couldn't create pressure to save their lives, Malik had possibly the worst month of his career, Kenny got injured and didn't play... 

[lollygagger8]

I think Ballard will snag Lamb at #13 and then draft a QB in the 2nd or 3rd round 

[Restinpeacesweetchloe]

This is a good QB class. Even the reporters  agree.

 

 

[twfish]

2 minutes ago, Moosejawcolt said:

Young qbs fail if u don't build around them.  Dungy said years ago that exact thing.  U need the pieces so it doesn't put to much pressure on them.  Continue to build the D.  Add some play makers. Now give Brissett another year and let's see  these guys develop.  If Brissett sucks, then draft a guy in 2021 as he is coming to a talented team. Just my thought.

This team went to the divisional round last year. They had a top 10 defense last year and a top 5 offense last year. We have one of the best o-lines in the NFL, one of the best line backer duos in the league. The team only got better from the team last year talent wise. As a matter of fact the team started out 5-2 and where playing great until teams began stacking the box, limiting our run game and forcing Brissett to pass and he could not get it done, plain and simple. QB is our biggest need and it's not even close to any other position. You want to see Jacoby for another year that's fine, draft his replacement now and get him use to the NFL and play him in 2021. This isn't a thing to just push off for another year and hope for more QB's next year.

[Restinpeacesweetchloe]

1 minute ago, stitches said:

I agree the D was not great the last 4-5 games(they actually were pretty good until that meltdown in the Tennessee game), I disagree that it was horrendous, though. I think people underestimate how good they were the first half of the season. We do need some game changers at 3T or EDGE(hopefully Kemoko can stay healthy). The DBs are inconsistent and we don't really have a surefire CB1, but Rock had a relatively good promising rookie season for the responsibility he was given off the jump. Tell showed some promise too... Willis surprised me with how ready and solid he was. I wouldn't mind enforcing that unit, but IMO the problem of that unit right now is more that it's young than it's bad. BTW if anything IMO the last month or so of the season, it was the vets that didn't perform as well as they had to, rather than the youngsters. The vets on the DLine couldn't create pressure to save their lives, Malik had possibly the worst month of his career, Kenny got injured and didn't play... 

The secondary will improve once the pass rush improves.

[BleedBlu8792]

12 minutes ago, Moosejawcolt said:

Young qbs fail if u don't build around them.  Dungy said years ago that exact thing.  U need the pieces so it doesn't put to much pressure on them.  Continue to build the D.  Add some play makers. Now give Brissett another year and let's see  these guys develop.  If Brissett sucks, then draft a guy in 2021 as he is coming to a talented team. Just my thought.

 

So who do you have pegged for 2021 if  JB bombs, excluding Fields and Lawrence?

[WarGhost21]

10 minutes ago, twfish said:

Burrow a mid first talent? The heisman winner and one of the most polished passers that has came out that i can remember. Please explain another player that is going have an impact on a team like he will

Burrow is good, don’t get me wrong, but he came into this year having not done much of note in prior seasons, and then got it going with a top 3 offensive line, a top 5 WR room, and a good RB as well. He looked polished, sure, but he didn’t look totally elite. He’ll be a top 15 QB in the league for a while, but I don’t think he’ll ever be considered a top 3 or even top 5 QB. Not to mention that there are many other players in the class with insane talent, such as Derrick Brown, Jerry Jeudy, DeAndre Swift, Chase Young, and even Jeffrey Okudah. Lots of really good talent all around, which is the only reason why I don’t say Burrow is a top 10 player for the class based upon talent

[stitches]

6 minutes ago, Chloe6124 said:

This is a good QB class. Even the reporters  agree.

 

 

Nice. Give us all the QBs! We want them all! 

[BleedBlue4Shoe86]

13 minutes ago, Chloe6124 said:

You don’t wait on a QB if one is right there for your taking. You never know when another one is going to be in your grasps to get.

I will say that according to everyone on this board, if we build around JB and he starts, we will suck(LOL).  So if that is the case draft Trevor Lawrence or Justin Fields next year.

[stitches]

1 minute ago, BleedBlue4Shoe86 said:

I will say that according to everyone on this board, if we build around JB and he starts, we will suck(LOL).  So if that is the case draft Trevor Lawrence or Justin Fields next year.

JB won't actively suck. Actively sucking is much worse than what Jacoby does. Jacoby is just ... there... doing close to nothing to either win you the game or lose you the game... so it becomes up to the rest of the roster whether you win or lose. Is your run game and defense good enough? You might win! If one of them is not, you are most likely losing. Jacoby is great for games where we have the clear talent advantage because he won't lose you the game by throwing picks(what Hoyer did in that Miami game for example). He's not great when the opponent decides to shut down your run game(what teams decided to do most of the last 2 months) and your QB needs to make some plays to win you the game. 

 

IMO this roster is good enough to win between 6 and 10 games with Jacoby(depending on various breaks that might either go in our favor or against us). But the point is - we are not bad enough to lose enough games for Lawrence or Fields. 

[BleedBlue4Shoe86]

1 minute ago, stitches said:

JB won't actively suck. Actively sucking is much worse than what Jacoby does. Jacoby is just ... there... doing close to nothing to either win you the game or lose you the game... so it becomes up to the rest of the roster whether you win or lose. Is your run game and defense good enough? You might win! If one of them is not, you are most likely losing. Jacoby is great for games where we have the clear talent advantage because he won't lose you the game by throwing picks(what Hoyer did in that Miami game for example). He's not great when the opponent decides to shut down your run game(what teams decided to do most of the last 2 months) and your QB needs to make some plays to win you the game. 

 

IMO this roster is good enough to win between 6 and 10 games with Jacoby(depending on various breaks that might either go in our favor or against us). But the point is - we are not bad enough to lose enough games for Lawrence or Fields. 

so let me ask this, if he improves over the offseason and we can consistently win 9-10 games, with the occasional 11-12 wins (if we get hot).  Would you not take that going forward.  That would consistently put us in the playoffs and competing for Superbowls.

 

Just curious

[Restinpeacesweetchloe]

11 minutes ago, stitches said:

Nice. Give us all the QBs! We want them all! 

I was just listening to a video. They don’t think Fromm will go until the 3rd or 4th rd. He has a great resume and will do good in interviews. He is very charismatic. Maybe a team in the first will fall in love with him. I actually think he is a good fit for NE. I doubt a team ahead of the colts take him.

[DougDew]

30 minutes ago, Moosejawcolt said:

Agreed but I didn't think the 2018 class was thst great.   

I apparently got one too many QBs in the top 7 that year.  

 

I didn't think it was that great, which is why I thought there would be more QBs taken top 13 this year.

 

How about Kyler Murray.  He went #1 and I never saw the appeal in that at all.

 

But, he's a modern, mobile/running play making broken play QB, and that seems to be the trendiness now.

 

Edit: I guess the pundits are coming around to the notion that this is a very good QB class.

[stitches]

16 minutes ago, BleedBlue4Shoe86 said:

so let me ask this, if he improves over the offseason and we can consistently win 9-10 games, with the occasional 11-12 wins (if we get hot).  Would you not take that going forward.  That would consistently put us in the playoffs and competing for Superbowls.

 

Just curious

Well... depends on how much he improves and in what ways. I also don't care for QB wins. They are close to meaningless stat for me. I won't be swayed by whether we win 5 games or 12, when evaluating the QB play. It's about how the QB himself played. The Bears won 12 games with bad Mitchell Trubiski and Atlanta won 7 with incredible Matt Ryan in 2018. This means nothing about the QB play - the team might have won 12 because of him or in spite of him. You have to look at every instance individually. 

 

Also... 9-10 win teams are not very frequently in the Superbowl, let alone winning it. The last one is the Baltimore Ravens in 2012. That's 8 years ago. Superbowl teams are usually dominant in the regular season too... not just... barely making it in the playoffs. You need a consistent 12-14 win team and for that in most cases you need a great QB performance. I'm not sure Jacoby can improve to that point... but I wouldn't mind seeing it next year(I still think he starts in 2020 for us).

[twfish]

3 minutes ago, BleedBlue4Shoe86 said:

so let me ask this, if he improves over the offseason and we can consistently win 9-10 games, with the occasional 11-12 wins (if we get hot).  Would you not take that going forward.  That would consistently put us in the playoffs and competing for Superbowls.

 

Just curious

No that's not enough for me. That's mediocre to me and basically what the Cowboys have been the past 10+ years.

[DougDew]

9 minutes ago, stitches said:

You need a consistent 12-14 win team and for that in most cases you need a great QB performance. I'm not sure Jacoby can improve to that point... but I wouldn't mind seeing it next year(I still think he starts in 2020 for us).

Respectfully, getting that number of wins each year is not really sustainable.  Its why the term "window of opportunity" gets used.  I think you're right, teams that win the SB are dominate through the season and they have that many wins.

 

Not talking about what QB we need, but I think SB winning teams happen to have everything come together during their winning season, including great QB play.  NE was consistent because Brady is consistently great, and they always play in a crappy division.  As did we when we had Manning.

[stitches]

9 minutes ago, DougDew said:

Respectfully, getting that number of wins each year is not really sustainable.  Its why the term "window of opportunity" gets used.  I think you're right, teams that win the SB are dominate through the season and they have that many wins.

 

Not talking about what QB we need, but I think SB winning teams happen to have everything come together during their winning season, including great QB play.  NE was consistent because Brady is consistently great, and they always play in a crappy division.  As did we when we had Manning.

Maybe not every year because there are chance/injury things that happen every year that impact the final count, but IMO you have to be a threat to finish with that many wins almost every year your QB is healthy.

 

But yeah, we won't always get all pro performances out of 2 players on rookie contracts for example. You will have weaker rosters some years, while retooling, you will have stronger rosters other years when you hit high on your picks/FAs. But still the QB should be the most stable/consistently good part of your roster when healthy simply because it's the piece that will most likely stay with you for longest if he's a true franchise QB and it's the piece that impacts winning the most. 

[chad72]

26 minutes ago, stitches said:

Well... depends on how much he improves and in what ways. I also don't care for QB wins. They are close to meaningless stat for me. I won't be swayed by whether we win 5 games or 12, when evaluating the QB play. It's about how the QB himself played. The Bears won 12 games with bad Mitchell Trubiski and Atlanta won 7 with incredible Matt Ryan in 2018. This means nothing about the QB play - the team might have won 12 because of him or in spite of him. You have to look at every instance individually. 

 

Also... 9-10 win teams are not very frequently in the Superbowl, let alone winning it. The last one is the Baltimore Ravens in 2012. That's 8 years ago. Superbowl teams are usually dominant in the regular season too... not just... barely making it in the playoffs. You need a consistent 12-14 win team and for that in most cases you need a great QB performance. I'm not sure Jacoby can improve to that point... but I wouldn't mind seeing it next year(I still think he starts in 2020 for us).

 

Well said.

 

Let us look at the 9 or 10 team winners that made the playoffs and won the SB as a wild card:

 

2005 Steelers - 11-5 (6th seed)

2007 Giants - 10-6 (5th seed)

2010 Packers - 10-6  (6th seed)

2011 Giants - 9-7 (4th seed)

2012 Ravens - 10-6 (rested starters while up 10-5 in last game since they couldn't improve seeding)

 

Everyone of them had a QB that could make plays in the passing game when needed at all levels (short, intermediate and deep). Ravens' Flacco run was second time a QB threw 10 plus TD passes without an INT, after Montana, and again, goes to show you the impact of the QB play there where Flacco was slinging deep passes to Torrey Smith and Jacoby Jones. Flacco was in year 5 of his rookie contract then. The Ravens were knocking on the door for nearly a decade with elite defensive players till QB play, yes, QB play actually put them over the hump.

 

That is why Russell Wilson's contribution cannot be diminished even if they won as a complete team vs the Broncos in 2013. He has just backed it up in the years to follow. Even the 2008 Cardinals that made the SB with a 9-7 record had Kurt Warner, and would have won it if not for the plays made by the QB on the other side, Big Ben.

 

There is no such ceiling visible with Jacoby, based on what we have seen so far. That is why we have to invest in someone that has a higher ceiling even if JB is the starter in 2020. When push comes to shove, the QB WILL have to make plays at a high consistent level in the passing game in the playoffs at some point in time en route to a SB, just to get there.

 

[DougDew]

And Flacco had both Torrey Smith and Jacoby Jones.  Flacco didn't do it by himself.  Not that any one of the three are great by themselves, but they did play well together that year.

[Stephen]

4 hours ago, DougDew said:

I think this QB class is BETTER than the 2018 class that saw 3 QBs go top 3 and then Allen at 7 after a trade up.

 

In the poll thread, I said that 5 QBs will go before pick 13 and I'm sticking to it.

 

for now

 

I said 4 who is the 5th. I had love, herbert,  burrow, and tua before 13

[Stephen]

4 hours ago, WarGhost21 said:

There certainly is a decent chance that he goes before our 1st pick. However, based on a talent perspective and how raw he is, he's a 3rd round caliber player at best. There is a reason why I don't want a QB round 1, and it is because this class isn't that good at the position. 

 

I have Burrow and Herbert graded as mid-late firsts, Tua would be there too if not for injury, and every other QB has a 3rd round grade or lower. After those top 3, I rank them as such:

 

Jacob Eason (3)

Jake Fromm (3)

Jordan Love (3-4)

Anthony Gordon (3-4)

Jalen Hurts (3-5)

Kellen Mond (4-5)

 

And then the rest after that can be mixed around however you please. It's a poor talent class at the position, either pick one Round 2 or don't pick one at all.

I have burrow  rated higher than Lawrence 

[Restinpeacesweetchloe]

Josh Allen went at 7 and he was very raw. Teams will draft QB in the first round because of potential. That doesn’t mean they are reaching.

[DougDew]

16 minutes ago, Stephen said:

I said 4 who is the 5th. I had love, herbert,  burrow, and tua before 13

Eason.

 

I said 5 as just an extreme answer.  To make a point that the QBs will go higher than how they are rated presently.

 

There is more information to come in the next few weeks.  Notably on Love, Eason, and Fromm.

[2006Coltsbestever]

58 minutes ago, stitches said:

Well... depends on how much he improves and in what ways. I also don't care for QB wins. They are close to meaningless stat for me. I won't be swayed by whether we win 5 games or 12, when evaluating the QB play. It's about how the QB himself played. The Bears won 12 games with bad Mitchell Trubiski and Atlanta won 7 with incredible Matt Ryan in 2018. This means nothing about the QB play - the team might have won 12 because of him or in spite of him. You have to look at every instance individually. 

 

Also... 9-10 win teams are not very frequently in the Superbowl, let alone winning it. The last one is the Baltimore Ravens in 2012. That's 8 years ago. Superbowl teams are usually dominant in the regular season too... not just... barely making it in the playoffs. You need a consistent 12-14 win team and for that in most cases you need a great QB performance. I'm not sure Jacoby can improve to that point... but I wouldn't mind seeing it next year(I still think he starts in 2020 for us).

"you need a consistent 12-14 win team". You are asking almost the impossible. That is unrealistic for almost any team or QB to achieve. 2 teams over the last 20 years did it consistently and that was us and the Pats. We had Manning and they had Brady. That is arguably the 2 best QB's of all-time. We never even won 12 games with Andrew here. I would take 10 wins every year making the playoffs with the occasional 12 win season and SB run sprinkled in at times.

[stitches]

24 minutes ago, 2006Coltsbestever said:

"you need a consistent 12-14 win team". You are asking almost the impossible. That is unrealistic for almost any team or QB to achieve. 2 teams over the last 20 years did it consistently and that was us and the Pats. We had Manning and they had Brady. That is arguably the 2 best QB's of all-time. We never even won 12 games with Andrew here. I would take 10 wins every year making the playoffs with the occasional 12 win season and SB run sprinkled in at times.

 

We never won 12 with Luck because he literally had one of the worst OLines in football for the the duration of his career here(except for last year), he had a period of 5 YEARS without a 100 yard rusher. He had a horrible defense for majority of his years too. You still have to have a team around the QB, no matter how good he is. QB is the most important position by a huge margin. A QB by himself still cannot compensate for the other 21 players you put on the field. Having a great QB does not absolve you from the responsibility of putting a good roster around him. Those Luck teams never had a chance... and not because of Luck. 

 

I truly think Luck with this roster could have had a pretty nice series of seasons coming up... Alas, we never got to see it. And I still think we can have pretty good run going forward if we hit on a QB. 

 

edit: oh and I forgot - he had Chuck as his HC and series of Air Coryell disciples. 

[DougDew]

18 minutes ago, stitches said:

 

We never won 12 with Luck because he literally had one of the worst OLines in football for the the duration of his career here(except for last year), he had a period of 5 YEARS without a 100 yard rusher. He had a horrible defense for majority of his years too. You still have to have a team around the QB, no matter how good he is. QB is the most important position by a huge margin. A QB by himself still cannot compensate for the other 21 players you put on the field. Having a great QB does not absolve you from the responsibility of putting a good roster around him. Those Luck teams never had a chance... and not because of Luck. 

 

I truly think Luck with this roster could have had a pretty nice series of seasons coming up... Alas, we never got to see it. And I still think we can have pretty good run going forward if we hit on a QB. 

The worst Oline in Luck's career was probably when he had Satele, McGlynn, and Winston Justice, which was his rookie year and we went 11-5. 

 

His skilled position players were outstanding then.  Probably the best he ever had.

 

TY was good, Reggie was younger and great, Dwayne Allen was good, Donnie Avery was good, and Vic Ballard was good.

 

TY, DA, and Vic all contributed immediately as rookies.

[2006Coltsbestever]

6 minutes ago, stitches said:

 

We never won 12 with Luck because he literally had one of the worst OLines in football for the the duration of his career here(except for last year), he had a period of 5 YEARS without a 100 yard rusher. He had a horrible defense for majority of his years too. You still have to have a team around the QB, no matter how good he is. QB is the most important position by a huge margin. A QB by himself still cannot compensate for the other 21 players you put on the field. Having a great QB does not absolve you from the responsibility of putting a good roster around him. Those Luck teams never had a chance... and not because of Luck. 

 

I truly think Luck with this roster could have had a pretty nice series of seasons coming up... Alas, we never got to see it. And I still think we can have pretty good run going forward if we hit on a QB. 

I agree with this post, all I am saying is, asking a team + their QB to win 12-14 games consistently is unrealistic. In recent history only Manning and Brady have done it consistently. FWIW had we had Luck this year we may have won 12 games, Luck is that good. 

3 minutes ago, DougDew said:

The worst Oline in Luck's career was probably when he had Satele, McGlynn, and Winston Justice, which was his rookie year and we went 13-3. 

 

His skilled position players were outstanding then.  Probably the best he ever had.

 

TY was good, Reggie was younger and great, Dwayne Allen was good, Donnie Avery was good, and Vic Ballard was good.

 

TY, DA, and Vic all contributed immediately as rookies.

We actually went 11-5 but Luck no doubt carried that team.

[stitches]

5 minutes ago, 2006Coltsbestever said:

I agree with this post, all I am saying is, asking a team + their QB to win 12-14 games consistently is unrealistic. In recent history only Manning and Brady have done it consistently. FWIW had we had Luck this year we may have won 12 games, Luck is that good. 

12-14 is a bit aggressive, I admitted so earlier. Mainly because of things that have to do with chance and injuries, but IMO if your franchise QB is healthy you have to be a threat to get to 12 wins almost yearly and in some years go to 13-14. 

[DougDew]

3 minutes ago, 2006Coltsbestever said:

I agree with this post, all I am saying is, asking a team + their QB to win 12-14 games consistently is unrealistic. In recent history only Manning and Brady have done it consistently. FWIW had we had Luck this year we may have won 12 games, Luck is that good. 

We actually went 11-5 but Luck no doubt carried that team.

TY, Reggie, Avery, DA, and VB..

 

All 3 WRs, his TE, and his RB were collectively his best skill position players he ever had.  By far, IMO.  And three were rookies.   And I'd take that group now in a second, except maybe replace DA with Doyle.

 

His oline had Satele, McGlynn, Justice, and AC was only a second year player.  By far his worst oline, IMO.

[stitches]

10 minutes ago, DougDew said:

The worst Oline in Luck's career was probably when he had Satele, McGlynn, and Winston Justice, which was his rookie year and we went 13-3. 

 

His skilled position players were outstanding then.  Probably the best he ever had.

 

TY was good, Reggie was younger and great, Dwayne Allen was good, Donnie Avery was good, and Vic Ballard was good.

 

TY, DA, and Vic all contributed immediately as rookies.

Agree about his weapons in his early years. Just a slight correction - we went 11-5 back then. 

[2006Coltsbestever]

2 minutes ago, stitches said:

Agree about his weapons in his early years. Just a slight correction - we went 11-5 back then. 

Yeah we were 11-5 but I would take that every year because teams that go 11-5 make the playoffs 99% of the time.

[2006Coltsbestever]

To the OP regarding if Love will be there at #13? I am starting to doubt it. He may be gone before #13.

[stitches]

8 minutes ago, 2006Coltsbestever said:

Yeah we were 11-5 but I would take that every year because teams that go 11-5 make the playoffs 99% of the time.

After the second attempt I knew we were doomed the moment we meet the better teams in the playoffs, because Chuck was just clueless and not setting up this team for success and we had serious holes that as good as Luck was he couldn't compensate for in a game against the best game planners and rosters in the league. 

 

In this respect, playoffs are fun and all but having a legit chance to compete against the best (win or lose) has always been the thing that excited me. At the time, I never felt like we had a chance against the best. 

[2006Coltsbestever]

1 minute ago, stitches said:

After the second attempt I knew we were doomed the moment we meet the better teams in the playoffs, because Chuck was just clueless and not setting up this team for success and we had serious holes that as good as Luck was he couldn't compensate for in a game against the best game planners and roster in the league. 

 

In this respect, playoffs are fun and all but having a legit chance to compete against the best (win or lose) has always been the thing that excited me. At the time, I never felt like we had a chance against the best. 

I thought in 2014 we had a chance but I knew winning at Foxboro would be a pain/tough and that it was. We just never could match the Patriots fire power. With Manning from 2003-2009, I always felt like we had a chance to win the SB. 

[DougDew]

1 minute ago, stitches said:

After the second attempt I knew we were doomed the moment we meet the better teams in the playoffs, because Chuck was just clueless and not setting up this team for success and we had serious holes that as good as Luck was he couldn't compensate for in a game against the best game planners and roster in the league. 

 

In this respect, playoffs are fun and all but having a legit chance to compete against the best (win or lose) has always been the thing that excited me. At the time, I never felt like we had a chance against the best. 

The bye week teams are usually much better than the wildcard/divisional teams.  They have the talent and are rolling that season which is why they have the bye in the first place.  We were always outmatched during those playoff seasons.

[chad72]

1 minute ago, 2006Coltsbestever said:

"you need a consistent 12-14 win team". You are asking almost the impossible. That is unrealistic for almost any team or QB to achieve. 2 teams over the last 20 years did it consistently and that was us and the Pats. We had Manning and they had Brady. That is arguably the 2 best QB's of all-time. We never even won 12 games with Andrew here. I would take 10 wins every year making the playoffs with the occasional 12 win season and SB run sprinkled in at times.

 

True, I think he got carried away with emphasizing the QB aspect that he flash backed to the Peyton years . If you have that very good to elite QB, you have a puncher's chance every time. He does not see it in JB, that was the eventual point.

 

Even, for all the 12 game seasons we had, we had only 1 SB to show for it. Luck had 2 11-5 seasons, in one of which we went to the AFCCG. 11-12 wins is the sweet spot for a possible Top 2 seeding, and thus greater chances of making it to the SB. 

 

Let us put it this way, a very good/elite QB that can put the team on his back when the supporting cast has a few bad games can make the difference of 2-3 games every season, IMO. That would be the difference between a 7-9 win team to a 10-12 win team consistently. If you are good enough to get double digit wins every year with a marquee QB, you have a shot in the playoffs, IMO. We just do not have one on our roster right now after Luck's retirement, that is the bottom line.