Cam v. Luck - The "Build Around" Philosophy

[CRA]

If you look at all the players Indy has brought in. You could dismiss them as easily as you have dismissed all of the guys we brought in. How many difference makers have they added?

They have built around there QBs preferences. Which makes him better and QB is the ultimate difference maker.

Greener and Allen were both drafted to compliment Luck's style. They can both be Olsen like in the near future. Have you watched Hilton? He is another key cog. All about building around your QB. Since Luck was selected 7 of there 8 1st-3rd round picks have been offensive to build around Luck.

They have done more in a less amount of time for their QB.

[TonyN]

4 of their 5 losses came against teams that did not make the playoffs.

7 of their 11 wins came against their weak division and the Raiders. They got smoked by the Rams. That leaves 8 games against teams with a winning record (I believe) so I think they went 4-4 against teams with a winning record. Unless I am missing something.

They are a good football team, but if they played in a better division they would hover around an 7-11 win team. And not a perennial double digit win team that has division locked up before week 1 even starts.

They had some good wins and some not impressive losses like losing at home to the average Dolphins and getting demolished by Zona and the Rams (without Bradford)

They are a solid team, that benefits with having a bare minimum 6 games against garbage QBs every year.

 

 

The Colts went 5 and 4 against teams with winning records and lost one game to a team with a losing record. 

 

The Panthers went 3 and 4 against teams with winning records and lost one game to a team with a losing record. 

 

Whose got the better resume ???

[thefuzz]

I agree. I just think while we're waiting for that we shouldn't expect Cam to put up guady numbers like Luck, or use that to say Luck is better. Indy may not be the best team on the league but they are geared more towards offense than us.

 

 

Personally, I couldn't care less about his numbers, what ESPN, says about him, or how the fan boys feel, all I care about is wins, and having a shot.

[Oudaman90]

I will also like to add that building up the defense is =/= to building around Cam. That's building around Luke. If the inverse of last year happened and we become the #2 offense in the league would that be considered helping Luke out? If we were blowing teams out he wouldn't have to worry about making teams go three and out on every series.

[teeray]

The Colts went 5 and 4 against teams with winning records and lost one game to a team with a losing record. 

 

The Panthers went 3 and 4 against teams with winning records and lost one game to a team with a losing record. 

 

Whose got the better resume ???

 

 

Colts went 4-4 against teams with a winning record:  Wins (Seattle, Denver, SF, and Chiefs) Losses (Zona, Miami, Cincy, and San Diego)

 

Panthers went 4-3 against teams with a winning record:  Wins (Miami, New Orleans, SF, and New England) Losses (New Orleans, Arizona, and Seattle)

 

 

So..... I guess by your logic we do?

 

 

[teeray]

Actually Miami went 8-8 

 

So we would be 4-3 against teams not below .500

 

And Colts would be 4-4 against teams not below .500

 

 

[TonyN]

Except you are wrong.

 

Colts went 4-4 against teams with a winning record:  Wins (Seattle, Denver, SF, and Chiefs) Losses (Zona, Miami, Cincy, and San Diego)

 

Panthers went 4-3 against teams with a winning record:  Wins (Miami, New Orleans, SF, and New England) Losses (New Orleans, Arizona, and Seattle)

 

 

So..... I guess by your logic we do?

 

Except you are wrong.

 

The Colts beat the Chefs (11-5) twice.

They also beat the Broncos (13-3)

Seahawks (13-3) and

49'ers (12-4)

 

The Panthers wins against teams with winning records came against the Saints, 49'ers and Pats. Miami finished 8-8.

[teeray]

I will also like to add that building up the defense is =/= to building around Cam. That's building around Luke. If the inverse of last year happened and we become the #2 offense in the league would that be considered helping Luke out? If we were blowing teams out he wouldn't have to worry about making teams go three and out on every series.

 

You build teams.

 

Lets say you are GM.  Remember how BAD our defense was his rookie year and how GOOD our offense was.

 

Would you build your defense first or offense first?

 

Fact is we had to build the defense first out of neccessity

[teeray]

Except you are wrong.

 

The Colts beat the Chefs (11-5) twice.

They also beat the Broncos (13-3)

Seahawks (13-3) and

49'ers (12-4)

 

The Panthers wins against teams with winning records came against the Saints, 49'ers and Pats. Miami finished 8-8.

 

They only beat the Chiefs once... unless you are counting the round of the playoffs that the Panthers had a bye in lol.  That would be intellectually dishonest though

[mcdougal]

Has anybody mentioned that the Colts selected Luck's roommate with the second pick they had in that draft and then the next year went out and got his offensive Coordinator from Stanford?

 

Those two moves alone is more than enough to show that the Colts have built around their QB, while the Panthers have not. And that is not to say that building a defense is the wrong move. But what is wrong is to pour all your resources into that unit and then complain about the offense that was the worst in the NFL the year proceeding Newton--and has each year gotten worse.

[TonyN]

They only beat the Chiefs once... unless you are counting the round of the playoffs that the Panthers had a bye in lol.  That would be intellectually dishonest though

 

You beat who you play. What is intellectually dishonest about including the Colt's playoff win in my calculations when I also included their playoff loss in my calculations???

[teeray]

You beat who you play. What is intellectually dishonest about including the Colt's playoff win in my calculations when I also included their playoff loss in my calculations???

 

 

Convenient that you leave out .500 teams in you calculations and you leave out the fact that 4 of their 5 losses came from teams not even in those playoffs.

 

Basically, if we don't look at the Colts schedule as a whole, and cherry pick winning %'s and don't take into account their terrible division, their bad losses, and leave out .500 teams.... then they really had a good schedule

 

Again, 7 of their 11 wins came against there division and the Raiders.

 

We played some bad teams too, but every team we played with a losing record is worth than the entire AFC South outside of the Colts.

 

And basically what you are showing proves what my basic point from the beginning.

 

The Colts and the Panthers are about the same as far as a football team goes, the Colts just benefit from playing in the AFC South.

 

If you swapped teams and divisions the Panthers would win the AFC South every year, and the Colts would compete with the Sainst and (usually0 the Falcons and have some good years and bad years.

 

There is nothing to suggest that the Colts are a better football team than the Panthers.

 

Thus, back to original argument.... Division matters

[mcdougal]

You build teams.

 

Lets say you are GM.  Remember how BAD our defense was his rookie year and how GOOD our offense was.

 

Would you build your defense first or offense first?

 

Fact is we had to build the defense first out of neccessity

 

That is true. If you are a GM you build a good team. Period.

 

The problem I have with the Huddle is, picking defensive after defensive player, and then using cap space on defense, to then complain about how the offense is not scoring points or how defense is carry all the weight.

 

What in the world do you expect to happen when you do that to a team that already lacked play-makers on the offense?

 

If this team does not perform, it is on the defense.

[TonyN]

Convenient that you leave out .500 teams in you calculations and you leave out the fact that 4 of their 5 losses came from teams not even in those playoffs.

 

Basically, if we don't look at the Colts schedule as a whole, and cherry pick winning %'s and don't take into account their terrible division, their bad losses, and leave out .500 teams.... then they really had a good schedule

 

Again, 7 of their 11 wins came against there division and the Raiders.

 

We played some bad teams too, but every team we played with a losing record is worth than the entire AFC South outside of the Colts.

 

And basically what you are showing proves what my basic point from the beginning.

 

The Colts and the Panthers are about the same as far as a football team goes, the Colts just benefit from playing in the AFC South.

 

If you swapped teams and divisions the Panthers would win the AFC South every year, and the Colts would compete with the Sainst and (usually0 the Falcons and have some good years and bad years.

 

There is nothing to suggest that the Colts are a better football team than the Panthers.

 

Thus, back to original argument.... Division matters

 

 

Except that wasn't the argument. 

 

It is just hilarious the way huddle members will try to belittle other players accomplishments because of the inferiority complex over Newton. 

 

Here is the reality: the Colt's overall schedule was just as tough as Carolina's (.484 compared to .494), the Colts beat more winning teams, had a higher win percentage against winning teams and won a playoff game, all while beating what most observers will admit were the 3 best teams in football last season. (Bronco's, Seahawks, 49'ers).

 

And they accomplished all this with a bad defense.

 

None of what I have said in this thread is an any way an attempt to belittle Carolina or Cam Newton.

 

Stop with the nonsense about Luck only accomplishing what he is accomplishing because the Colt's play a weak schedule.

 

It's baloney.

 

If Cam Newton were putting up Luck numbers playing the Wofford Terriers each week, you guys would be jizzing all over yourselves.