@the-gipper said:

You are not even paying attention.  You answer my post with some comment that is way out in left field. 

So? You have it on absolute authority that the Colts will get rid of Luck.   Prove it.   Or otherwise just admit that it is just your own wildass speculation.

They might for our number one.

WSS

@boo-fagley said:

No, not speculation.

Past history is a great indicator of future results. Luck has had a cakewalk in the dome and playing bum teams in the AFCS. The AFCS is finally on the rise which makes now a great time to ship Andy off since the gravy train is over in his current division. The Colts see other rookie QBs come into the league and win without excuses. The day that everything is perfect for Andy is not coming. This draft is ripe with talented QBs. The AFCN is a terrible fit for Andy since 14 of his games would be outside unlike the 9 games in conditioned space. Also, the AFCN teams are better. Hopefully, Dorsey lets another team pay cash for this clunker of a QB.

You are not even paying attention.  You answer my post with some comment that is way out in left field. 

So? You have it on absolute authority that the Colts will get rid of Luck.   Prove it.   Or otherwise just admit that it is just your own wildass speculation.

@boo-fagley said:

No, not speculation.

Past history is a great indicator of future results. Luck has had a cakewalk in the dome and playing bum teams in the AFCS. The AFCS is finally on the rise which makes now a great time to ship Andy off since the gravy train is over in his current division. The Colts see other rookie QBs come into the league and win without excuses. The day that everything is perfect for Andy is not coming. This draft is ripe with talented QBs. The AFCN is a terrible fit for Andy since 14 of his games would be outside unlike the 9 games in conditioned space. Also, the AFCN teams are better. Hopefully, Dorsey lets another team pay cash for this clunker of a QB.

Andrew Luck is a clunker?  He threw for 40 TD's in a season and is only 28.  He's more talented than Flacco or Dalton.  Ben is probably retired in a few years.  I'd rather pay Luck than Cousins.  Oh I forgot, Luck can't breathe outside of his bubble. 

@boo-fagley said:

I hope your sister finds somebody with heavy duty springs on their car.

Two of my sisters had their husbands die. One by cancer, one by a stroke.  The other had her husband suffer a serious head injury in an auto accident, causing epilepsy and other mental issues.   You insensitive MFing prick.  Think before you speak!!!

(I am just busting your balls....though all of the above is true).

@boo-fagley said:

Buffalo had an actual parade down main street the day Bledsoe arrived in town. Their QB prayers finally answered as NE just traded them the next Babe Ruth of football. The future could not have brighter. Then the season began and Bledsoe $hit the bed just like Andy Luck will.  When the honeymoon was finally over a few years later, Buffalo ran his sorry axx out of town and dont come back.

Because the Colts are selling a lame horse ready for the glue factory. Youre not getting Sea Biscuit.

Well....it ALL speculation on your part.   Speculation that Luck would even be traded. Speculation that the Browns would be interested. Speculation that he would not be any good. 

You are such a big speculator.  Have I got a Russian hotel deal for you. In lovely Chernobyl.

@boo-fagley said:

Luck ruled a division of losers. The tale of the tape confirms this. I agree that the AFCS is turning over which makes now a good time to peddle off Andy Luck to a new team of enablers that will blame the Colts for Andys failures. 

I hope the Browns dont buy into the Bledsoe 2.0 narrative.

What is the Bledsoe 2.0 narrative?  And why should or should not the Browns buy into it?

@boo-fagley said:

B - Better than what the Browns have now is settling for the fat girl instead of the ugly fat girl.

I assume that this is basically the story of your life?

@boo-fagley said:

Thank you admitting that Andy has a stud WR like Josh Gordon.

Why wouldn't I? When Luck was healthy, he along with the help of Hilton (and others)  ruled that division....even if it was weak in the past.

When has Josh Gordon ever had a stud like Andrew Luck (when healthy) ?

@boo-fagley said:

Comedy Gold I tell ya!

The first time ever that you dont want to consider history. Andy Luck is not playing now.  2017 amounts to nothing in regards to Luck. Luck is not a winner and has played the AFCN on 6 times.

Glad you didnt bet me because you would opening up your wallet. Moths would probably fly out.

I consider history all the time.....when discussing history is relevant or interesting.  But, we are talking about two different things here:

A.  Who is better in 2017:  the AFCS or the AFCN.   It is indisputable that  this year it is the AFCS.  The last decade is irrelevant to that question.

B.  Would Andrew Luck be a good pickup for this team.   I, personally am not the one advocating it.  If you thought so, you were wrong. Only thing I could say about it is that even with a banged up Andrew Luck...he would probably be better than what we have right now at the position.

@boo-fagley said:

Add no Running back, no Tight End, no offensive coordinator, no good WRs other than TY Hilton.

Special teams are no good too. The head coach is an anchor. The Indy uniforms are too tight because theyre 100% cotton and shrink in the washer. Of course, the Colts couldnt afford the right size shoes and Andys are a size too small hurting his bunions. Other than that everything looks good.

TY Hilton single handedly practically beat the Browns.  As much as we carp on the offense....and there is ample reason to do so.....the plan on how to deal with Hilton was atrocious.

@boo-fagley said:

So what? Brisett is playing and what does a QB starting for the 1st time is his career have to do with Luck? Brisett wasnt even in camp to learn the Colts offense.

What does it have to do with Luck?  If Luck were healthy and playing...Brissett wouldn't even be on that team. WTF is your point?

Between 2012 - 2016 the AFCS has been pitiful and weak. Luck has had it easy.

To use your words:  So what?   That was then....this is now. Jax, Tenn. and Houston are all a lot better now than they have been during that period.  With Watson, Watt etc.....the DATs would have been a lot better than they are.  We hope they suck balls.  That doesn't take away from the fact that the AFCS, this year, is better by a fair margin than the AFCN.

Jax 

12 -  2 - 14

13 - 4 -12

14 - 3 - 13

15 - 5 -11

16 - 3 - 13

Tenn

12 - 6 - 10

13 - 7 - 9

14 - 2 -14

15 - 3 - 13

16 - 9 - 7

Hou

12 - 12 - 4

13 - 2 - 14

14 - 9 - 7

15 - 9 - 7

16 - 9 - 7

5 winning seasons and 10 losing seasons out of 15 seasons = 33% winning percentage.  Wanna make a bet that the AFCN has a higher win % and fewer losing seasons??

No....because I don't care.  Its nothing worth arguing over.  You are talking history.....not 2017.  I would not argue with that history.  The AFCS HAS been...historically, the suckiest division in the game likely.  But NOT NOW.

@tour2ma said:

None of which addresses my timing comment.

The only aspect of timing is that now the Steelers get to play the DATs without Watson.....otherwise that would have been a good game.

and the Rats get to play the Colts without...much of anything.

@boo-fagley said:

The Colts are not good with Luck.

True....lack of O Line, Defense...makes any team not good.

@the-gipper said:

Best they can do is 6-10

None of which addresses my timing comment.

@tour2ma said:

Certainly what the record says, but... looking at the timing of some of the games, I'm not sure that is true right now.

There are, I believe, only 2 games left:  Steelers vs. Texans, and Ravens vs. Colts.   AFCN best vs. AFCS worst.

Still...it seems like it could come out 5-10 at best. .......except the math there don't add up.  I must be missing something.  I was going based on your numbers.   Lets clarify this:

Browns were 0-4 

Bengals were 1-3 Ls to Texans, Jags Tits,  W over Colts

Ravens are 1-2 so far:   Ls to Jags, Tits  W over Texans....still to play the Colts

Steelers are 2-1:  L to Jags,  Ws over Colts, Tits.  still to play Texans

So...AFCN is  now  4-10   with 2 games to play vs. AFCS.   Best they can do is 6-10

@the-gipper said:

So, overall  3-10.    3-6 without Browns 4 losses.  Like I said, AFCS is better this year.

Certainly what the record says, but... looking at the timing of some of the games, I'm not sure that is true right now.

@boo-fagley said:

Then is Lucks career. Now Luck isnt playing.

Colts are 1-2 with a game vs. Ravens left.    Colts are not good without Luck, that is true. Browns should have beat them.

But note.....AFCN has only 1 other win against any other AFCS team.

@tour2ma said:

vs. the AFCS...

PTG is 2-1

BLT is 0-2

CIN is 1-3

So, overall  3-10.    3-6 without Browns 4 losses.  Like I said, AFCS is better this year.

PTG is 2-1

BLT is 0-2

CIN is 1-3

@boo-fagley said:

Over the last several years the AFCS has been weak. The Steelers, Ravens and Bungles are always in the Super Bowl conversation.

Also, Luck plays 9 games in a dome every season. Not a good fit for Cleveland.

That was then, this is now.   The Titans and Jags are both good.  DATs not so much now that their QB is out.  Same with Colts. 

Curious what the head to head record is AFCS vs. AFCN....in non Browns game.    AFCS will have the big advantage because Browns lost every game.

@boo-fagley said:

Over the last several years the AFCS has been weak. The Steelers, Ravens and Bungles are always in the Super Bowl conversation.

Also, Luck plays 9 games in a dome every season. Not a good fit for Cleveland.

Luck threw for 300 yards, 4 TD's and no picks in Cincinnati on a freezing cold day in December.  He'd be fine.  Luck to Gordon.  I keep seeing it.

@tour2ma said:

I hear that from everyone who has visited Prague.

Well since my roots hail from the Czech Republic, a visit to Prague has to be on my bucket list. Probably visit a few cemeteries looking for those pre 1900s relatives. 

@boo-fagley said:

The AFCS is the worst division in the NFL. Luck has made a career of feasting on bad teams. In 6 playoff games when facing tougher competition, Lucky has thrown 13 INTS. 

Of course, nothing is Lucks fault.

I think the AFCS is now better than the AFCN.  I mean....the Browns are in the AFCN...and they drag the division down.  And I still do not think that Balt and Cin are anything but shite.

@boo-fagley said:

The Browns have a much better chance drafting a Franchise QB. That is my position and just because the Browns havent been able to draft a Franchise QB, that does not mean that they never will.

I don't know that the Browns have a much better chance at finding a Franchise QB in the draft...or otherwise.  Obviously their draft history suggests that whomever they draft that they think will be their FQOTF....will not be.  But, yes, they should try.  I mean...how often can one team get unlucky?

The thread is about taking Andy Luck off the Colts hands. My answer is NO, unless he is going cheap which I doubt is the case.

And I don't have a problem with that.  My only point was to NOT put all your eggs in one basket necessarily.  To say "we are only going to take QBs in the draft....and to ignore potential trades of FAs...would be shortsighted"

Somebody has to have a pretty good idea who the next stud QB is. They knew Ben was down there in Miami of Ohio.

I am not sure anyone knows for sure.  Somebody thought Jamarcus Russell would be the next stud QB. Someone thought Joey Harrington would be that. Someone thought Vince Young would be that. Someone thought Jake Locker would be that.  Someone thought Josh Freeman would be that. Someone thought RGIII would be that.  Someone thought Blake Bortles would be that.  Someone thought David Carr would be that. Some team thought that Brady Quinn, Brandon Weeden and Johnny Manziel would be that.  The Steelers got lucky.   They got a guy that, as a first round QB taken, is like in the top 5 best QB taken this century.   BR could easily have been a Christian Ponder or a Blaine Gabbert or a Matt Leinert, or Jay Cutler, all of whom were taken in the 10-11-12 -13 pick range...just as BR was.