If Jim Harbaugh is an NFL Coach next year, Will Luck pull and Elway/Eli move?

Originally posted by OnTheClock:
I'm appalled at the Andrew Luck sensationalism. I mean, wow.

I understand, he's a terrific player.. but all of this "he's the best to ever come out in the last decade" or "he'll be the most amazing prospect to come out at QB" .. it's way, way over the top. Guys, Bradford was a superior prospect. It was hardly arguable that he was the best QB in the nation. With Luck, it's very arguable.

Stop all of this "We have to trade EVERYTHING for him!!!" talk. Please. If he declares, great. If we get him, great. But there are far too many other talented guys -- arguably just as good right now -- to say we have to, or should, do whatever possible to get Luck.

All I'm saying is this: Calm down. Breathe. We have a shot at several very good quarterbacks, and that includes players already in the NFL that we could feasibly trade for.

Its that he plays for Stanford... if he played for any other school he wouldn't be getting nearly the love.

Originally posted by OnTheClock:
I'm appalled at the Andrew Luck sensationalism. I mean, wow.

I understand, he's a terrific player.. but all of this "he's the best to ever come out in the last decade" or "he'll be the most amazing prospect to come out at QB" .. it's way, way over the top. Guys, Bradford was a superior prospect. It was hardly arguable that he was the best QB in the nation. With Luck, it's very arguable.

Stop all of this "We have to trade EVERYTHING for him!!!" talk. Please. If he declares, great. If we get him, great. But there are far too many other talented guys -- arguably just as good right now -- to say we have to, or should, do whatever possible to get Luck.

All I'm saying is this: Calm down. Breathe. We have a shot at several very good quarterbacks, and that includes players already in the NFL that we could feasibly trade for.

Originally posted by Jcool:

Originally posted by OnTheClock:
I'm appalled at the Andrew Luck sensationalism. I mean, wow.

I understand, he's a terrific player.. but all of this "he's the best to ever come out in the last decade" or "he'll be the most amazing prospect to come out at QB" .. it's way, way over the top. Guys, Bradford was a superior prospect. It was hardly arguable that he was the best QB in the nation. With Luck, it's very arguable.

Stop all of this "We have to trade EVERYTHING for him!!!" talk. Please. If he declares, great. If we get him, great. But there are far too many other talented guys -- arguably just as good right now -- to say we have to, or should, do whatever possible to get Luck.

All I'm saying is this: Calm down. Breathe. We have a shot at several very good quarterbacks, and that includes players already in the NFL that we could feasibly trade for.

Its that he plays for Stanford... if he played for any other school he wouldn't be getting nearly the love.

That's it. It proves to be a Bay Area centric board time and time again.

Originally posted by SanDiego49er:

Originally posted by Jcool:

Originally posted by OnTheClock:
I'm appalled at the Andrew Luck sensationalism. I mean, wow.

I understand, he's a terrific player.. but all of this "he's the best to ever come out in the last decade" or "he'll be the most amazing prospect to come out at QB" .. it's way, way over the top. Guys, Bradford was a superior prospect. It was hardly arguable that he was the best QB in the nation. With Luck, it's very arguable.

Stop all of this "We have to trade EVERYTHING for him!!!" talk. Please. If he declares, great. If we get him, great. But there are far too many other talented guys -- arguably just as good right now -- to say we have to, or should, do whatever possible to get Luck.

All I'm saying is this: Calm down. Breathe. We have a shot at several very good quarterbacks, and that includes players already in the NFL that we could feasibly trade for.

Its that he plays for Stanford... if he played for any other school he wouldn't be getting nearly the love.

That's it. It proves to be a Bay Area centric board time and time again.

luck is cool, accurate, gutsy and very lucky sometimes. what else do you want in a QB? look on any mock draft you find and luck is probably the top pick.

Originally posted by hondakillerzx:

Originally posted by SanDiego49er:

Originally posted by Jcool:

Originally posted by OnTheClock:
I'm appalled at the Andrew Luck sensationalism. I mean, wow.

I understand, he's a terrific player.. but all of this "he's the best to ever come out in the last decade" or "he'll be the most amazing prospect to come out at QB" .. it's way, way over the top. Guys, Bradford was a superior prospect. It was hardly arguable that he was the best QB in the nation. With Luck, it's very arguable.

Stop all of this "We have to trade EVERYTHING for him!!!" talk. Please. If he declares, great. If we get him, great. But there are far too many other talented guys -- arguably just as good right now -- to say we have to, or should, do whatever possible to get Luck.

All I'm saying is this: Calm down. Breathe. We have a shot at several very good quarterbacks, and that includes players already in the NFL that we could feasibly trade for.

Its that he plays for Stanford... if he played for any other school he wouldn't be getting nearly the love.

That's it. It proves to be a Bay Area centric board time and time again.

luck is cool, accurate, gutsy and very lucky sometimes. what else do you want in a QB? look on any mock draft you find and luck is probably the top pick.

His arm is not that strong. And his best throws are with tons of time to throw. He has a brick wall in front of him. He won't have that with Chilo and Anthony Davis.

Alex was the "mock draft #1 pick" several years ago. Once upon a time Ryan Leaf was a consensus top 2 overall pick in many mock drafts. Jamarcus Russell was projected and picked #1. So what's your point? The guy hasn't played 1 down in the NFL. You have no idea what he will be.

Originally posted by SanDiego49er:

Originally posted by hondakillerzx:

Originally posted by SanDiego49er:

Originally posted by Jcool:

Originally posted by OnTheClock:
I'm appalled at the Andrew Luck sensationalism. I mean, wow.

I understand, he's a terrific player.. but all of this "he's the best to ever come out in the last decade" or "he'll be the most amazing prospect to come out at QB" .. it's way, way over the top. Guys, Bradford was a superior prospect. It was hardly arguable that he was the best QB in the nation. With Luck, it's very arguable.

Stop all of this "We have to trade EVERYTHING for him!!!" talk. Please. If he declares, great. If we get him, great. But there are far too many other talented guys -- arguably just as good right now -- to say we have to, or should, do whatever possible to get Luck.

All I'm saying is this: Calm down. Breathe. We have a shot at several very good quarterbacks, and that includes players already in the NFL that we could feasibly trade for.

Its that he plays for Stanford... if he played for any other school he wouldn't be getting nearly the love.

That's it. It proves to be a Bay Area centric board time and time again.

luck is cool, accurate, gutsy and very lucky sometimes. what else do you want in a QB? look on any mock draft you find and luck is probably the top pick.

His arm is not that strong. And his best throws are with tons of time to throw. He has a brick wall in front of him. He won't have that with Chilo and Anthony Davis.

Alex was the "mock draft #1 pick" several years ago. Once upon a time Ryan Leaf was a consensus top 2 overall pick in many mock drafts. Jamarcus Russell was projected and picked #1. So what's your point? The guy hasn't played 1 down in the NFL. You have no idea what he will be.

Your hate for Luck is appalling. And like I've proved before, it's quite evident that you don't really watch his games or at least study the way he plays. In his game against Oregon State on Saturday, he was being rushed, took one step up, and before even setting his feet, flung the ball 45 yards to Baldwin for a TD. He threw for over 300 yards, and this is with an offense that tends to play with three tight end, two back sets. And did I mention that their #1 receiver was out too??

Yes, Stanford's o-line is good, but he does occasionally get rushed out of the pocket and he continues to make plays with his feet. The fact that you continue to discredit Luck's abilities as a QB is unbelievable.

[ Edited by SF69ers on Nov 30, 2010 at 10:44:50 ]

We may get Harbaugh or we may get Luck, but we won't get both. An even bettter chance is we don't get either.

Originally posted by OnTheClock:
I'm appalled at the Andrew Luck sensationalism. I mean, wow.

I understand, he's a terrific player.. but all of this "he's the best to ever come out in the last decade" or "he'll be the most amazing prospect to come out at QB" .. it's way, way over the top. Guys, Bradford was a superior prospect. It was hardly arguable that he was the best QB in the nation. With Luck, it's very arguable.

Stop all of this "We have to trade EVERYTHING for him!!!" talk. Please. If he declares, great. If we get him, great. But there are far too many other talented guys -- arguably just as good right now -- to say we have to, or should, do whatever possible to get Luck.

All I'm saying is this: Calm down. Breathe. We have a shot at several very good quarterbacks, and that includes players already in the NFL that we could feasibly trade for.

I specifically remember you saying that you wouldn't touch Bradford until the 2nd round last year, when he hurt his shoulder and before it became apparent that the Rams would draft him.

When was the last time a Top candidate college HC and #1 overall pick QB together in the NFL???

My guess is, if we get one, we ain't getting the other.

So who would you rather have Luck or Harbaugh???

Originally posted by Kolohe:
When was the last time a Top candidate college HC and #1 overall pick QB together in the NFL???

My guess is, if we get one, we ain't getting the other.

So who would you rather have Luck or Harbaugh???

Harbaugh

Originally posted by jreff22:

Originally posted by Kolohe:
When was the last time a Top candidate college HC and #1 overall pick QB together in the NFL???

My guess is, if we get one, we ain't getting the other.

So who would you rather have Luck or Harbaugh???

Harbaugh

Agreed. As big of a fan as I am of Luck, I think Harbaugh has the magic touch in developing a QB. So we'll never know but he might want to develop Locker, Mallett, Stanzi, or even our "savior" Nate Davis. I have that much confidence in Harbaugh.

Originally posted by Kolohe:
When was the last time a Top candidate college HC and #1 overall pick QB together in the NFL???

My guess is, if we get one, we ain't getting the other.

So who would you rather have Luck or Harbaugh???

well

idk

I'd go with Harbaugh

I just do not want to see Luck on the Cardinals or Seahawks

^^^That's why I let you guys answer that one, that question was too hard for me to answer. I've been pondering that question in my head for awhile now.

Originally posted by Kolohe:
^^^That's why I let you guys answer that one, that question was too hard for me to answer. I've been pondering that question in my head for awhile now.

No QB could be successful with this current coaching staff.

Originally posted by Kolohe:
^^^That's why I let you guys answer that one, that question was too hard for me to answer. I've been pondering that question in my head for awhile now.

It is tough, but I'm sure Harbaugh can mold Locker/Mallett/Stanzi into good QBs.