Originally Posted by G Mobile
Classic right here.
He never said stats are completely worthless. You are the only one saying that at anytime. Stats should help an argument not be the only important thing. You act like people not picking Griffin means we are directly attacking him and saying he sucks. We all like Griffin, but some disagree who is RoY. Quit being childish with the "Luckhugger" quips too.
Nice brownie point attempt with the HeadMod.... we see what you did there.
I have to admit I didn't invent or trademark the LuckHugger
term, but I think it fits to a bunch of people in here.The people who didn't watch a single Colts game in full but are going along with the crowd with the loud.
I guess that's
better than being a "ModHugger".
Anyway, so some are saying these stats don't mean much?
I will be clear: I say they mean A LOT. About 80-90% or so of the criteria is summed up in here:
Another thing, and this might just be me, is that it's funny when people say "Well Luck has so many more Ints, and his defenders say "Yeah but that's because they ask him to do more, pass more... you'll get that if you do it more naturally".
OK. Is that valid?
If it is, then it's also interesting to note that despite Griffin and Wilson running much more than Andrew, the 2 QBs RG3 and Wilson have a combined 5 lost fumbles, same as Luck by himself. They ask them to run more, you'd expect (and accept I guess) more fumbles as with Luck and his Ints.
Apples to apples?