Dutch 874 Posted July 7, 2013 (edited) There's been a lot of debate about Luck, Rg3 and Wilson. A lot of people talk about Luck's season being overrated and that he wasn't as good. A lot of people are claiming the RG3 and Wilson was exceptionally better than Luck. People go straight to Luck's numbers and don't see the ins and outs of his numbers. Let's take a deeper look at his numbers. The first thing I want to address is Luck's 4th quarter comebacks and game winning drives. Luck had 7 altogether. A lot of people tend to argue and say that Luck was basically cleaning up his own mess from his interceptions which led to those comebacks. Let me elaborate on that and dig deeper into the numbers. I'm going to review those 7 games. vs 23-20: 20/31 224 yards, 2 TDs, 0 ints. 4th quarter and 0:31 seconds in the game. Luck put together a 4 play drive, 45 yards and they kicked a FG to win. No interceptions. vs 30-27: 31/55 362 yards, 2 TDs, 1 int. The Packers scored 0 points off of Luck's int. Luck was down 21-3 at the half. Luck offense put up 16 unanswered points in the 3rd quarter. In the 4th quarter with 0:35 seconds left, Luck threw a TD to Wayne to take the lead; game winning drive. Not seeing the mess yet. @ 19-13: 26/38 297 yards, 1 TD, 1 int. Luck throws an int in the 3rd quarter. The Titans scored 0 points off Luck's int. Luck comes from behind and throws a 4th quarter TD to tie up the game and put it into overtime. In overtime, Luck got the ball and orchestrated a game winning drive throwing a TD to seal the game. vs 23-20: 30/48, 433 yards, 2 TDs, 0 ints. Luck put together a scoring drive (fg) to put his team on top in the 4th quarter. No interceptions. @ 35-33: 24/54 391 yards, 4 TDs, 3 ints. This was somewhat of an ugly game for Luck. Luck threw 3 ints but Detroit only capitalized one of them scoring only 3 points off of Lucks 3 ints. In the 4th quarter on 4th and 10 on the 14 yard line with 0:04 seconds left, Luck throws a TD and seals the game. Another 4th quarter comeback game winning drive. Huge dramatic mess that people rant about; 3 points. vs 27-23: 16/34 196 yards, 1 TD, 2 int. This wasn't a great game for Luck either. His first pic went back for 6. But for anyone that watched the game (or play) saw that he was sacked and it should have been overturned. http://www.nfl.com/gamecenter/2012120903/2012/REG14/titans@colts#menu=highlights&tab=recap Skip to 0:21 seconds. It is what it is though. The refs missed one. Lucks other pic came at the end of the 2nd quarter; insignificant. In the 4th quarter, Luck put together another drive that led to points and won the game. So Luck gave 7 points off of an interception on a play that should have been ruled dead. @ 20-13: 17/35 205 yards, 1 TD, 0 int. Statistically not a great game for him. No turnovers and still managed to get the 4th quarter come back on a winning drive. All in all, Luck is 9-1 when the score margin is within 1-7 points. Let's look at this in a more broad perspective. Luck had 9 interceptions in his losses this season. That leaves him with 9 interceptions in the games he won. Luck only threw interceptions in 4 out of 7 in his 4th quarter comeback and game winning drive games. So, if you've been reading up, only 10 points (and 7 came from a bad ref call) came from capitalizing off of Luck's interceptions. So in all actuality, for all you guys ranting about Luck having to clean up his own mess due to his interceptions in 4th quarter comeback and game winning drive games, it's just not true. 10 points off of interceptions isn't a lot of mess to clean up. Now I would like to focus on the throws that these young QBs made. Let's take a look at the base percentage of all the throws that these QBs made and the success that they had. Behind the Line of Scrimmage Luck: 98 attempts; consisted of 15.6% of total throws, 402 yards, 1 TDs. RG3: 91 attempts; consisted of 23.15 of total throws, 408 yards, 3 TDs Wilson: 70 attempts; consisted of 17.8% of total throws, 371 yards, 2 TDs Passes 1-10 yards Luck: 285 attempts; consisted of 45.4% of total throws, 1709 yards, 13 TD. RG3: 187 attempts; consisted of 47.5% of total throws, 1138 yards, 7 TDs. Wilson: 189 attempts; consisted of 48% of total throws, 1141 yards, 13 TDs. Passing 11-20 yards Luck: 156 attempts; consisted of 24.8% of total throws, 1342 yards, 1 TD. RG3: 76 attempts; consisted of 19.3% of total throws, 1102 yards, 3 TDs. Wilson: 76 attempts; consisted of 19.3% of total throws, 784 yards, 4 TDs. Passing 21-30 yards Luck: 59 attempts; consisted of 9.4% of total throws, 581 yards, 4 TDs. RG3: 21 attempts; consisted of 5.3% of total throws, 306 yards, 3 TDs. Wilson: 32 attempts; 8.1% of total throws, 477 yards, 4 TDs. Passing 31-40 yards Luck: 17 attempts; 2.7% of total throws, 250 yards, 3 TDs. RG3: 5 attempts; 1.2% of total throws, 0 yards, 0 TDs. Wilson: 16 attempts; 4% of total throws, 198 yards, 2 TDs Passing 41+ yards Luck: 12 attempts; 1.9% of total throws, 90 yards, 1 TD. RG3: 13 attempts; 3.3% of total throws, 246 yards, 4 TDs (alot play action) Wilson: 10 attempts; 2.5% of total throws, 147 yards, 1 TD Luck had a larger volume of more difficult throws while a higher percentage of RG3's and Wilson's own throws consisted of easier passes. Another neat little fact is that only 10% (34 passes) of Lucks high volume throws were to his RB. Rookie QBs usually rely on checking it down to their RB. Luck was throwing down the field. Still, for him to have 54% accuracy rating and still be as effective as he was should be an eye opener. QBs who have around 54% completion rate usually tank the season (Mark Sanchez, Chad Henne). That goes to show how many big plays he made and how effective he was when he completed his passes. 27% of Luck's throws were also deep throws being 15 yards or more being 3rd in the league in that category under Jay Cutler and Colin Kaepernick (Bruce Arians). Those deep passes are harder to complete and let's not forget about the time it takes for those deep routes to develop. Another factor to consider is that the Colts had one of the worst offensive lines in the entire league. Luck got hit 105 times more than any other QB in the league. He was also sacked 40 times. Something else of note is that Luck was pressured 117 times (according to sports illustrated; pff says 203. SI is more strict) compared to RG3's 69 pressures and Wilson's 64. Luck was also blitzed substantially more attempting 189 passes while being blitz than RG3s 71 and Wilson's 116. Something else to note is that Luck had a higher volume of throws on 3rd down and was exceedingly more successful on the money down than RG3 and Wilson. Actually, he was better than every rookie QB in history on 3rd down. Also, majority of RG3's passes were play action passes; 39.4% and Luck's was 16.2%. Rg3 benefited from the play action so much because of Alfred Morris. Granted, RG3 opened up lanes for Morris but Morris created a lot of plays on his own breaking tackles being top 3 in yards after contact. It's more of a symbiotic relationship. Both RG3 and Russell Wilson had 1500-1600 yard rushers to support them. If you take out Luck's runs, the Colts back field attempted 378 carries for only 1416 yards; 3.7 ypc. Luck also accounted for just 1 less TD than all his backs combined. Something else to consider is the defense. RG3s and Lucks defenses were almost equally as bad but the Colts set a record being the first 11 win team to allow 387 points. They were also tied the 2011 Steelers for a team over 11 wins for fewest takeaways; 15. Russell Wilson's defense is straight boss. #1 scoring defense; great support. Overall when you look at the broad perspective, Luck was asked to do a lot more than RG3 and Wilson with much less. He had way more difficult throws being in a Bruce Arian's offense and was behind a horrible offensive line. He also had almost a non-existent running game compared to RG3 and Wilson who were top in the league in team rushing yards. If you look at it this way, if you take Lucks completions (339) and stack them next to RG3's and Wilson's attempts (393), Luck completes 86% of his passes. Luck almost completes more passes than RG3 and Wilson even attempted. That's pretty crazy when you think about it. That goes to really show how much more of a work load Luck had to carry on his shoulders; especially with no running game which people tend to overlook/ignore. Then with the 4th quarter comebacks and game winning drives showing that his interceptions had little to no affect on those games, he was one of the most clutch QBs in the game last year. It's one thing having success, but having the mental toughness to overcome a deficit mounting a comeback is another challenge in itself; resiliency. An unquantifiable and underrated trait in my opinion; especially in a rookie QB. Don't get me wrong, all of these young were spectacular and are on their way to having great careers. Personally, I would be ecstatic to have any one of these guys as my QB. But without a doubt Luck embraced the role of a franchise QB at a way higher difficultly level than RG3 and Wilson. RG3 and Wilson had a way lesser role in their offense than Luck did and had a way better supporting cast. He carried his team to weights that RG3 and Wilson can't touch if you dig deep within the numbers. Give me Luck. Edited July 7, 2013 by dutchff7 7 1 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
RANGA+ 1,210 Posted July 7, 2013 Also people seem to forget that the Redskins and Seahawks had two of the best rushing attacks in the league last year. Luck had no help whatsoever. He basically shouldered the entire load of the offense himself. I don't understand how anyone could call him overrated. 5 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
RazorStar 4,025 Posted July 7, 2013 Andrew Luck is the 24th best player in football now guys. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Favre4Ever+ 4,476 Posted July 7, 2013 Yes, let's put this to bed indeed. You can have him. 1 1 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Jules 98 Posted July 7, 2013 (edited) Great post dutchff7 and excellent job putting all that together. Once again though as a side note, I would like to give a shout out to Reggie Wayne because I often feel he does not get enough love from even the Colts fanbase. He was ridiculously valuable in leading and mentoring the youth on the Colts last year and is continuing to do so along with making critical catches on the field. He has always been very close to Chuck Pagano too and took it to heart when he became ill. I was pleased to see him have so much success with a rookie QB because for so many years many claimed that he was a product of Manning and our offense and I always felt it was BS. He did not have to stay with the Colts either after Irsay cleaned house....word always was that he had a few offers from more "Super Bowl ready" teams. One rumor was the Patriots but it never was confirmed. He wanted to be here and he wanted to help because the Colts are part of who he is. And he said last offseason that it was not written in stone the Colts would stink....and he was right. Much work to be done on the Colts to further the journey. But, win or lose I can almost promise that on a weekly basis they will fight hard....and as a fan sometimes that is all you can ask for is to see your team lay it out there on the line every single week. Edited July 7, 2013 by Jules Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
oochymp 2,393 Posted July 7, 2013 Also people seem to forget that the Redskins and Seahawks had two of the best rushing attacks in the league last year. Luck had no help whatsoever. He basically shouldered the entire load of the offense himself. I don't understand how anyone could call him overrated. and people who point that out seem to forget that to say that RG3 and Wilson had a significant impact on their respective rushing attacks is an understatement Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Jules 98 Posted July 7, 2013 IMO Arians went away from the run too much, even when it was working. Just how I always felt. I feel as if its been since nearly the 2006 season since the Colts have had a consistent run game. But, honestly there is no doubt all the young QBs did well last year. I don't think anyone is going to get a mass internet award on it either. Some prefer Luck, some prefer someone else. So be it. I prefer Luck but I have no problems if anyone doesn't. I also remember Peyton Manning's 3-13 rookie season with even more interceptions then Luck had. Granted the games have changed some so I hate to do the comparison thing. But, rookies should be able to muck up at times and be given that right. They need room for improvement anyway..... JMO Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Bang 12 Posted July 7, 2013 Also people seem to forget that the Redskins and Seahawks had two of the best rushing attacks in the league last year. Luck had no help whatsoever. He basically shouldered the entire load of the offense himself. I don't understand how anyone could call him overrated. That rushing attack in Washington was in large part due to the multiple threat RG3 presents. It was nice to see Morris banging into linebackers 5 yards downfield, because half the DL was keyed on something else. I think Luck is greatness in the making. But I'm glad my team got RG3. ~Bang Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Dutch 874 Posted July 7, 2013 (edited) Yes, let's put this to bed indeed. You can have him. Says the guy that has Aaron Rodgers... I wish I could. You would too with our roster Edited July 7, 2013 by dutchff7 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Jules 98 Posted July 7, 2013 I think Luck is greatness in the making. But I'm glad my team got RG3.~Bang Yep. I think we are all happy with the young QBs we currently have whether you are a Colts/Redskins/Seahawks/49ers fan. Which is great. I will say this though....the NFC is becoming freaking loaded at QB. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
RANGA+ 1,210 Posted July 7, 2013 and people who point that out seem to forget that to say that RG3 and Wilson had a significant impact on their respective rushing attacks is an understatement They both post a big threat in the running game, yes. But the Redskins also have Alfred Morris and the Seahawks also have Marshawn Lynch. Who do the Colts have? If Indy had a guy with the talent of either of those guys, Luck would have had a far easier time. Which is what I was getting at... Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
RazorStar 4,025 Posted July 7, 2013 Vick Ballard is just fine.... and Ahmad Bradshaw is a borderline top 10 runner. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Dutch 874 Posted July 7, 2013 (edited) and people who point that out seem to forget that to say that RG3 and Wilson had a significant impact on their respective rushing attacks is an understatement Rg3 benefited from the play action so much because of Alfred Morris. Granted, RG3 opened up lanes for Morris but Morris created a lot of plays on his own breaking tackles being top 3 in yards after contact. It's more of a symbiotic relationship. Both RG3 and Russell Wilson had 1500-1600 yard rushers to support them. If you take out Luck's runs, the Colts back field attempted 378 carries for only 1416 yards; 3.7 ypc. Luck also accounted for just 1 less TD than all his backs combined. That's something that I acknowledged. It's a symbiotic relationship though. While scrambling QBs do open up lanes for the RBs, the RBs create their own plays too by breaking tackles and getting yards after contact. Also, Marshawn Lynch was doing that before Wilson got there. The QBs benefited equally from the RBs making plays. Having a scrambling QB doesn't automatically warrant the type of production Morris and Lynch put up. Edited July 7, 2013 by dutchff7 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
DonovanMcnabb for H.O.F 2,241 Posted July 7, 2013 (edited) The whole, Luck is being asked to do far more is becoming so played out. What a player is asked to do, and what he actually does is two complete distinct things. It's crazy how much a couple wins through mostly luck and easy scheduling can change people's perspective of a player. Edited July 7, 2013 by DonovanMcnabb for H.O.F 3 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
RANGA+ 1,210 Posted July 7, 2013 The whole, Luck is being asked to do far more is becoming so played out. What a player is asked to do, and what he actually does is two complete distinct things. It's crazy how much a couple wins through mostly luck and easy scheduling can change people's perspective of a player. 4 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Jules 98 Posted July 7, 2013 (edited) ^Yes that is a great unintentional play with words. I will say this. You can't go wrong with a man named Luck wearing the horse shoe. Good things are often bound to happen that cannot be predicted!!!! It's a "Luck" thing. :grinno: Edited July 7, 2013 by Jules 1 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Thanatos 2,847 Posted July 7, 2013 Luck's schedule is also far far easier than the one Wilson had. How do you take that into account? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Jules 98 Posted July 7, 2013 (edited) Luck's schedule is also far far easier than the one Wilson had. How do you take that into account? In the AFC the top QB situation is basically an aging Manning/Brady, an injury prone Big Ben and some arguments over Flacco being elite. Oh and the yearly "Is this the year Rivers comes back" conversation. We are a sorry bunch at times in the AFC. *ashamed* I fully admit Luck is likely in a better situation for the future in the AFC in terms of year to year consistent competitiveness we see. I feel the NFC is MUCH more competitive and tougher at times to get into the playoffs in recent seasons. Keep in mind outside the Colts statistical issues in 2012 and all the rookies and the coaching change and all kinds of strange crap.....they only finished ONE GAME behind the mighty balanced Houston Texans. ONE FREAKING GAME. Maybe this does not happen again but with the Texans trend of late season swoons/inability to EVER win in Indy I don't think the AFC South is impossible to seize again either in the future if the Colts can "clean up" some glaring weaknesses. I am not saying we WILL win the South but I am saying it is not impossible either. I would much rather fight with the Texans every year then say fight with the 49ers if I am being completely honest. It's not even close to me! I don't believe the Colts are at the level of the Ravens yet for example and the playoff loss showed us how far we have to go. But, I still believe we are playoff worthy and potentially will be again. Edit: I also mean no disrespect to the Texans who I feel are one of the best teams around. Just saying that I am more scared of a team like the 49ers and would be if they were in the same conference as the Colts for years to come.... Edited July 7, 2013 by Jules Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Dutch 874 Posted July 7, 2013 (edited) The whole, Luck is being asked to do far more is becoming so played out. What a player is asked to do, and what he actually does is two complete distinct things. Luck did do way more though. The stats and tape shows it. As far as the distinction comment, my entire post is about what he did do; the product he put out on the field. I only compared what he was asked to do with the other rookies. It's crazy how much a couple wins through mostly luck and easy scheduling can change people's perspective of a player. How was it mostly luck? What is your definition of Luck? Some tip passes for TDs? Fumbles into the endzones and recover? Extreme blown coverages? Bad refereeing? Edited July 7, 2013 by dutchff7 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
theMileHighGuy 656 Posted July 7, 2013 You mean luck like replacement refs giving wins to you luck? All three should be excellent quarterbacks for years to come. I think Luck has the more sustainable game and without question the most straight up passing talent. Who knows if RG3 will get through the entire season? Russell Wilson is also obviously the benefactor of a great running game and a ridiculous defense, but really that's no slight on him. Honestly, we need to see how these kids do now that defenses have a full season of tape on them before we can truly 'put this to bed'. 3 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
DavethePanther 37 Posted July 7, 2013 Gonna chime in on this one. Luck has all the tools to be an upper echelon QB. As a Panther fan I initally was disappointed he decided to go back to Stanford when he was projected to be our QB. I am glad he did. Either you are strictly talking rookies or blantantly disrespecting Cam Newton and maybe even C. Kaepernick. While he had bad 1st half (mostly because the OC could not get his head out of his ASS and realize the read option wasn't working) He clearly showed he is as good if not better than all three mentioned in the last half of the season. Luck broke his rookie record and congrats to it. But it took him over 100 more attempts to do it. Luck had some good wins. 24th? IMO way way way too high. Luck is a product of the media blitz. They have been molding his bust for the HOF since he was at Stanford. His numbers were good and his "W" are commendable but he gets far too much credit for those wins and not enough blame on the "L". I think of the 3 rookies, Luck will have the better season in year 2. He is primarily a pocket QB and RGIII uses his running ability to excel. And he has already suffered another knee injury. (had one in College). Wilson is 2nd behind Luck as he uses his mobility to extend plays and not run so much. I will say, all these FIVE young QBs are exciting and hopefully will be around a long time. Put any in a basket and pull their name out and your team still has a chance to be successful. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
DonovanMcnabb for H.O.F 2,241 Posted July 7, 2013 Luck did do way more though. The stats and tape shows it. As far as the distinction comment, my entire post is about what he did do; the product he put out on the field. I only compared what he was asked to do in comparison with the other rookies. How was it mostly luck? What is your definition of Luck? Some tip passes for TDs? Fumbles into the endzones and recover? Extreme blown coverages? The stats show it? Simply because he threw the ball a lot and has a lot of yards show that he did more? Because after all, God forbid if he completed more then 55% percent he wouldn't have to throw the ball more... It's been wildly proven that when a majority of your games are won/lost by 7 points or less, luck (the real luck not the human Luck) played a factor. I'm not going into details (unless if you really want me to) because these findings are all over the internet, but look no further then the game against Detroit. Where 2 easy dropped INTs in his GWD occurred. Or, you can look at the enigma that is somehow winning 10 games when your team finishes the year with a negative point differential. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Bucman 891 Posted July 7, 2013 If were going to base this PURELY on stats. Luck is getting overrated by many. He is probably going to be a good QB. But his rookie year was not as great as people keep making it out to be. His completion rating sucked, he threw 18 INTs. Of the recent QBs (*rookie* Newton, Wilson, RG3) Lucks yard per pass was the lowest. He also had the worst completion %. Lets break the Interception per pass too. Luck - 34.8 Wilson - 39.3 Griffin - 78.6 Tannehill - 37.2 I understand Luck threw a lot more passes, but he also threw a helluva a lot more INTs. Tannehill probably had the worst supporting cast of them all and still threw less interceptions per pass. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
BJORN 679 Posted July 7, 2013 Well, since everyone keeps overlooking him...I'll take Wilson. If we are picking "best young upcoming QB" I'd actually lean towards Bradford. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites