Let's put this to bed. Give me Andrew Luck.

[Jules 98]

I don't really care to be pulled into this debate.

 

Obviously in Seattle, we're thrilled with Wilson. And frankly, I'm not sure I care whether or not Wilson pales statistically to Luck or Griffin. Wilson is a perfect fit for our team and I'm sure that Luck would have been too. Although Luck wouldn't have thrown it more than 25 times a game under our system either. I think Luck could have been equally efficient, just as I'm sure that Wilson can put up big numbers if called on to do so.

 

But we didn't have to endure a 2-14 season to get Wilson. And it would have cost us half a decade in first round picks or more in order to move up to get him. Ultimately, it doesn't matter. We both have franchise QBs on the roster and that's sufficient.

 

It doesn't matter who it better to me. The cost to get Luck would have imploded our ability to compete going forward. All I can say, is that I'm pretty stoked where Seattle is at both now and for the next 5 to 6 seasons at minimum. I'm not sure Indy fans believe their window of opportunity is now.

 

It will be fun watching those two match up this year.

 

 

Excellent post.

[DonovanMcnabb for H.O.F 2,241]

I see you put an italicized emphasis on how badly Luck looked which is perception and is the entire point of my post.

 

And if you really think that Luck played in the same lane as a Sanchez, Gabbert/Henne and company, it just proves you're just looking at stats. That's a ridiculous statement.

 

Nope. I italicized, "looked" because I've seen Luck play several times and I've witnessed the errand throws for myself. I have NFL game rewind as well so I wouldn't be out here arguing if I didn't know what I was saying. And not only that but he played against the NFC North teams and I saw either all or most of all the games when they were live.

 

You highlight all his comebacks, which is great, but then leave out that in a lot of those games, it wasn't just the turnovers that was making Luck as much a part of the solution as the problem, it was also the erratic accuracy. The sacks and hits he was getting from holding on to the ball too long.

 

There were clear times, as well as games where after seeing it, and seeing people talk about him, it was clear that he was living off of pre-draft hype, rather then what he looked like at times.

[DonovanMcnabb for H.O.F 2,241]

Haha I love you Dmac but your inner hater is shining through. You are making stuff up now lol.

 

In the first paragraph I would love to see some sort of empirical proof of what you say. All games that are decided by a small margin are luck. I would like to see a study doing that with actual proof not just you claiming it to be so to support your own conclusions.

 

With the second you contradicted yourself in the same sentence. You say it is a below average team. Then you say luck played like a bottom 5 QB which is a fallacy that again you are just throwing out there to support your own conclusion. Then you go on to ask why should he get the credit. Well if he is bottom 5 and his team is below average than who should get the credit ? You have to pick one. You cant say his team is below average and he is bottom 5 and ask why he gets the credit. One of those statements is false.

 

I have no hate for Luck (outside of the fact that Matt Stafford is the GOAT), do I think RGIII is better? Yea, but that's irrelevant.

 

The whole team? Since winning is a team thing?

[DonovanMcnabb for H.O.F 2,241]

Actually, I've gone on record multiple times praising Eli for being a 4th quarter QB and being a "winner." Also, I gave a lot of credit to Tebow when he was in Denver and still think it's a shame he didn't at least get a chance to play somewhere. While it takes a team to win, it only takes one bad QB to tank a season—see Matt Cassel, Curtis Painter, etc...

 

You're right about one thing though: Luck did look bad at times, as well as he looked equally great at times. It's been said by professional QBs and CBs alike that those two positions are less about the mistakes a guy makes and more about getting past them and overcoming them. Luck managed to that extremely well.

 

He didn't look like an all-pro, but he's not an overrated bum either imo. He's clearly talented and deserves the credit he gets for leading that team—you know, the one that won 2 games just one year before—to the playoffs. Dismissing wins as "luck" sounds like a cop-out response to me.

 

He didn't play flawless football every Sunday, and I honestly don't think that anyone is saying that he did. He's deserving of the praise he gets though, as his talent is undeniable. He's got a solid arm, good mobility, accuracy MOST of the time, and the mind for the position. He might not be making all the throws just yet, but he's making some very big ones. That counts for something.

 

The season was a bit of roller coaster ride with Luck, but when he was good he was very good. In the playoff game, when the playcalling was atrocious, the entire offense looked abysmal. That tracks with the normal play caller hospitalized. Apart from that game though, Luck did a great job of making sure that the Colts were competitive week after week. Hell, even in the playoff game the weren't ever really out of it up until the very end.

 

It's my belief that Luck is a good player. Also, I have always put a lot of stock in the ability of a QB to dial it in late in games, in big situations, and on third down. Luck does this.

 

Lemme just clarify that at no point have I said Luck is a scrub. I have said that there are times when he looked like a scrub, this is a fact. I understand he's a rookie, I seen some of the great stuff he did. I have said on other threads that he's gonna look much better this upcoming year then he did last year.

 

But people who make claims like, the amount of times he threw the ball fail to realise that had he completed more of those passes -accuracy-, he probably wouldn't throw as much either. And what about TDs? If you're gonna throw the ball a ton, get TOs, lotsa yards, where are the TDs?

 

People who make claims like, he had no running game fail to realize that for the majority of the season, the Colt's running game was actually middle/average to bellow average (just like their passing game the entire year).

 

They also fail to realize things like his stats in his last 4 games of the season looked like this:

70/150 (46.7%), 978 yards (6.5 ypa), 8 TD, 5 INT

 

And they still went 3-1... That's borderline Tebowing... Their is no way in hell to say that the Colts were this good because of Luck. They finished with that record because of a favorable schedule, lucky bounces going their way many times, and total team efforts.

[Jules 98]

In all honesty we SHOULD be giving teams more credit then just focusing so often on individuals. But, we put QBs on a pedestal and give them the praise when the team wins and the excuses when the team loses. And lets not act like an RGIII doesn't get as much attention either. He does, especially in the large market of DC. And his post injury updates are constant too. In order to make Indy appealing as well to the masses they will have to at some times hype Luck up...just like they did with Manning over the years. As a small market in the Midwest the QB has often been our "selling point" IMO.

 

So for everyone to claim Luck is overhyped....well just be glad we are not an east coast team or else you would REALLY be hearing about him more often I feel.

 

Besides, I also feel as if they want to get a few of these young QBs going and fresh in your minds too since eventually guys like Manning/Brady will be gone and they need new up and coming stars in the league to market to the public.

 

Nobody has to listen to the media attention being given to anyone and we all have a choice to turn away from it. I have just watched ESPN this offseason a few times, around the draft. I have not watched the NFLN in ages. I get my news on local sports media or reading online.....

 

Nobody has to read or listen to any hype if they don't want to IMO!!!

[Favre4Ever+ 4,476]

Stats can get overstated at times, of course. And I agree that both sides like to nitpick certain numbers to better suit their argument. However, it is unfortunate in this case that Luck really had no numbers at all that his supporters can hinge on because it just wasn't that successful of a year.

 

Instead those supporters must hang their hats on Luck coming through in comeback fashion in games in which he caused the Colts to be down. The other number they bring up is victories, which is so misleading for multiple reasons. The COLTS winning X more games is not an indication that he did a swell job.

 

The numbers say he was average... but so does the tape. Bad decisions, crumbling when his protection breaks down, & failing to trust his reads all were huge problems he will have to correct moving into this 2013 season. In college, he could get away with just slinging the ball down the field and it not coming back to bite him... He can't do that anymore.

 

You don't need flashy or gaudy stats to be a successful QB... but rarely are you going anywhere in today's league with an inefficient one. Unless your name is Eli Manning... Although, the Colts probably won't see that type of success signing one of the worst defensive players in the league to big dollars.

 

Thus, the last and only other thing that can be brought up is his "potential" and "talent". If only we had some easier and more indicative measures in which to grade a players potential or talent. However, if we had the answer to that question... There wouldn't be much reason to hire scouts.

 

But I digress... Let's spend more time talking about a real QB....

 

[Jules 98]

Aaron Rodgers in comeback games could use some work. :grinno:

 

 

j/k

 

 

Personally I am a fan of Rodgers. But, I still prefer Favre for some reason deep down.....

 

Favre brought me more joy when I watched him growing up. Favre is becoming underrated to me too as time goes on.

 

Todays game sucks out a lot of fun. I think in our stats obsessed fantasy football society we don't focus enough at times on just truly enjoying the sport.....watching our teams win games or try to win games....or just the pure moments. I don't say after a game, "Wow that was a good win. Sure wish our QB had a higher passer rating though!."

 

(Now with all this chatter watch Luck blow everyones roof off when it comes to stats next year. That would be a hoot...... )

 

My favorite Colts team of all time is the 1995 Colts. I was a young girl. We gave no shit about the numbers. We just wanted to win the game!! And Jim Harbaugh was all balls.....

 

 

Ahhh people over analyze so much! Enjoy the game people. Have fun with your teams. So much in the world and in our country is going down the tubes. At least football can still provide moments of pure joy to us all!!!

 

I promise next year I will be more critical of Andrew Luck's stats.

[Jules 98]

BTW it is interesting that Andrew Luck inspires so much discussion from both sides. Whether you are impressed by him or not.

 

I see this on other forums too. He results in some lengthy discussions/threads.

 

Interesting.

 

 

So many QBs bore me to the point I never really talk about them too....

[Favre4Ever+ 4,476]

Lemme just clarify that at no point have I said Luck is a scrub. I have said that there are times when he looked like a scrub, this is a fact. I understand he's a rookie, I seen some of the great stuff he did. I have said on other threads that he's gonna look much better this upcoming year then he did last year.

 

But people who make claims like, the amount of times he threw the ball fail to realise that had he completed more of those passes -accuracy-, he probably wouldn't throw as much either. And what about TDs? If you're gonna throw the ball a ton, get TOs, lotsa yards, where are the TDs?

 

People who make claims like, he had no running game fail to realize that for the majority of the season, the Colt's running game was actually middle/average to bellow average (just like their passing game the entire year).

 

They also fail to realize things like his stats in his last 4 games of the season looked like this:

70/150 (46.7%), 978 yards (6.5 ypa), 8 TD, 5 INT

 

And they still went 3-1... That's borderline Tebowing... Their is no way in hell to say that the Colts were this good because of Luck. They finished with that record because of a favorable schedule, lucky bounces going their way many times, and total team efforts.

 

HOw dare you insult Tebow by comparing him to the very human... Andrew Luck.

[Jules 98]

HOw dare you insult Tebow by comparing him to the very human... Andrew Luck.

 

Exactly. Tebow is a God amongst men.

 

And when all is said and done, time will tell how this Andrew Luck journey will end.

 

But, I do appreciate all the various opinions here and the thought provoking original post. I like to get different takes on things from REAL fans of various teams and not just talking heads and Colts fans.

Edited July 8, 2013 by Jules

[Dutch 874]

 

I know we kind of what to go beyond the stats somewhat... But why praise a QB who digs himself huge holes and then struggles after he crosses midfield?

 

 

The kid struggles immensely pinpointing his passes beyond 10 yards. Yes, everyone expects performance to drop off in the deep game, but being so mediocre in this department... You have to wonder why he is attempting more of them than most any QB in the league.

 

We also expect QB to get worse when facing pressure, right? Of course... And Luck faced a lot of pressure this last season. He responded extremely unfavorably. Bar none, he is one of the worst QBs when facing pressure which makes the number of deep passes he attempts even more confounding. If you can't man up and deliver with a defending barreling down at you, making a living in this league won't be easy.

 

He can get better, absolutely. And he has plenty of time to do it... But this is a great example of putting the cart before the horse. Let's sit back, call it as we see it, and see what he can develop into.

 

Although, after one season... He looks like maybe the best Peyton Manning replacement ever. Maybe we should wait to see how he does in the playoffs first.

 

Regardless.... Whether you look at the stats or watch him play, you should come to the same conclusion. Calling Luck anything more than mediocre would be an insult to the good - great QBs around the league.

 

 

It funny you bring that up. I just did some research and found some interesting stats. Now, I want everyone to read and comprehend that I am not saying Luck is better than these guys. I am simply just using this information for a basis of comparison to help put things into perspective.

 

With you bringing up Luck's efficiency past 10 yards, I decided to look at some of the other QBs in the league.

 

Tom Brady

 

11-20 yards: 56/113 49.6% 1071 yards 6 TDs 2 INT, QBR: 93.2

 

21-30: 14/44 31.8% 414 yards 3 TDs 2 INT, QBR: 71.6

 

31-40: 6/18 33.3% 274 3 TDs 1 INT QBR: 98.4

 

41+: 0/6--------------------------------------------

 

Blitz: 111/173 64.2% 1376 15 TDs 0 INT, 117.6

 

QB Pressure: 21/69 30.4% 241 yards 1 TD 1 INT, QBR: 40.8

 

 

Drew Brees

 

11-20: 84/135 62.2% 1530 8 TDs 4 INT, QBR: 108.8

 

21-30: 17/37 45.9% 534 2 TD 3 INT, QBR: 76.7

 

31-40: 8/25 32% 304 yards 3 TDs 3 INT, QBR: 79.4

 

41+: 5/9 55.6% 280 yards 1 TD 0 INT, QBR: 137.5

 

Blitz: 113/184 61.4% 1613 10 TD 3 INT, QBR: 101.1

 

QB Pressure: 34/79 43% 435 yards 2 TDs 1 INT, QBR: 64.1

 

 

Peyton Manning

 

11-20: 77/126 61.1% 1355 yards 6 TDs 1 INT, QBR: 110.4

 

21-30: 18/38 47.4% 541 5 TDs 5 INT, QBR: 93.6

 

31-40: 7/21 33.3% 289 yards 3 TDs 1 INT, QBR: 101.7

 

41+: No attempts, noodle arm

 

Blitz: 128/189 67.7% 11 TDs 4 INT, QBR: 100.8

 

QB Pressures: 18/49 36.7% 170 yards 1 TD 1 INT, QBR: 45.5

 

 

Aaron Rodgers

 

11-20: 59/106 55.7% 1169 yards 7 TDs 3 INTs, QBR: 104.6

 

21-30: 14/37 37.8% 437 yards 7 TDs 0 INTs, QBR: 122.4

 

31-40: 5/10 50% 227 yards 2 TDs 0 INTs, QBR: 135.4

 

41+: 0/6

 

Blitz: 86/139 61.9% 1131 yards 14 TDs 3 INT, QBR: 112.1

 

QB Pressures: 25/63 39.7% 355 yards 3 TDs 1 INTs, QBR: 67.9

 

Undisputed #1 QB in the league seriously...

 

 

Andrew Luck

 

11-20: 76/156 48.7% 1342 yards 1 TD 6 INTs, QBR: 64.6

 

20-31: 19/59 32.2% 581 yards 4 TDs 3 INTs, QBR: 71.4

 

31-40: 5/17 29.4% 250 yards 3 TDs 1 INT, QBR: 94.2

 

41+ 2/12 16.7% 90 yards 1 TD 2 INTs, QBR: 46.5

 

Blitz: 93/189 49.2% 1264 yards 5 TDs 3 INTs, QBR: 73.2

 

QB Pressures: 44/117 37.6% 673 yards 5 TDs 3 INTs, QBR: 61

 

Those are some interesting stats. When you look at passes 11-20 yards and 21-30 yards, Luck attempted more throws than all of these elite QBs; by a good margin for some. There's no way a rookie QB should be throwing down the field more times than these 4 guys; that's just ludicrous. Oh wait, Bruce Arian's was calling the plays. It appears as if Arian's was trying to utilize Luck as if he were an elite QB; which he isn't. Arian's had Luck attempt 627 passes (5th most in the league), was dialing up long developing deep passing plays (more attempts down field than the Elite 4; 27% of his passes 15 yards or more 3rd in the league), behind a horrible offensive line (most hit QB in the league), with an ineffective running game and made no adjustments. It's crazy when you think about it. The elite 4 weren't even asked to throw deep down the field as much as Luck. Arian's didn't do Luck any justice. So when you look at efficiency, it's obvious why. You can't simply ignore/disregard these factors when you are truly evaluating QBs as if they don't play a part. When you look beyond the stats period, you're basically looking at circumstances; things that people tend to overlook or act like they don't matter. When you evaluate or compare players, circumstances always comes into play; what are they asked to do. (similar to my post about Revis and Sherman; Sherman sitting in his cover 3 zone with help over top vs Revis following the best WR all game) When you look at the entire picture: 627 pass attempts, long developing deep passing plays (was asked to more than elite 4; efficiency), worst offensive line in the league and ineffective run game, that seems like an elite work load. Is he elite? No. Did he have pretty numbers? No. But did he get the job done? Yes. He came through when it mattered.

 

All of

Edited July 8, 2013 by dutchff7

[Favre4Ever+ 4,476]

All said already regarding Arians, his overratedness, and the his failure to utilize Luck correctly.. But the work and effort put into the numbers is well appreciated.

 

I will have to disagree that he got the job done. Don't really think he did. Did the Colts and those running the team maybe set him up for failure? You can make a case for that, absolutely. But at the end of the day, he is responsible for his own play. Bruce Arians isn't forcing him to make incorrect reads, make bad decisions, or cower when trying to throw under pressure.

 

Hopefully the Colts can surround him with a scheme he is better suited to play... But I think that also goes to show how overrated he was coming out of school. We are now talking about tailoring a scheme around a guy whose talent was supposed to carry him into the Hall of Fame.

 

Oh the wonderful joys of the NFL.

[Jules 98]

It funny you bring that up. I just did some research and found some interesting stats. Now, I want everyone to read and comprehend that I am not saying Luck is better than these guys. I am simply just using this information for a basis of comparison to help put things into perspective.

 

With you bringing up Luck's efficiency past 10 yards, I decided to look at some of the other QBs in the league.

 

Tom Brady

 

11-20 yards: 56/113 49.6% 1071 yards 6 TDs 2 INT, QBR: 93.2

 

21-30: 14/44 31.8% 414 yards 3 TDs 2 INT, QBR: 71.6

 

31-40: 6/18 33.3% 274 3 TDs 1 INT QBR: 98.4

 

41+: 0/6--------------------------------------------

 

Blitz: 111/173 64.2% 1376 15 TDs 0 INT, 117.6

 

QB Pressure: 21/69 30.4% 241 yards 1 TD 1 INT, QBR: 40.8

 

 

Drew Brees

 

11-20: 84/135 62.2% 1530 8 TDs 4 INT, QBR: 108.8

 

21-30: 17/37 45.9% 534 2 TD 3 INT, QBR: 76.7

 

31-40: 8/25 32% 304 yards 3 TDs 3 INT, QBR: 79.4

 

41+: 5/9 55.6% 280 yards 1 TD 0 INT, QBR: 137.5

 

Blitz: 113/184 61.4% 1613 10 TD 3 INT, QBR: 101.1

 

QB Pressure: 34/79 43% 435 yards 2 TDs 1 INT, QBR: 64.1

 

 

Peyton Manning

 

11-20: 77/126 61.1% 1355 yards 6 TDs 1 INT, QBR: 110.4

 

21-30: 18/38 47.4% 541 5 TDs 5 INT, QBR: 93.6

 

31-40: 7/21 33.3% 289 yards 3 TDs 1 INT, QBR: 101.7

 

41+: No attempts, noodle arm

 

Blitz: 128/189 67.7% 11 TDs 4 INT, QBR: 100.8

 

QB Pressures: 18/49 36.7% 170 yards 1 TD 1 INT

 

 

Aaron Rodgers

 

11-20: 59/106 55.7% 1169 yards 7 TDs 3 INTs, QBR: 104.6

 

21-30: 14/37 37.8% 437 yards 7 TDs 0 INTs, QBR: 122.4

 

31-40: 5/10 50% 227 yards 2 TDs 0 INTs, QBR: 135.4

 

41+: 0/6

 

Blitz: 86/139 61.9% 1131 yards 14 TDs 3 INT, QBR: 112.1

 

QB Pressures: 25/63 39.7% 355 yards 3 TDs 1 INTs, QBR: 67.9

 

Undisputed #1 QB in the league seriously...

 

 

Andrew Luck

 

11-20: 76/156 48.7% 1342 yards 1 TD 6 INTs, QBR: 64.6

 

20-31: 19/59 32.2% 581 yards 4 TDs 3 INTs, QBR: 71.4

 

31-40: 5/17 29.4% 250 yards 3 TDs 1 INT, QBR: 94.2

 

41+ 2/12 16.7% 90 yards 1 TD 2 INTs, QBR: 46.5

 

 

Those are some interesting stats. When you look at passes 11-20 yards and 21-30 yards, Luck attempted more throws than all of these elite QBs; by a good margin for some. There's no way a rookie QB should be throwing down the field more times than these 4 guys; that's just ludicrous. Oh wait, Bruce Arian's was calling the plays. It appears as if Arian's was trying to utilize Luck as if he were an elite QB; which he isn't. Arian's had Luck attempt 627 passes (5th most in the league), was dialing up long developing deep passing plays (more attempts down field than the Elite 4; 27% of his passes 15 yards or more 3rd in the league), behind a horrible offensive line (most hit QB in the league), with an ineffective running game and made no adjustments. It's crazy when you think about it. The elite 4 weren't even asked to throw deep down the field as much as Luck. Arian's didn't do Luck any justice. So when you look at efficiency, it's obvious why. You can't simply ignore/disregard these factors when you are truly evaluating QBs as if they don't play a part. When you look beyond the stats period, you're basically looking at circumstances; things that people tend to overlook or act like they don't matter. When you evaluate or compare players, circumstances always comes into play; what are they asked to do. (similar to my post about Revis and Sherman; Sherman sitting in his cover 3 zone with help over top vs Revis following the best WR all game) When you look at the entire picture: 627 pass attempts, long developing deep passing plays (was asked to more than elite 4; efficiency), worst offensive line in the league and ineffective run game, that seems like an elite work load. Is he elite? No. Did he have pretty numbers? No. But did he get the job done? Yes. He came through when it mattered.

 

All of

 

Wow how do you come up with all this stuff? You are like a Colts fans dream stat machine!!!

 

You are just making me want to chug more blue koolaid. Mmmhmmmm tastes like blueberries......

 

Okay homerism aside for a second I think WE ALL CAN AGREE ON ONE THING:

 

Andrew Luck>Joe Webb

[Jules 98]

In AFC South someone should start a stat analysis thread for Luck when the season starts. A week by week analysis.

 

Cause I promised I would be more critical in year 2. I usually give rooks a one year grace period....oh it will be tough though. I am protective of this young man for some reason it seems.

Edited July 8, 2013 by Jules

[Dutch 874]

All said already regarding Arians, his overratedness, and the his failure to utilize Luck correctly.. But the work and effort put into the numbers is well appreciated.

 

I will have to disagree that he got the job done. Don't really think he did. Did the Colts and those running the team maybe set him up for failure? You can make a case for that, absolutely. But at the end of the day, he is responsible for his own play. Bruce Arians isn't forcing him to make incorrect reads, make bad decisions, or cower when trying to throw under pressure.

 

Hopefully the Colts can surround him with a scheme he is better suited to play... But I think that also goes to show how overrated he was coming out of school. We are now talking about tailoring a scheme around a guy whose talent was supposed to carry him into the Hall of Fame.

 

Oh the wonderful joys of the NFL.

 

 

He didn't get the job done? So with just about every facet of their team being average/below average, with the extreme lack of everything at just about every position except QB and a WR, and with the team still making the play offs, he didn't get his job done? Lol. He wasn't pretty at it all the time but he carried the load and he won games when it mattered. I wouldn't even say that they need to tailor a scheme around him. When I look at everything he was asked to do, he was asked to be an elite QB when you look at the circumstances; attempts, all the passes being low % down the field passes that were dialed up by Arian's, along with the team mediocrity/below average play and ineffective running game. Stats within the stats yo,(my new line; trademarked) they paint the picture clearer.

Edited July 9, 2013 by dutchff7

[Thanatos 2,847]

Tom Brady: Blitz: 111/173 64.2% 1376 15 TDs 0 INT, 117.6

 

Dear god. Why do people blitz Brady?

[DonovanMcnabb for H.O.F 2,241]

Even if you take out the passes beyond 20 yards, his completion percentage was still around 57%. His accuracy % between 1-10 yards is 59%.

 

To put that into perspectives, Mark Sanchez and Blaine Gabbert were at around 62% in that same area.

 

But that's also on Arians.

[Dutch 874]

Even if you take out the passes beyond 20 yards, his completion percentage was still around 57%. His accuracy % between 1-10 yards is 59%.

 

To put that into perspectives, Mark Sanchez and Blaine Gabbert were at around 62% in that same area.

 

But that's also on Arians.

 

His accuracy rating was 61.1% with throws between 1-10 yards.

 

Also, why would you take his passes beyond 20 yards out of the equation? My stance was that he made a way higher volume of passes in the 11-20 yard range & 21-30 yard range compared to the other guys. That would be defeating the purpose of my own argument.. 169 of his passes were 15 yards are more which is the most in the league by a considerable margin.

[DonovanMcnabb for H.O.F 2,241]

I'm not trying to take away his passes beyond 20 yards to prove nothing more then to show the people who say that the reason why his accuracy %, QBR, INTs, ETC was so low was because of where he threw the ball.

 

The point I'm trying to make by showing splits of his passes 1-10, as well as his accuracy for throws is that it doesn't matter where he threw the ball, whether short or far, he was erratic. As was his accuracy.

 

Where do you get your stats from, 60%? ESPN has his splits from 1-10 yards at 59.1%. Ignore my comment on his comp.% from 21 yards to behind the LOS, 57% is off, but even then, the actual numbers aren't pretty.

 

With or without Arians asking him to go deep more then other QBs, his efficiency stats would still be very average at best. Which again brings up the question; if Luck was more efficient on those passes, wouldn't his numbers be more efficient? And even more importantly, wouldn't the offense be more efficient? If he completed more of those shorter passes wouldn't he have to throw less?

Edited July 8, 2013 by DonovanMcnabb for H.O.F

[Favre4Ever+ 4,476]

No matter how you look at the numbers, they aren't in his (Luck's) favor. Which is why everyone who defends him is just better off talking about what they hope he becomes, not what he actually is.

[seanbrock 1,684]

Wow, there's a lot of heated debate in this thread. I think the reason why some people on TGP aren't high on Luck is because we're a very anti-hype forum haha, except for myself and goat of course. I think Luck had an impressive rookie year. He wasn't very efficient but I think given time that will change.

 

I've never seen a rookie QB take on so much of a load that Luck did. He shouldered that whole offense. There was no run game and the line was bad. Then you also have to factor in the offense he was in. He was throwing the football down the field. I mean, he completed less than 60% of his passes and still had a 7+ ypa. He did have a great veteran WR and a bunch of good young targets though.

 

Right now it's tough to say who I'd take out of this rookie class. Luck is overrated, but it's not really his fault. He's not asking to be named one of the 25 best players in the league. He went through some typical rookie growing pains and showed a lot of poise and talent. The kid is going to be a great QB.

[Dutch 874]

When you look at passes 11-20 yards and 21-30 yards, Luck attempted more throws than all of these elite QBs; by a good margin for some.

 

 

Even if you take out the passes beyond 20 yards, his completion percentage was still around 57%.

 

 

I'm not trying to take away his passes beyond 20 yards to prove nothing more then to show the people who say that the reason why his accuracy %, QBR, INTs, ETC was so low was because of where he threw the ball.

 

Bro, that's exactly what you're trying to do. In my argument, I'm saying look at the passes 11-20 yards & 21-30 yards. Then you say if you take out the pass beyond 20 yards... What does that have to do with my stance? And then you have the nerve to say afterwards that you're not trying to take his passes beyond 20 yards away when that's EXACTLY what you said and even provided information on it lol (I'm about to address your information shortly).

 

Luck attempted 627 passes. 27% of his passes (filter to regular season) were deep passes 15+ yards being 3rd in the league under Jay Cutler and Colin Kaepernick. Luck threw for a way higher volume of passes than they did. Luck threw a total of 169 passes beyond 15 yards which is the most in the league. THAT is my main point and you failed to address and tried to disregard it.

 

The point I'm trying to make by showing splits of his passes 1-10, as well as his accuracy for throws is that it doesn't matter where he threw the ball, whether short or far, he was erratic. As was his accuracy.

 

Where do you get your stats from, 60%? ESPN has his splits from 1-10 yards at 59.1%.

 

Let's take a look at the stats you provided. Andrew Luck threw for a total of 627 passes. Espn broke down Andrew Luck's splits passing attempts :

 

Behind LoS: 86 attempts

 

1-10: 279 attempts

 

11-20: 162 attempts

 

21-30: 59 attempts

 

31-40: 20 attempts

 

41+: 12 attempts

 

 

When you add all of that up, that's only 618 total attempts. Andrew Luck had 627. So, not only does that mean that information is wrong, it shows that you didn't do any real research and all you did was copy and paste and didn't do any work to check behind it. That makes your next quoted paragraph completely irrelevant because you're talking efficiency and numbers and yours Espn's was wrong.

 

With or without Arians asking him to go deep more then other QBs, his efficiency stats would still be very average at best. Which again brings up the question; if Luck was more efficient on those passes, wouldn't his numbers be more efficient? And even more importantly, wouldn't the offense be more efficient? If he completed more of those shorter passes wouldn't he have to throw less?

 

I'm done debating with you on this topic. Not only do you openly contradict yourself and fail to address my stances, you're copying and pasting wrong information and not doing any real work behind it. Your opinion of Luck is your opinion and that's fine. But putting so much effort to discredit a player and not doing any real homework behind it... c'mon now.

Edited August 9, 2013 by dutchff7

[KempBolt 498]

I'm definitely with Dutch on this one. When you consider what Luck was asked to do (carry the offense, throw deeper than almost everyone else, throw so often), what he was asked to do it with/without (no running game, league's worst line, inexperienced receivers outside of Wayne, a defense that couldn't hold a lead), and the tremendous amount of upside he still possesses, there is no question in my mind that he's going to be the best of the rookies and that what he did last year was the most impressive performance among the rookies.

[Dutch 874]

People are just disregarding/ignoring the circumstances as if they don't matter and keep running to the raw numbers. They don't tell the entire story. The stats within stats breaks it down and reveal what the situation was. The situation was that Luck was being utilized as if he was an elite QB. He was asked to throw 627 times, throw more deep passes than anyone else in the league, behind a horrible offensive line, had no running game, and a bad defense. How does none of that play a factor? In all actuality, The Colts ARE a bad team outside of Luck and Wayne if you take a real look at their situation. They were 2-14 last season. The only substantial change was at QB. Bad team, extremely unfavorable play calling, elite work load and he still won games. He's not elite so having that elite work load won't do justice for his raw numbers but he carried that load and took that bad team to the playoffs enduring those circumstances. There's no downplaying or disregarding those factors.

Edited July 9, 2013 by dutchff7

[Phins4life 271]

Dear god. Why do people blitz Brady?

Welcome to my hell. Standard 4-man fronts are far more effective in the long run, at least in our case.