Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

NewColtsFan

A Question for Everyone: Why was Luck playing in the 4th Quarter?

Recommended Posts

NewColtsFan    12,956

Maybe it's me. Maybe I'm completely wrong. No one asked Luck this. And, even more to the point, no one asked Arians this. So, perhaps I'm completely wrong on this issue. Wouldn't be the first time.

But, from early in the 4th quarter I kept calling for Arians to take Luck out of the game. Enough.

Put in Stanton. What was to be gained by playing Luck? More experience? A miracle comeback?

IMO, whatever could be gained paled in comparison to what could have been lost. Luck could've been hurt. And what would have happened to our possible playoff run had Luck been hurt? Gronkowski got hurt late in the 4th quarter. That could've happened to Luck.

Sit the kid down. There's way more downside than there is upside in playing him. Sit him down and let him clear his head of that nightmare. He was terrible. All rookie QB's have a game (or more) like that and this was definitely one to forget for Andrew. I just did not understand the reasoning for playing him to the end.

But, since no one asked Luck in the post-game, and no one asked Arians, maybe it's not a big deal and I'm flat-out wrong.

What do you think?

I look forward to reading your views when I wake up....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
HungarianColtsFan    1,751

Coin has 2 flips IMO.

On one hand, Luck is a rookie, and he needs to gain experience, as much and as fast as he can.

On the other hand, such terrible game is hard to get over, and he may lose confidence. I was rather worried about psychological effects than risk of an injury.

To be honest, I thought for a second that maybe it would be better to bench Luck, but that might have caused bigger lost in confidence than this KO loss.

I' don't know what had been the right call in that issue.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
ReMeDy    2,168

I'm fine with playing Luck, because I highly doubt we'll reach the Superbowl and it's likely the Texans have won our division, so we may as well go for broke and play Luck as much as possible. Even if he gets injured, I don't know of anyone who would complain at having a better draft pick if we lose games. Our team is rebuilding anyway you slice it.

Regarding Drew Stanton, there may be political mischief happening backdoors where Stanton intends to leave after this season anyways. It'd be pointless wasting playing time on a guy who's leaving.

It could also be Luck wanted to keep playing, so Arians accommodated him. Luck is fiercely competitive like that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
#12    418

You don't pull an NFL QB of Luck's caliber out in that situation. Doing so would be counterproductive. A borderline starter with little job security? Maybe you do. Andrew Luck, Peyton Mannning - no.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
RGIII    576

For a rookie QB the experience and reps are important, especially under difficult circumstances. The fact is Luck could be hurt at any time in any game, any practice, any warm-up, or any non-football-related activity. At the end of the day you have to be willing take some risks to develop your guy and I don't think you pull him in this situation unless you're either a very serious contender on the verge of clinching something (better to live to fight another day in that case) or your guy is getting beat like a red-headed stepchild (or, worse, an Eagles QB).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Gavin    7,030

A few reasons come to mind, None of which are probably true

Like you said a miracle comeback maybe? we were down 38-17 going into the 4th which given our young team and the fact that we were going against a Tom Brady led offense was pretty insermountable but stranger things have happened and Arians just isn't one to lay down when getting a whippin (One of the things I like about him). I would have taken Luck out but not because of the score, Our O Line ceased to exist (which is getting monotonous, I swear sometimes its like Luck said something about each one of there mommas). Another reason is if you saw Lucks post game interview he was clearly frustrated and angry with the loss and with himself which is a good thing, he needs to remember how that feels and channel that and get better(Maybe thats why Arians left him to, to make let him feel that anger and frustration and to remember what that feels like and to get better. Personally I would have thought long and hard about taking him out, like I said he was playing without an O Line to protect him (seemingly) even when he wasnt getting hit he was being chased from beginning to end of the game it seemed, The O Line should be embarrassed and ashamed of there performance in terms of pass protection, however Luck made some bad decisions thats for sure and some horrible throws

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Gavin    7,030

The way he played, perhaps we should have benched him before the 1st quarter?

I get your point because he did not play well even with 2 touchdowns and well over 300 yards passing but I dont feel like watching my team lose 59-0, Stanton would have gotten destroyed behind our O Line

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
UKColt13    1,227

Couldn't watch the game in the UK, but if we are down by more than 30 in the 4th Quarter Luck and Wayne should not be on the field. It is just wasted minutes with a risk of them getting hurt that we can't afford.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
ruksak    5,963

These kinds of brutal butt kickings are great for a rookie QB. As hard as it was to watch the Patriots laughing as they dismantled our team, the experience is good for the team and given our character, should prove to be both humbling and galvanizing.

21 gimmie points on the road won't win games, nor even allow you to be competitive.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
SIXTHOBJECT    79

All this talk about benching one player, We should have benched the whole dang team. I cant believe people on here you dont ever bench a player you have such high hopes for unless you are stomping a team in the ground. Its never just one players fault this was a team reality check. Let it go we have plenty to learn from it. Oh ya and you dont pay players what they get paid to sit them down and give up! Wow I am diappointed by these all these crazy comments. The Pats just showed us we are not there yet. Brighter days are comming we have to take it on the cheek and move on that is all a young team can do.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Dan    764

Get him some experience of being in a walk-over position. Not the first time it'll happen in his career, let's not hide him from it and pretend it'll be all rosy. Also, he had to get that 300+ yard game record!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
King Colt    868

More important: Why play Brady?! If Luck gets hurt they lose a rookie, if Brady gets hurt they lose a Hall of Fame, four time Super Bowl champion. I was amazed he stayed until the whistle blew.

A rookie getting his berains beat in needs to stay in and absorb that feeling of how far one has to go in the NFL when you are your first year. What would motivate you more for revenge, a single punch in the head or a royal, non-stop whoopin'? Call it "A Lesson Learned".

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
oldunclemark    7,544

Maybe it's me. Maybe I'm completely wrong. No one asked Luck this. And, even more to the point, no one asked Arians this. So, perhaps I'm completely wrong on this issue. Wouldn't be the first time.

But, from early in the 4th quarter I kept calling for Arians to take Luck out of the game. Enough.

Put in Stanton. What was to be gained by playing Luck? More experience? A miracle comeback?

IMO, whatever could be gained paled in comparison to what could have been lost. Luck could've been hurt. And what would have happened to our possible playoff run had Luck been hurt? Gronkowski got hurt late in the 4th quarter. That could've happened to Luck.

Sit the kid down. There's way more downside than there is upside in playing him. Sit him down and let him clear his head of that nightmare. He was terrible. All rookie QB's have a game (or more) like that and this was definitely one to forget for Andrew. I just did not understand the reasoning for playing him to the end.

But, since no one asked Luck in the post-game, and no one asked Arians, maybe it's not a big deal and I'm flat-out wrong.

What do you think?

I look forward to reading your views when I wake up....

No....Luck is a rookie and he needs every snap he can get.......Why take that away from him. we may play them again in January..

Playing in a game where you are down 3 or 4 TDs is also experinece....

I dont want to only put Andrew in a position where he can succeed....failure is a teacher. too

Luck wasnt hurt..so play him...all the way....I would also play him is we ever get up 3 TDs....

I agree with Lolly...the question is: Why was Tom Brady playing when they were ahead 4 TDs...?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
FireJimCaldwell    3,011

Maybe it's me. Maybe I'm completely wrong. No one asked Luck this. And, even more to the point, no one asked Arians this. So, perhaps I'm completely wrong on this issue. Wouldn't be the first time.

But, from early in the 4th quarter I kept calling for Arians to take Luck out of the game. Enough.

Put in Stanton. What was to be gained by playing Luck? More experience? A miracle comeback?

IMO, whatever could be gained paled in comparison to what could have been lost. Luck could've been hurt. And what would have happened to our possible playoff run had Luck been hurt? Gronkowski got hurt late in the 4th quarter. That could've happened to Luck.

Sit the kid down. There's way more downside than there is upside in playing him. Sit him down and let him clear his head of that nightmare. He was terrible. All rookie QB's have a game (or more) like that and this was definitely one to forget for Andrew. I just did not understand the reasoning for playing him to the end.

But, since no one asked Luck in the post-game, and no one asked Arians, maybe it's not a big deal and I'm flat-out wrong.

What do you think?

I look forward to reading your views when I wake up....

There is no 100% right or wrong answer. I can see pros & cons in leaving him in and pros & cons in pulling him.

Obviously any team would regret a player being injured in a game in which the outcome has been decided whether it's Gronkowski/Belichick or McCoy/Reid. Either coach if they had a do-over would likely make a substitute.

What is gained by leaving him in? You don't embarrass him by putting in QB2, you let him finish the game knowing that he was a key contributor to the result and in my opinion from a mental standpoint it would be better to have him on the field playing, as opposed to standing there simmering over looking at the scoreboard and seeing 59-24. Obviously that works both ways, some might do better by standing on the sideline for the final 5 minutes or so, but I think most competitors would do better with riding the loss out on the field.

A player has to be smart in those situations and understand there aren't any 25 points plays that can alter the game in one play.

I also think it's about the team mentality moving forward. You ride & die with the starter. You win with him, you lose with him. If it were a team like last year where there was no clear cut starter, then obviously you might make a change midway through the 3rd quarter in hopes of a change up that can spark the team, but Stanton isn't going to be a spark.

My perspective on a one-sided game like this is that I think you have to use it as a building block. Try to get something positive or work on a certain situation/grouping/concept, experiment with new plays that you want to run against a 100% live defense. I'm not sure we saw that yesterday, but once the outcome is decided, you have to use that time to learn & progress. Even if it means taking out 87 and other starting receivers just to get the QB more time with other receivers. At that point any small goal you can accomplish is a positive.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
oldunclemark    7,544

It probably gets back to the condition of the offensive line, too...

If the 1st string line was still in...and not getting overrun (i dont think they were) I want a rookie player to play..

Luck wasnt ineffective....He just made a couple of drive killing throws..that dont hurt as much in a game that's already lost

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
ColtsBlueFL    3,634

There would be nothing to explain it correctly, because Luck would feel it to be punitive and not protective. Getting pulled while playing less than stellar on the wrong side of a blowout. Let him finish... good or bad.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Jay Kirk    6,038

Look we found something out by this,there is still more than enough work to be done in all parts of the game,and Mr Luck learned a vauable lesson.IMO better now than further down the road,hes got a good head on his shoulders,and he will rebound and probably play well this week,but i must also say it eliminates the possibility for the Big Head so all is well and good in Colts land

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

  • Thread of the Week

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • Meh, these guys make millions. If they aren't smart enough to take out long term care insurance with some of that money then it's on them. 
    • So many assumptions here, I don't know where to begin:       How does Steve Young know what Andrew is thinking?        There's no effort on the part of the Colts FO, Owner and/or coaching staff to improve the team around him.        There's no talent on this team besides Andrew.          Andrew can void his contract and just decide to leave.        He would be on a losing team for his career, if he stayed.         While we can all agree that the team around him has to improve, not only for the sake of his health but for him to have a successful career, the means to that improvement can come from a new influx of players and/ or coaches or from existing players and coaches getting better each week.     If you think about individual players and ask yourself if you are glad they are Colts, you can make the case that there is more to this team than Andrew.     As far as Ballard, I'm glad the Colts landed him. If the goal is to build a team around him, he is an important piece.      I want to see how this coaching staff does when the injured players return.        At very least, what is happening now is good for the team as a whole. Young players are getting reps and depth is being built. The defense is playing together and as a result familiarity and communication should improve.      If this team keeps improving, the wins will come. Andrew could return to a team that may be the best he has played with so far. I know these are assumptions on my part but to assume things won't change (one way or another) is a bigger assumption IMO.  
    • I guess if he really wanted to, he could pull a Carson Palmer and retire, then sign with a different team. I wish we had more positive stories to talk about. But negativity is what always sells and gets the most response. 
    • The Rams and 49ers scored more points last night than on any other Thursday night game ever. Goff seems to be headed in the right direction and the coach Sean McVay may know something. Great ending as well.
  • Welcome New Members

  • Members

    • PeterBowman

      PeterBowman 1,847

      Senior Member
      Joined:
      Last active:
    • WarGhost21

      WarGhost21 544

      Member
      Joined:
      Last active:
    • dodsworth

      dodsworth 226

      Member
      Joined:
      Last active:
    • SteelCityColt

      SteelCityColt 4,719

      Moderators
      Joined:
      Last active:
    • chad72

      chad72 6,430

      Senior Member
      Joined:
      Last active:
    • DaColts85

      DaColts85 587

      Senior Member
      Joined:
      Last active:
    • csmopar

      csmopar 3,123

      Senior Member
      Joined:
      Last active:
    • Indy1996

      Indy1996 7

      New Member
      Joined:
      Last active:
    • BProland85

      BProland85 1,462

      Senior Member
      Joined:
      Last active:
    • UKColt13

      UKColt13 1,227

      Senior Member
      Joined:
      Last active: