Jaworski has Luck as Top-5 Quarterback.....

[southwest1]

Even if all you are saying is true, if he wants to considered elite, he is supposed to cover up the deficiencies to an extent. I mean 1 playoffs win over 10 years just doesn't look good.

Do you think we put any QB with cowboys the result be the same?.

Exactly Shane. Romo does not seal the deal or close out games. Anybody remember the Denver game. LOL! Close only counts in horseshoes, hand grenades, & nuclear weapons...

 

Oh crap, SW1 is about to give Jerry Jones a complement. Clearly, the world is about to end.  Jerry is getting better at protecting Romo on the line starting with the drafting of WI Badgers Center Travis Frederick in 2013. It made me ill to see such a great player land in Texas, but Jerry deserves credit for that stroke of genius as much as it kills me to say that outloud. 

[Gavin]

Even if all you are saying is true, if he wants to considered elite, he is supposed to cover up the deficiencies to an extent. I mean 1 playoffs win over 10 years just doesn't look good.

Do you think we put any QB with cowboys the result be the same?.

Do you think we put any QB with cowboys the result be the same?.

 

Any current QB yes, Also Peyton Manning who's obviously much better then Romo  Peyton could not even cover up his teams(The years Peyton had no defense to help him out as a Colt) deficinces in the playoff like I said, Romo has only been starting since 2006 so its actually been 7 years, Now like I said, Do I think he is good enough to get over that hump? He has not shown that so far and its going to be an even taller order this year, Not much really was done to the back end of that defense unless some rookies come out and ball out....Not likely to happen at least in year 1...and there most noteable front 7 player (That's healthy) Henry Melton missed all of last year except 3 games...Anthony Spencer only played 1 game last year. I think he is in that 2nd Tier of top QB's and the 5th or 6th best QB could be strongly debated after Peyton, Brady, Rodgers, Brees, I have Luck in my 2nd tier

[southwest1]

Do you think we put any QB with cowboys the result be the same?.

 

Any current QB yes, Also Peyton Manning who's obviously much better then Romo  Peyton could not even cover up his teams(The years Peyton had no defense to help him out as a Colt) deficinces in the playoff like I said, Romo has only been starting since 2006 so its actually been 7 years, Now like I said, Do I think he is good enough to get over that hump? He has not shown that so far and its going to be an even taller order this year, Not much really was done to the back end of that defense unless some rookies come out and ball out....Not likely to happen at least in year 1...and there most noteable front 7 player (That's healthy) Henry Melton missed all of last year except 3 games...Anthony Spencer only played 1 game last year. I think he is in that 2nd Tier of top QB's and the 5th or 6th best QB could be strongly debated after Peyton, Brady, Rodgers, Brees, I have Luck in my 2nd tier

Really? I will admit that Luck is young but he has made the Playoffs in back to back seasons. I'm not challenging you Gavin because a) I value your analysis skills, b) you are entitled to your opinions without a brutal backlash, & C) Your name is not Skip Bayless or the guy who always gets under my skin & makes me furious over how he goes out of his way to point out every flaw he sees in Andrew Luck & Jay Cutler & RG3 seem to walk on water almost 24/7. 

 

Big surprise Skip...Grrr! Offensive line issues mean anything to you in Chewbacca's rookie year Mr. Bayless? Sigh...Preach Stephen A. Smith! Yes...11-5 can't be denied baby! INT's are dropping when he is protected Skip.

 

http://youtu.be/NSLXu4ZPaXg

 

Yes I realize that Skip's angle is to say controversial things daily on his program that get a rise out of people, but Skip always takes pleasure in delivering the blow in Luck's back & twisting the knife at will. SW1 may despise Dallas, but I do say nice things about them occasionally. 

 

Plus, Gavin my friend, you were 100% right about Seattle's "Legion Of Boom" defense & secondary that steamrolled Denver in the SB. I was wrong & you were right. Well played Gavin! Ironic that I didn't listen to my own Sun Tzu signature isn't it? LOL! 

[jvan1973]

VL, I didn't put any words into your mouth. Both RBs helped your squad win games NE had to. Just because RB Donald Brown is now playing for San Diego does that mean I slam him & his contributions made in INDY? No, he played great for us this last season. Okay, to be fair, I never liked his breakaway speed or that he fell down so much at the 1st sign of contact, but Brown helped us win games we desperately needed especially with Trent Richardson under performing. My point is this: I don't discount a guy or his legacy on our franchise simply because he now has a new zip code VL.

Where in that statement am I supposed to ascertain you thought Blount was just a " lunch pail kind of guy[s.]?" Stats don't mean a darn thing to me VL. Did Blount help you down the post season stretch? Absolutely. Don't get upset at me simply because you failed to accurately articulate your original position. I like you VL, but further clarification on your part was needed & might have been beneficial to me there. JMO.

Tell that to Rex Ryan in NY Jvan. LOL! His family NFL DNA is all about ground & pound.

Not when their behind in the fourth quarter

[Shane Bond]

Do you think we put any QB with cowboys the result be the same?.

 

Any current QB yes, Also Peyton Manning who's obviously much better then Romo  Peyton could not even cover up his teams(The years Peyton had no defense to help him out as a Colt) deficinces in the playoff like I said, Romo has only been starting since 2006 so its actually been 7 years, Now like I said, Do I think he is good enough to get over that hump? He has not shown that so far and its going to be an even taller order this year, Not much really was done to the back end of that defense unless some rookies come out and ball out....Not likely to happen at least in year 1...and there most noteable front 7 player (That's healthy) Henry Melton missed all of last year except 3 games...Anthony Spencer only played 1 game last year. I think he is in that 2nd Tier of top QB's and the 5th or 6th best QB could be strongly debated after Peyton, Brady, Rodgers, Brees, I have Luck in my 2nd tier

Those are pretty bold comments saying any current QB will yield same results like Romo. In other words you are saying, Brady/Manning/Brees all will have same results.

 

If you really believe that, there is nothing more to discuss.

[MR. Blueblood]

 Peyton Manning himself only won 3 of his first 9 playoff games and only 2 of his first 5 and also while producing only 2 more td's in his first 4 playoff games...Luck also has not gotten his team over that hump either yet, He has 1 win in his first 3 playoff games

Manning has also been stuck with the "can't win in the playoffs" or "chokes in the playoffs" label because of those post season failures, but at least he got the team to the playoffs to begin with.  The Cowboys haven't made it to the playoffs in what 4-5 years?  Take it for what it's worth, but Tim Hasselbeck has Romo as the 4th best QB in the NFC East.  Either he doesn't know his ... from a hole in the ground or are you willing to admit you might be looking at Romo through rose colored glasses.

[Gavin]

Manning has also been stuck with the "can't win in the playoffs" or "chokes in the playoffs" label because of those post season failures, but at least he got the team to the playoffs to begin with.  The Cowboys haven't made it to the playoffs in what 4-5 years?  Take it for what it's worth, but Tim Hasselbeck has Romo as the 4th best QB in the NFC East.  Either he doesn't know his ... from a hole in the ground or are you willing to admit you might be looking at Romo through rose colored glasses.

Robert Griffin III better then Tony Romo? I would love to know his logic on that one, Nah Im not looking at Romo through rose colored glasses, Romo has his faults and I don't believe he will be getting to the SB in his career but Griffin is not better then Romo lol, More exciting? Absolutely, Better? Not in my opinion, Im also not convinced Eli is better

[Blue Horseshoe]

I just don't see it.  How is someone with very average numbers anything but an average quarterback let alone the 5th best in the league?  Why do these analysts feel so compelled to hype the man all the time rather than simply say he is a good young quarterback with a long way to go but who shows a lot of reason for optimism?   Give the man time to learn and to develop his skill set.  This ranking is entirely too high.

[Gavin]

Those are pretty bold comments saying any current QB will yield same results like Romo. In other words you are saying, Brady/Manning/Brees all will have same results.

 

If you really believe that, there is nothing more to discuss.

Mannings had those results when he had to deal with bad defenses(2001), So did Brees(2012) and Brady(2002)...Only New Orleans was historically bad but the other two were among the worst in the league yards per game wise there respective years and all 3 QB's missed the playoffs those years

[Shane Bond]

Mannings had those results when he had to deal with bad defenses(2001), So did Brees(2012) and Brady(2002)...Only New Orleans was historically bad but the other two were among the worst in the league yards per game wise there respective years and all 3 QB's missed the playoffs those years

But they also have had bad defenses in other years too and took them to playoffs and even SB. Do you know the Colts 2009 defensive ranking?. Do you know the Pats defensive ranking in 2011 i believe.

 

Do we remember how young they were in 2001 and 2002?. 

 

Are you seriously putting Romo in par with Brady/Manning?.

[Blueblazes]

I just don't see it.  How is someone with very average numbers anything but an average quarterback let alone the 5th best in the league?  Why do these analysts feel so compelled to hype the man all the time rather than simply say he is a good young quarterback with a long way to go but who shows a lot of reason for optimism?   Give the man time to learn and to develop his skill set.  This ranking is entirely too high.

Wow, a voice of reason and objectivity. I've been a major Colt fan for decades but just no way I put Andrew above Rodgers, Manning, Rivers, Brees or Romo at this point.Yes, I believe he will be top 5 and has potential to be top 2 or 3. Just not yet.

[1yrdandacloudofdust]

Tony Romo lacks structure froma strong head coach. He's become underrated imo. He's top 5 easily.

[BOTT]

Robert Griffin III better then Tony Romo? I would love to know his logic on that one, Nah Im not looking at Romo through rose colored glasses, Romo has his faults and I don't believe he will be getting to the SB in his career but Griffin is not better then Romo lol, More exciting? Absolutely, Better? Not in my opinion, Im also not convinced Eli is better

Hasselbeck has Romo 4th in the division because he is 34 and coming off back surgery......said on espn radio

[BOTT]

Wow, a voice of reason and objectivity. I've been a major Colt fan for decades but just no way I put Andrew above Rodgers, Manning, Rivers, Brees or Romo at this point.Yes, I believe he will be top 5 and has potential to be top 2 or 3. Just not yet.

He didn't put him ahead of Rodgers, Brees, Brady and Manning....just Romo.

[BOTT]

I just don't see it.  How is someone with very average numbers anything but an average quarterback let alone the 5th best in the league?  Why do these analysts feel so compelled to hype the man all the time rather than simply say he is a good young quarterback with a long way to go but who shows a lot of reason for optimism?   Give the man time to learn and to develop his skill set.  This ranking is entirely too high.

Because they realize he is carrying a below average roster on his back. He may not always be pretty when doing it, but the kid gets it done.

[NewColtsFan]

I just don't see it.  How is someone with very average numbers anything but an average quarterback let alone the 5th best in the league?  Why do these analysts feel so compelled to hype the man all the time rather than simply say he is a good young quarterback with a long way to go but who shows a lot of reason for optimism?   Give the man time to learn and to develop his skill set.  This ranking is entirely too high.

 

Here's what you're not seeing.....

 

Luck has won 23 games in his first two years with a team around him that NFL experts believe is -- at best -- average.   The reason his numbers aren't better is that his team isn't better.

 

 

By the way,  this is not just Ron Jaworski saying this....   a few weeks back I posted that a poll of 26 NFL exces,  that's GM's, Directors of Player Personnel,  scouts,  Head Coaches and Coordinators also put Luck as the 5th best QB behind the big four of Manning, Rogers, Brady and Brees.  

 

Yes, Luck is capable of much, much more....   but he's also a superior talent to most current NFL QB's.

[Gavin]

Hasselbeck has Romo 4th in the division because he is 34 and coming off back surgery......said on espn radio

reasonable I guess

[Superman]

Here's what you're not seeing.....

 

Luck has won 23 games in his first two years with a team around him that NFL experts believe is -- at best -- average.   The reason his numbers aren't better is that his team isn't better.

 

 

By the way,  this is not just Ron Jaworski saying this....   a few weeks back I posted that a poll of 26 NFL exces,  that's GM's, Directors of Player Personnel,  scouts,  Head Coaches and Coordinators also put Luck as the 5th best QB behind the big four of Manning, Rogers, Brady and Brees.  

 

Yes, Luck is capable of much, much more....   but he's also a superior talent to most current NFL QB's.

 

I personally think he gets extra credit because of his potential and his intangibles, both of which are immeasurable but undeniable. 

 

I ranked QBs a few weeks back, and I have Luck behind the top four, plus Rivers, Ryan and Roethlisberger. But of course, that's based partially on what they've proven already, as opposed to what they have to offer in the future.

[NewColtsFan]

I personally think he gets extra credit because of his potential and his intangibles, both of which are immeasurable but undeniable. 

 

I ranked QBs a few weeks back, and I have Luck behind the top four, plus Rivers, Ryan and Roethlisberger. But of course, that's based partially on what they've proven already, as opposed to what they have to offer in the future.

 

I think the problem with all these lists is that the criteria changes from list to list.

 

So, your list uses what the player has accomplished as a key component.   So, it's understandable to put the Three R's in there. (Hey!   Where's Romo?!)  

 

But other lists factor things such as future and long term potential.   The question of.... "if you were starting a team who would you want?".....  OR....  "if you had to win one game today, who would you want?"....     Those types of questions can and do change the formula and can give you different outcomes.

 

At my old age, I try not to get too worked up over these lists and take them too seriously.    I post them here as points of discussion, especially if there is perceived good news for Colts fans here....   and with Luck, I always think the news will be good!

[southwest1]

Not when their behind in the fourth quarter

Your point is valid Jvan. My remark was not a criticism against you; it was more of a mental indictment against Rex Ryan's preferences & overall football tendencies. I just wanted to clear the air. Rex is a slave to the running game & he always will be. Yes, he has thrown the ball with Mark Sanchez in the past & got to the AFC Championship Game, but in his heart his overconfidence in the ground game is his biggest weakness. 

 

Again, I respect your NFL judgement Jvan because you are rarely wrong in what you say. 

[Superman]

I think the problem with all these lists is that the criteria changes from list to list.

 

So, your list uses what the player has accomplished as a key component.   So, it's understandable to put the Three R's in there. (Hey!   Where's Romo?!)  

 

But other lists factor things such as future and long term potential.   The question of.... "if you were starting a team who would you want?".....  OR....  "if you had to win one game today, who would you want?"....     Those types of questions can and do change the formula and can give you different outcomes.

 

At my old age, I try not to get too worked up over these lists and take them too seriously.    I post them here as points of discussion, especially if there is perceived good news for Colts fans here....   and with Luck, I always think the news will be good!

 

Most certainly. It's hard to quantify how these rankings are being handled from person to person. 

 

Me personally, I think accomplishments carry more weight than potential, since potential often goes unrealized. Luck's potential is virtually unparalleled and uncontested, but I think people give him credit for already being as good as we expect him to be in the future. He's special, and he makes special things happen already. But it does seem premature to place him in the top five, ahead of those other guys.

[ztboiler]

Most certainly. It's hard to quantify how these rankings are being handled from person to person. 

 

Me personally, I think accomplishments carry more weight than potential, since potential often goes unrealized. Luck's potential is virtually unparalleled and uncontested, but I think people give him credit for already being as good as we expect him to be in the future. He's special, and he makes special things happen already. But it does seem premature to place him in the top five, ahead of those other guys.

I feel the contradiction also - I think Luck is getting the nod in some top 5's in part due to potential.  I also think it is a reflection of the huge gap between the top 4 and the rest.  Potential is the tie breaker among the next tier.

 

The real contradiction, and what supports Jaworski, is what Luck has truly accomplished already.  22 wins, including wins last year over Seattle, Denver, and San Fran with a roster that is still rebuilding - a roster that he had to consistently carry to photo finishes.  Luck doesn't have the statistics of a top 5 QB yet, but he does have the results.  In fact, it might be fair to speculate that there might only be 2 QB's in the league that could have won 22 games for the Colts the last two years and 1 playoff game - and neither are named Manning or Brady.

[Stoney]

I'm a big Luck fan . Good kid, great attitude , etc. He just needs to get over his postseason issues. That'll come. Not sure if he's quite top 5, but certainly close.

Postseason issues..? He's only played 2 years in the league. And the first year was with a completely rebuilt team. He needs a couple more years before you call his postseason woes "issues"...give the man a break.

[ColtsBTM12]

So would I...based on Lucks upside but in no way is Luck better then Romo now

Romo's stats might be better but Andrew knows how to win football games. Romo hasn't been to the playoffs since 2009, while Luck has made the playoffs in each of his first two years with a worse supporting cast. Luck is also more durable and mobile.

[1yrdandacloudofdust]

Romo's stats might be better but Andrew knows how to win football games. Romo hasn't been to the playoffs since 2009, while Luck has made the playoffs in each of his first two years with a worse supporting cast. Luck is also more durable and mobile.

The NFC east is just a little harder than the AFC south. I blame Garrett more than Romo. Romo needs to be saved from himself. If they ran the ball more, they'd win more.

[ColtsBTM12]

The NFC east is just a little harder than the AFC south. I blame Garrett more than Romo. Romo needs to be saved from himself. If they ran the ball more, they'd win more.

True, but I just think that this shouldn't even be a discussion when one guy has shown he can take his team places and the other has gone 8-8 the past 3 years. 

[JPFolks]

I skimmed over all 5 pages, so I am sorry to beat this obviously dead horse, but I will insert my view anyway albeit late in the conversation: 

 

In my opinion, Andrew Luck is easily and without question #5 or better right now in the NFL.  Though it pains me to acknowledge it, Brady did the best job last year of all QB's by far because he had the worst talent to work with all season.   He won some games that still don't make sense.  Manning, on the other hand, should not have lost to anyone with those Offensive weapons.  Sure, his defense sucked, but Luck and the Colts beat the Seahawks with far less talent on both sides of the ball, so Manning has little excuse.  Likewise, Wilson and Kaepernick both had overflowing talent around them and the Colts beat them both.  

 

Here's some thoughts on all of them: : 

 

Brady (last year was amazing winning with no talent, though he  

Manning (though he's the greatest reg. season QB ever, his teams always had more talent than Luck had his rookie year and most of his second year)

Brees (guy couldn't do much on bad San Diego teams and had a great defense and big weapons in New Orleans when he's won)

Rogers (uh... sure, he puts up great numbers, but when he lost the teams talent last year, he couldn't deal with it very well, plus he missed games)

 

Luck (last 2 years as a rookie and 2nd year player he went 11-5 and won a playoff game, beat the NFC runner up and both Super Bowl teams as well as KC twice, at their place and home).

 

Rivers: Does nothing with so-so talent year after year, early in his career he had loaded teams and still lost

Roethlisberger: last two season with weak teams missed playoffs.

Ryan: We see what NOT having Mr. All World Receiver part of the year  did to him last year.  He still had more than Luck had last year after injuries.

Romo: Sucks with mediocre talent and sucked with pretty good talent.  

Newton: one good year with great Defense... can put up offense, but lacks leadership to get his team over the hump beyond one year.  Let's see him do it this year with a great D but less on O.. 

RGIII: Was never as good as Luck regardless and did not deserve ROTY over Luck based on what each had to work with... regressed year 2 and benched the last 3 games .

Wilson: He's had ALL WORLD D both years.  I believe any of the ABOVE QB's could have won a Super Bowl with those teams.

Kaepernick: Had perhaps better talent overall than any other player around him and this year has the most by far suggesting he should win the SB clearly this year if he's in the league of even this second group.   

 

No one else really is in conversation are they? 

 

So which group does Luck CLEARLY belong with?  The top group.  And he may not even be at the bottom of it if you simply measure the 2 years he has played and the level of talent he had to work with compared to those other teams. 

 

Luck had no Sophomore or even Rookie slump in terms of RESULTS.  And I believe Luck could have achieved just as much as any of the above QB's with those SAME teams around him.  Luck STILL has less talent around him than the majority of these teams.  Let's see what he pulls off again this year with less talent.  (And the injuries are already started before the first game).

[Gavin]

Romo's stats might be better but Andrew knows how to win football games. Romo hasn't been to the playoffs since 2009, while Luck has made the playoffs in each of his first two years with a worse supporting cast. Luck is also more durable and mobile.

All true

[LuckBeWithUS]

So would I...based on Lucks upside but in no way is Luck better then Romo now

that might be the most ridiculous thing ive read on this entire website... so far!   makes me sad...

[Gavin]

that might be the most ridiculous thing ive read on this entire website... so far!   makes me sad...

Looking at your screen name I would expect nothing less

[Superman]

I feel the contradiction also - I think Luck is getting the nod in some top 5's in part due to potential.  I also think it is a reflection of the huge gap between the top 4 and the rest.  Potential is the tie breaker among the next tier.

 

The real contradiction, and what supports Jaworski, is what Luck has truly accomplished already.  22 wins, including wins last year over Seattle, Denver, and San Fran with a roster that is still rebuilding - a roster that he had to consistently carry to photo finishes.  Luck doesn't have the statistics of a top 5 QB yet, but he does have the results.  In fact, it might be fair to speculate that there might only be 2 QB's in the league that could have won 22 games for the Colts the last two years and 1 playoff game - and neither are named Manning or Brady.

 

Agreed. It's hard to be objective with Luck, because he's special, and it's easy to get caught up in that. But in order for him to truly be one of those top tier guys, he has to produce like a top tier guy. So far, while he's shown improvement, the production is not there. 

[Blueblazes]

Agreed. It's hard to be objective with Luck, because he's special, and it's easy to get caught up in that. But in order for him to truly be one of those top tier guys, he has to produce like a top tier guy. So far, while he's shown improvement, the production is not there. 

 

Couldn't have said it better. Andrew is really good now and will be much better and more consistent in the future and will be top 5, but not now. I would not rather have any other QB under 25-26 but he's still got a lot of growth to do. His 9 INTs in '13 showed much improvement was made (2.6% of his attempts were INTs--which is solid). But his yards per attempt and completion percentage need improvement before he can be top tier. Yards per attempt measures the true quality of each pass attempt (some have said it's the most important QB stat of them all). His was 6.7 yards per attempt which is not good. This will improve greatly I am sure. His completion percentage will also improve from the very low 60.2%. He will be top 5, but just not there yet. It's hard to be objective though when he is my fave team's QB and has experienced 2 winning seasons. More to come!

[ViriLudant]

In surprised that this hasn't been posted. Good article on the issue, just out today:

http://fivethirtyeight.com/datalab/how-good-is-andrew-luck/

[BOTT]

In surprised that this hasn't been posted. Good article on the issue, just out today:

http://fivethirtyeight.com/datalab/how-good-is-andrew-luck/

Because it's not a good article.

[Superman]

In surprised that this hasn't been posted. Good article on the issue, just out today:

http://fivethirtyeight.com/datalab/how-good-is-andrew-luck/

I just skimmed through that article. I mostly agree. It's kind of what I've been saying in this thread (except for comparing Cam Newton to Luck, which is sloppy).

Also, they say Luck is 6'3". It's not like 538 to get minor details like that wrong, and it undermines the piece overall -- if they got that wrong, what else did they get wrong?

[ViriLudant]

Because it's not a good article.

Way to back this claim with facts.

Which they did.

But hey, random biased claims work for some .

[BOTT]

Way to back this claim with facts.

Which they did.

But hey, random biased claims work for some .

This coming from the "stats are for losers" guy. Look, they do what all these numbers based sights do.....they go thru all the numbers and blah blah and then near the end the mention the other factors that could skew a players numbers but they can't really account for that. Zzzzzz.

[rsrobinson]

In surprised that this hasn't been posted. Good article on the issue, just out today:

http://fivethirtyeight.com/datalab/how-good-is-andrew-luck/

 That article is right on the money.  Statistically Luck's performance simply hasn't matched the hype to this point.  Luck's #5 rating is based on highly subjective and largely unquantifiable opinions about his supporting cast and perceived potential, and influenced by preconceived biases that had him rated as a generational talent coming out of college.  That's not to say his production won't eventually catch up to the hype but it hasn't so far.

[southwest1]

In surprised that this hasn't been posted. Good article on the issue, just out today:

http://fivethirtyeight.com/datalab/how-good-is-andrew-luck/

Thanks for the article VL. I don't like the last sentences or so though. 

 

"He finished 16th in 2013. By that measure, Luck hasn’t even been an average passer thus far in his career. Depending on the stat or the scout, Luck is mediocre or good. Or great. Or average."

 

I will admit that Luck needs to improve against NE in the post season no question, but I don't view Andrew as "average" at all. He had a incredible comeback vs the KC Chiefs & if TR & Bradshaw chew up yards on the ground INDY will keep moving forward. 

 

Stats don't measure confidence in the huddle or a 2 minute drive TDs either. If a QB embodies confidence, greatness for a franchise is right on the verge of reality. Nice piece though. I liked reading it. 

[southwest1]

 That article is right on the money.  Statistically Luck's performance simply hasn't matched the hype to this point.  Luck's #5 rating is based on highly subjective and largely unquantifiable opinions about his supporting cast and perceived potential, and influenced by preconceived biases that had him rated as a generational talent coming out of college.  That's not to say his production won't eventually catch up to the hype but it hasn't so far.

His rating is also based on what HOF QB he followed i.e. Peyton Manning & that the fact that INDY's wheels did not fall off & post season appearances continued like clockwork with no drop off from a cliff depicting doom & gloom. 

 

Andrew had enormous shoes to feel & he slid on those NFL cleats like a tailor made glove.