Luck vs. Manning - first 55 games

[ColtsFanMikeC]

Just now, throwing BBZ said:

 

 Perhaps you are to young to remember that there was MUCH more physical contact by defenders early in Mannings career. The difference this makes from today's game is Immense.
 Mannings game was also Pass Heavy due to his Ego, but Luck IMO, makes a significantly higher number of Dumb throws at this stage of his career, especially considering how long it takes him to make a decision.
 Luck is barely .500 outside of the AFC South. His time for learning IS UP!!

 

You are correct, there was more physical contact in the beginning of Peyton's career.

 

Andrew attempted 627, 570 and 616 passes in his first three seasons and was on pace to attempt 665 passes in season 4.  Peyton attempted 575, 533, 571, 547 passes in his first 4 years.

 

Andrew is throwing 4 passes per game more (38.7 times per game) than Peyton (34.7 times per game) was, and is averaging 0.28 less INTs per game. 

 

Andrew has dealt with a much worse line than Peyton dealt with, has had pretty much no run game to speak of (Peyton had HOFer Marshall Faulk and future HOFer Edgerrin James in his backfield to start his career -- and Edge had the arguably the best start to a career of any RB ever).  Peyton had RBs who could catch the ball and were serious options in his offense (in his rookie year, Faulk led the team with 86 receptions for 908 yards and rushed for >1,300 yards... in year 2, Edge was 2nd on the team with 62 receptions for 586  yards and rushed for >1,500 yards.... in year 3, Edge was 2nd in receptions and 3rd in yards with 63 for 594 and rushed for >1,700 yards... I'm not counting year 4 because both Edge and Andrew Luck were injured in this year of comparison, though Edge and Rhodes combined for 58 catches and >1,700 yards rushing..... in Luck's first year his RBs combined for 33 catches and less than 400 yards, Ballard leading the way with a whopping 17 receptions, and we had a very inconsistent running attack with Ballard rushing for 814 yards and Brown rushing for 417 - if you subtract Luck's 255 yards, the team combined for less yards rushing than Faulk alone... in year 2, our studs Donnie Brown and T. Rich combined for a total of 55 receptions for 469 yards and <1,000 yards rushing... in year 3, our total run game, including Luck's 273 yards, combined for 97 yards less than Edgerrin and we actually utilized the RBs in the passing game with Boom, T Rich and Bradshaw combining for 86 catches for 702 yards).  

 

I am not disagreeing with you that the era Peyton played in to start his career than Luck's, but to Luck's credit he is throwing more frequently, has less of a supporting cast (I would argue on the OL, at the RB position, and even at WR).  Luck and Wayne really hit it off in year 1, with Wayne being a precise route-runner and consummate professional to help his teammates.... but after that Luck dealt with an injured Wayne and a still-developing Hilton.  By Peyton's 2nd season, Marvin was running the crispest routes in the NFL and he and Peyton had probably the best chemistry in the NFL.  TY has made great improvements, but I don't think you can say Luck had a security blanket after Wayne went down which could even compare to what  Peyton had in Marvin, and there is no argument that Luck's never come close to having the security blankets of a Faulk or Edge (Gore is the closest, but our line last year was atrocious and made that a null point).

 

I also agree with you, Luck doesn't have the excuse of being young, or 'still learning' anymore... but I don't think he makes much worse decisions than Manning was at the same point in their career.  Peyton still threw a lot of silly picks later during his time here, which were very similar to Luck -- trying to force plays that weren't there -- in both of their cases I think a lack of a very solid D was detrimental (I'm almost sure Peyton played most games vs. good teams during his career here with a mindset that 'if I don't score, they're going to score on the D'  which lead to forcing dumb passes).

 

I am optimistic that a good line (and ability to at least have a threat of a run game) and development from his WRs will do wonders for Luck.  I'm also optimistic that Luck's injury will be beneficial to him -- it has been stressed multiple times through his coaches, GM, owner,  teammates, himself, and the media that Luck needs to do a better job accepting when a play is over (this should reduce his fumbles and INTs).

 

 

[2006Coltsbestever]

23 minutes ago, NewColtsFan said:

 

Luck has had a great first 3 years (we'll throw out the injured 4th year)....  and he's on his way to a Hall of Fame career.

 

But, as I've said since I arrived here 4 years ago,   I don't see Luck EVER being as good as Peyton Manning.

 

That does't Luck and the Colts can't win a Super Bowl.   (Maybe even two)    Or that Luck won't go on to get into the Hall of Fame.        But I don't see Luck ever reaching Manning's success level.     I just don't see it.

 

Luck should be great.     Just not THAT great.

 

I honestly don't think there is any player in the NFL that can match Peyton's career regarding Stat wise and League MVP's won. Having said that, with the right team around Andrew he could very well win more SB's here in Indy than Peyton did. It isn't crazy to say that it would be impossible for him to win 2 SB's over a 15 year career.

[AKB]

3 minutes ago, ColtsFanMikeC said:

 

You are correct, there was more physical contact in the beginning of Peyton's career.

 

Andrew attempted 627, 570 and 616 passes in his first three seasons and was on pace to attempt 665 passes in season 4.  Peyton attempted 575, 533, 571, 547 passes in his first 4 years.

 

Andrew is throwing 4 passes per game more (38.7 times per game) than Peyton (34.7 times per game) was, and is averaging 0.28 less INTs per game. 

 

Andrew has dealt with a much worse line than Peyton dealt with, has had pretty much no run game to speak of (Peyton had HOFer Marshall Faulk and future HOFer Edgerrin James in his backfield to start his career -- and Edge had the arguably the best start to a career of any RB ever).  Peyton had RBs who could catch the ball and were serious options in his offense (in his rookie year, Faulk led the team with 86 receptions for 908 yards and rushed for >1,300 yards... in year 2, Edge was 2nd on the team with 62 receptions for 586  yards and rushed for >1,500 yards.... in year 3, Edge was 2nd in receptions and 3rd in yards with 63 for 594 and rushed for >1,700 yards... I'm not counting year 4 because both Edge and Andrew Luck were injured in this year of comparison, though Edge and Rhodes combined for 58 catches and >1,700 yards rushing..... in Luck's first year his RBs combined for 33 catches and less than 400 yards, Ballard leading the way with a whopping 17 receptions, and we had a very inconsistent running attack with Ballard rushing for 814 yards and Brown rushing for 417 - if you subtract Luck's 255 yards, the team combined for less yards rushing than Faulk alone... in year 2, our studs Donnie Brown and T. Rich combined for a total of 55 receptions for 469 yards and <1,000 yards rushing... in year 3, our total run game, including Luck's 273 yards, combined for 97 yards less than Edgerrin and we actually utilized the RBs in the passing game with Boom, T Rich and Bradshaw combining for 86 catches for 702 yards).  

 

I am not disagreeing with you that the era Peyton played in to start his career than Luck's, but to Luck's credit he is throwing more frequently, has less of a supporting cast (I would argue on the OL, at the RB position, and even at WR).  Luck and Wayne really hit it off in year 1, with Wayne being a precise route-runner and consummate professional to help his teammates.... but after that Luck dealt with an injured Wayne and a still-developing Hilton.  By Peyton's 2nd season, Marvin was running the crispest routes in the NFL and he and Peyton had probably the best chemistry in the NFL.  TY has made great improvements, but I don't think you can say Luck had a security blanket after Wayne went down which could even compare to what  Peyton had in Marvin, and there is no argument that Luck's never come close to having the security blankets of a Faulk or Edge (Gore is the closest, but our line last year was atrocious and made that a null point).

 

I also agree with you, Luck doesn't have the excuse of being young, or 'still learning' anymore... but I don't think he makes much worse decisions than Manning was at the same point in their career.  Peyton still threw a lot of silly picks later during his time here, which were very similar to Luck -- trying to force plays that weren't there -- in both of their cases I think a lack of a very solid D was detrimental (I'm almost sure Peyton played most games vs. good teams during his career here with a mindset that 'if I don't score, they're going to score on the D'  which lead to forcing dumb passes).

 

I am optimistic that a good line (and ability to at least have a threat of a run game) and development from his WRs will do wonders for Luck.  I'm also optimistic that Luck's injury will be beneficial to him -- it has been stressed multiple times through his coaches, GM, owner,  teammates, himself, and the media that Luck needs to do a better job accepting when a play is over (this should reduce his fumbles and INTs).

 

 

Very well said.

[ColtsFanMikeC]

27 minutes ago, NewColtsFan said:

 

Luck has had a great first 3 years (we'll throw out the injured 4th year)....  and he's on his way to a Hall of Fame career.

 

But, as I've said since I arrived here 4 years ago,   I don't see Luck EVER being as good as Peyton Manning.

 

That does't Luck and the Colts can't win a Super Bowl.   (Maybe even two)    Or that Luck won't go on to get into the Hall of Fame.        But I don't see Luck ever reaching Manning's success level.     I just don't see it.

 

Luck should be great.     Just not THAT great.

 

 

They are two totally different players.  If you're judging greatness on pure stats and rings -- Luck has a decent shot at surpassing Peyton, as he's putting up numbers earlier in his career that are better than what Manning was.  Luck suffered an injury last year, but after he played 7 games and it is one he should be able to full recover from.  Manning's neck is totally different, he missed an entire season and it was pretty obvious after his amazing first year in Denver that his arm strength and raw ability was greatly diminished.

 

Manning revolutionized the game with his cerebral play.  That said, Luck is every bit as intelligent as Peyton, and he is much more athletic, so he is going to score more TDs and gain yards with his feet.

 

It is still too early to tell if Luck will ever surpass Peyton.  He has had an overall better career with less around him to start.  A big knock on Peyton was he didn't show up in the 'big games' (I think this is an arguable point, but Luck has already pulled off one of the greatest comebacks in NFL playoff history in his short time in the league and has performed amazingly under pressure).

 

If Luck manages to stay healthy, I don't see any reason why he can't break or at least challenge Peyton's statistical records.  I think Irsay also realized with Peyton that it's not smart to build a team around 1 player -- and it does seem like conscious efforts are being made to provide him with a better defense and more balanced team.  Also, Brady is about out of the league (I can't see him playing more than 2-3 more years) and it seems as though Luck will become undoubtedly the beast of the AFC once Brady is gone, which may be a huge positive to Luck.  There is no reason why he can't and won't win more than 1 ring before his time is done here in Indy.

 

They're different players for sure, and Luck is playing in a different league than the league Peyton started in, so it will always be difficult to make a direct comparison.  However, at this point, it is still way too early to make any declarations about Luck turning in a better career than Peyton.

[Superman]

1 hour ago, 21isSuperman said:

I've been fairly critical of Grigson during his tenure here, but one place he's done some exceptional work in my opinion has been in structuring contracts.  You mentioning Loomis just made me think of this.  The Saints had to make a ton of cuts in the last few years because of the insane contracts they handed out, but Grigson has done a really good job of making sure the contracts he gives out are team friendly.

 

I give credit for contracts to Mike Bleum, but I'm sure Grigson deserves some recognition there as well. It also helps that the team hasn't had a lot of players worthy of re-signing to big deals, which kind of falls back on Grigson's drafting again. Next offseason the Colts will have ~$50m in cap space, but that's mostly because the 2013 draft class was a bust.

 

Anyways, to your point, in 2014 when Loomis was giving Jairus Byrnd $9m/year, Grigson signed Mike Adams, whom the Colts have paid a TOTAL of $6m through the end of 2016. Mike Adams has been to the Pro Bowl both years he's been in Indy, he's played 29/32 regular season games, and he has 10 picks. Jairus Byrd, well, hasn't done any of that stuff. 

 

That's just one stunning example. It's just ironic, or plain nonsense, for a Saints fan to talk about how bad the Colts GM is. But that kind of ironic nonsense isn't unexpected anymore.

[2006Coltsbestever]

Grigson is not as bad as people make him out to be. Since he took over in Indy, he made sure he kept and signed Reggie Wayne in 2012. Yes there was a lot of doubt that Reggie would be a Colt in 2012 and had seen his last days as a Colt after the stinky 2011 Season. Grigson cut several players as a major rebuild but was smart enough to hang on to Reggie who was Great during the 2012 Season. It helped Andrew out a lot during his Rookie Season. Grigson traded for Vontae Davis for a bag of chips! Grigson Drafted Andrew over RG3, he also drafted TY Hilton in the 2012 Draft. Grigson Drafted Moncrief in the 2014 Draft which was another solid pick. Grigson also signed players like Mike Adams and D'Qwell Jackson who have played Very Good for us! Grigson also made sure we kept Adam Vinatieri on the roster by re-signing him. I can offset his bad moves easily by the moves I just Posted he help make. Trading for Davis offsets trading for Trent for example. The Trent trade was Bad but the Davis trade was Great! I still think Dorsett will pan out as well and the Ryan Kelly Draft pick was very smart, I don't know how anyone can be critical of that pick. I don't think signing Frank Gore was that bad of a move either, he ran decent last season under the circumstances. I wouldn't put it past Gore to gain a 1000 Yards this season.

[weslo1812]

2 hours ago, 2006Coltsbestever said:

I honestly don't think there is any player in the NFL that can match Peyton's career regarding Stat wise and League MVP's won. Having said that, with the right team around Andrew he could very well win more SB's here in Indy than Peyton did. It isn't crazy to say that it would be impossible for him to win 2 SB's over a 15 year career.

I hate to say this, but Brady will surpass Manning in basically every category by the time he's done with his career. And if you go by wins and losses and success in playoffs, then Brady has already surpassed Manning. Don't wanna sound like a downer in Manning because he certainly is a great of all time by every stretch of the imagination. But Brady has had gaudy success in this league and gaudy numbers, and he's still got 3-4 years left probably to add to the accomplishments he already has.

[2006Coltsbestever]

45 minutes ago, weslo1812 said:

I hate to say this, but Brady will surpass Manning in basically every category by the time he's done with his career. And if you go by wins and losses and success in playoffs, then Brady has already surpassed Manning. Don't wanna sound like a downer in Manning because he certainly is a great of all time by every stretch of the imagination. But Brady has had gaudy success in this league and gaudy numbers, and he's still got 3-4 years left probably to add to the accomplishments he already has.

If Brady plays 4 more seasons he will pass Peyton in TD's and Yards projection wise, so you are correct (sort of) but we dont know if he will play that long. He is already missing 4 games to start this upcoming season. One thing is for sure Brady wont win 5 League MVP's or throw for 55 TD's in 1 Season. To me behind winning the SB, winning League MVP is the 2nd best award to have. It basically says that the media thinks you mean more to your team than any other player. Some even think it means that you are the best player in the league, some define it different. That is why Cam still gets so much glory despite losing the SB.

[crazycolt1]

On ‎7‎/‎19‎/‎2016 at 3:03 PM, LJpalmbeacher said:

The above chart doesn't show how many lost fumbles both qb's had. I'm guessing Luck has more but it would be interesting to see. Of course peyton's line wasbetter.

As far as fumbles I would think Luck would have more than Manning just for the fact of him running the ball more. Manning hardly ever ran with the ball and Luck does it all the time. So by comparing the fumble stat is really a stat that is self made by the two QBs play and has no bearing on who had less or more. Saying Luck had more fumbles in a negative sense makes no sense because Luck is a different type of QB than Manning was.

[crazycolt1]

5 hours ago, weslo1812 said:

I hate to say this, but Brady will surpass Manning in basically every category by the time he's done with his career. And if you go by wins and losses and success in playoffs, then Brady has already surpassed Manning. Don't wanna sound like a downer in Manning because he certainly is a great of all time by every stretch of the imagination. But Brady has had gaudy success in this league and gaudy numbers, and he's still got 3-4 years left probably to add to the accomplishments he already has.

He may break a couple but I highly doubt he will surpass Manning in every category as you state.

[Myles]

16 hours ago, ColtsFanMikeC said:

 

Dungy has Manning and Tom Moore to credit his success on defense to during his time with the Colts.  We pretty much never had a good run defense, which is a big part of the reason we struggled in the playoffs (especially if we had to play outside of the RCA Dome in real weather when Peyton and the offense struggled to get going). 

 

Freeney, although up there with the all-time great pass rushers, was extremely one-dimensional, as was Mathis.  I've said for a while now, if either of them make the HOF, the first person they should thank is Peyton.  If it wasn't for our serious offensive fire-power, our defenses would have been awful throughout pretty much the entire Dungy era.  Having the high-octane offense allowed the defense to be one-dimensional -- the vast majority of the time when our offense was struggling and other teams were able to run against us, our weaknesses showed and our D looked embarrassing. 

 

I like Dungy as a person, liked him as a head coach, and he should get credit for helping to make the 'Tampa 2' defensive scheme popular in the NFL.  However, our defense was almost 100% 'bend-don't-break' during Dungy's time here, was never dominating, and in games where our offense wasn't putting up the points to force the other team to pass (allowing Freeney and Mathis to pin their ears back), our defense more often than not looked pretty darn terrible.

 

If Dungy truly was the best (or next to the best) defensive mind of the 2000's (or if Polian built a better defense), I am pretty sure we would have won more than 1 SB.

Well said.   I feel exactly the same.   Manning was the defense.   If he didn't score often, the other team would not give up on the running game and they would run for 300 yards. 

[Jason_]

13 hours ago, 21isSuperman said:

The thing I really don't like about his defense is that it needs very specific types of players, and unless you had the perfect pieces, it could all go to shambles.  You need corners who can tackle, you need speedy linebackers, you need a defensive line that can rush the passer well enough so that it doesn't require blitzing, you need a John Lynch or Bob Sanders type of safety.  If you are somehow able to collect all of those pieces together, and keep guys healthy, you can have a great defense (for example, the 2007 Colts).  But I think it quickly became outdated when teams figured out they could just put in bigger, stronger players and push around the smaller, faster defensive guys.

 

Yep...and Dungy also went too far, imo, with the "smaller but faster" mentality.  I do think one thing that hurt him here in Indy was lack of a good play-calling DC.  

[Coffeedrinker]

Why compare the first 55 games why not the first 4 seasons?

On 7/19/2016 at 1:24 PM, ColtsFanMikeC said:

http://espn.go.com/blog/indianapolis-colts/post/_/id/17171/former-colts-center-jeff-saturday-sees-traits-of-peyton-manning-in-andrew-luck

 

I found this to be pretty interesting from the above article..... granted, we're in a different, more 'passer-friendly' era, but Luck's had a heckuva start to his career.  Many like to call him a turnover machine, but the stat that jumped out at me the most was 12 less INTs than Peyton in the first 55 games.

 

QB Comparison

A look at how Andrew Luck and Peyton Manning fared in the first 55 starts of their career:

Stat	Andrew Luck	Peyton Manning
Yards	14,838	14,111
TD passes	101	98
Interceptions	55	67
Record	35-20	30-25
Playoff Record	3-3	0-2

Why compare the first 55 games, why not the first 4 seasons.

 

Manning numbers would be:,

16,418 yards

111 TDs

81 INTs

32-32

 

After all the most important ability is availability.

 

Or why not compare their first 4 seasons playing in the AFC South?

 

Manning would then be:

16,771

133

49.

48-16

 

I like Luck and I'm glad he's a Colt, he has shown the ability to put a team on his shoulders and carry them to a win.

[crazycolt1]

6 minutes ago, Coffeedrinker said:

Why compare the first 55 games why not the first 4 seasons?

Why compare the first 55 games, why not the first 4 seasons.

 

Manning numbers would be:,

16,418 yards

111 TDs

81 INTs

32-32

 

After all the most important ability is availability.

 

Or why not compare their first 4 seasons playing in the AFC South?

 

Manning would then be:

16,771

133

49.

48-16

 

I like Luck and I'm glad he's a Colt, he has shown the ability to put a team on his shoulders and carry them to a win.

Why not compare them on how well they done on 2nd down after a sack in their first 21 games?

[crazycolt1]

23 hours ago, Jason_S said:

 

I don't even know if I could say Dungy was one of the better defensive minds in the league.  Monte Kiffin and Rod Marinelli had far better defensive success after parting ways with Dungy than Dungy had after parting ways with either of them.  I'd put every guy you listed above Dungy, and there are probably others as well.  

 

I do think Dungy was a pretty good Head Coach, but I'd only put him at above average as a DC.

Dungy might have done a little better had Polian  paid as much attention to the defense as he did with the offense? Dungy built a powerful defense in Tampa before being hired by the Colts. Good enough to dominate a super bowl the very next season. There is more to having a great defense than having two players who play great. (Freeney and Mathis)

[2006Coltsbestever]

2 minutes ago, crazycolt1 said:

Dungy might have done a little better had Polian  paid as much attention to the defense as he did with the offense? Dungy built a powerful defense in Tampa before being hired by the Colts. Good enough to dominate a super bowl the very next season. There is more to having a great defense than having two players who play great. (Freeney and Mathis)

Polian IMO assumed Peyton was so great that he alone could at least get us 2 Superbowl wins as long as he had just a couple of other Great players around him on both sides of the ball. We almost had 2, just fell short against the Saints.

[GoColtsWin]

14 minutes ago, 2006Coltsbestever said:

Polian IMO assumed Peyton was so great that he alone could at least get us 2 Superbowl wins as long as he had just a couple of other Great players around him on both sides of the ball. We almost had 2, just fell short against the Saints.

Before DFree had to leave the Super Bowl, we were trucking the Saints on both sides of the rock. That's a fact that can't be erased. Just goes to show you how injuries effect outcomes. Wasn't that the season Collie was on IR as well as other contributors. Injuries suck!

[2006Coltsbestever]

1 minute ago, GoColtsWin said:

Before DFree had to leave the Super Bowl, we were trucking the Saints on both sides of the rock. That's a fact that can't be erased. Just goes to show you how injuries effect outcomes. Wasn't that the season Collie was on IR as well as other contributors. Injuries suck!

Yeah the Freeney injury changed everything. Brees had all day to throw in the 2nd Half and picked us apart. They were just doubling Mathis. A lot of strange plays happened in that game too, like a sure TD drop by Garcon, a missed FG by Stover, and of course the onside Kick. They got every break you could possibly get and we still had a chance to tie the game at the end until Peyton got Intercepted.

[Jason_]

43 minutes ago, crazycolt1 said:

Dungy might have done a little better had Polian  paid as much attention to the defense as he did with the offense? Dungy built a powerful defense in Tampa before being hired by the Colts. Good enough to dominate a super bowl the very next season. There is more to having a great defense than having two players who play great. (Freeney and Mathis)

 

Or did Dungy tell Polian he could make the defense work with lesser talent so they could focus on surrounding Peyton with 

 

The level of talent he had to work with in Tampa was definitely exponentially better...but he also had help from, as I said in a previous post, Monte Kiffin and Rod Marinelli, who again have gone on to have much more defensive success without Dungy than he had without them. 

[crazycolt1]

19 minutes ago, Jason_S said:

 

Or did Dungy tell Polian he could make the defense work with lesser talent so they could focus on surrounding Peyton with 

 

The level of talent he had to work with in Tampa was definitely exponentially better...but he also had help from, as I said in a previous post, Monte Kiffin and Rod Marinelli, who again have gone on to have much more defensive success without Dungy than he had without them. 

C-mon Jason. I highly doubt that Dungy told Polian anything like that. No, Polian jumped on Mannings back and expected too much of him. Manning did carry the offence with a lot of help by having good offensive players. Manning just couldn't carry a less that average defense. Add the players Polian signed to the less than average special teams Manning just couldn't carry the whole team. The head coach can only be as good as the talent brought in. Dungy is now a Hall Of Fame head coach so evidently some one in the NFL thinks he was a great coach.

[Jason_]

2 minutes ago, crazycolt1 said:

C-mon Jason. I highly doubt that Dungy told Polian anything like that. No, Polian jumped on Mannings back and expected too much of him. Manning did carry the offence with a lot of help by having good offensive players. Manning just couldn't carry a less that average defense. Add the players Polian signed to the less than average special teams Manning just couldn't carry the whole team. The head coach can only be as good as the talent brought in. Dungy is now a Hall Of Fame head coach so evidently some one in the NFL thinks he was a great coach.

 

probably not.  The only type of coach I could see really doing that is one so arrogant about his scheme that he feels that most players (minus a couple of key pieces at key positions) are interchangeable.  I've never felt Dungy was that type of guy, but public perception doesn't always match what the person is like in real life.  

 

BTW, Polian did not do the same thing with Jim Kelly, who was considered one of the better QBs in his generation.  So he really had no prior track record of loading up the offense behind a talented QB while ignoring the defense.  Honestly, I think it'd be more likely that it was Irsay pushing for all of the top picks going to offense before I could see it having been Polian making that decision on his own.

 

Either way, regarding Dungy being in the HOF...that's as a HC.  I've already said he was a very good HC.  It was as a DC that I felt he was lacking, and he's not in the HOF as a DC so...that really seems irrelevant. 

[ColtsFanMikeC]

3 hours ago, Coffeedrinker said:

Why compare the first 55 games why not the first 4 seasons?

Why compare the first 55 games, why not the first 4 seasons.

 

Manning numbers would be:,

16,418 yards

111 TDs

81 INTs

32-32

 

After all the most important ability is availability.

 

Or why not compare their first 4 seasons playing in the AFC South?

 

Manning would then be:

16,771

133

49.

48-16

 

I like Luck and I'm glad he's a Colt, he has shown the ability to put a team on his shoulders and carry them to a win.

 

Luck has only played 55 regular season games.  Sure, availability is important, but in terms of what's been done on the field, there are only 55 games to compare.

 

Second, the first 4 seasons playing in the  AFC South -- Peyton was a veteran and surrounded with two HOF WRs by that time, that would be very unfair to Luck.  Luck has played and won some very tough games outside of the South, let's not forget that (including beating teams Peyton went to the Superbowl with twice and beating Manning in the playoffs once).  Why don't we just compare how the two have done when they've faced each other? That seems fair.

 

Not sure where you're getting the 32-32 or 48-16 playoff records from, it's impossible to play that many playoff games in 4 years.

 

Anyway, Luck has done much better in the playoffs early in his career than Peyton did. 

 

Luck has a long way to go to prove his greatness, but he's done quite a job so far.

[krunk]

On ‎7‎/‎19‎/‎2016 at 2:03 PM, LJpalmbeacher said:

The above chart doesn't show how many lost fumbles both qb's had. I'm guessing Luck has more but it would be interesting to see. Of course peyton's line wasbetter.

I'm trying to imagine what Lucks stats would have been like with a good Oline during his first 55 starts. Wonder how much better he would have done than Peyton?  We also have to understand that Peyton played during a time when there were for real Defenses.  The cornerbacks could get a good jam on you, darn near hold you without getting penalty flags.  The safeties could come up and knock hell out of you.  I remember a couple of hits from John Lynch and Kenoy Kennedy on Dallas Clark and Reggie Wayne that made me shiver they were so hard!  You don't see anybody getting hit like that anymore.  There wasn't all this "Defenseless Player" non-sense like we see in todays game.  The Rodney Harrisons of the world would knock the daylights out of you. 

[Goatface Killah]

17 hours ago, ColtsFanMikeC said:

 

They are two totally different players.  If you're judging greatness on pure stats and rings -- Luck has a decent shot at surpassing Peyton, as he's putting up numbers earlier in his career that are better than what Manning was.  Luck suffered an injury last year, but after he played 7 games and it is one he should be able to full recover from.  Manning's neck is totally different, he missed an entire season and it was pretty obvious after his amazing first year in Denver that his arm strength and raw ability was greatly diminished.

 

Manning revolutionized the game with his cerebral play.  That said, Luck is every bit as intelligent as Peyton, and he is much more athletic, so he is going to score more TDs and gain yards with his feet.

 

It is still too early to tell if Luck will ever surpass Peyton.  He has had an overall better career with less around him to start.  A big knock on Peyton was he didn't show up in the 'big games' (I think this is an arguable point, but Luck has already pulled off one of the greatest comebacks in NFL playoff history in his short time in the league and has performed amazingly under pressure).

 

If Luck manages to stay healthy, I don't see any reason why he can't break or at least challenge Peyton's statistical records.  I think Irsay also realized with Peyton that it's not smart to build a team around 1 player -- and it does seem like conscious efforts are being made to provide him with a better defense and more balanced team.  Also, Brady is about out of the league (I can't see him playing more than 2-3 more years) and it seems as though Luck will become undoubtedly the beast of the AFC once Brady is gone, which may be a huge positive to Luck.  There is no reason why he can't and won't win more than 1 ring before his time is done here in Indy.

 

They're different players for sure, and Luck is playing in a different league than the league Peyton started in, so it will always be difficult to make a direct comparison.  However, at this point, it is still way too early to make any declarations about Luck turning in a better career than Peyton.

Great points, in all your threads.

 

I would also add that stats only tell half the story. Luck has not only surpassed Peyton in numbers, he has also performed better in the playoffs. It took Manning a long time to be able to handle the pressure in the post season. And Luck already has a very respectable 3-3 record, including a legendary comeback performance, under his belt.

 

This kid was given an impossible task, and I would argue that no other QB, even Brady or Rodgers, could do any better than Andrew has with what he's been forced to work with.

 

He's been battered, under constant pressure, no running game (1 single 100 yard performance from a RB, HIS ENTIRE CAREER), constant 3rd and longs, average coaching, very young supporting cast on offense, average defense......AND he has managed to STILL throw less picks than Manning and have more post season success. That's beyond impressive to me. 

 

People forget Manning had a pretty good OL (Glenn, Meadows, McKinney), good TEs (Dilger, Pollard) + Harrison & Faulk, FROM DAY 1. 

 

People criticizing Andrew Luck are gonna be served some crow this year and I can't wait. 

[crazycolt1]

2 hours ago, Jason_S said:

 

probably not.  The only type of coach I could see really doing that is one so arrogant about his scheme that he feels that most players (minus a couple of key pieces at key positions) are interchangeable.  I've never felt Dungy was that type of guy, but public perception doesn't always match what the person is like in real life.  

 

BTW, Polian did not do the same thing with Jim Kelly, who was considered one of the better QBs in his generation.  So he really had no prior track record of loading up the offense behind a talented QB while ignoring the defense.  Honestly, I think it'd be more likely that it was Irsay pushing for all of the top picks going to offense before I could see it having been Polian making that decision on his own.

 

Either way, regarding Dungy being in the HOF...that's as a HC.  I've already said he was a very good HC.  It was as a DC that I felt he was lacking, and he's not in the HOF as a DC so...that really seems irrelevant. 

Why is it hard for you to have any blame at all on Polian? From what I have read and what was said Polian did his job without any interference from Irsay. If you going to put Polian up you have to accept the fact he was not perfect. Right now Grigson is taking heat from most but yet he has done as good of a job as Polian did in his first 4 years with the Colts. It took Polian 9 years to do what he did in Buffalo 4 years in a row. Was that because he changed his style of drafting as you mentioned? While Jim Kelly was a great QB he was not as good as Manning. You have to admit that Polian was a great GM but with a less than stellar post season record with the Colts. Was Polain a better GM with the Bills as he was with the Colts?

[Jason_]

6 minutes ago, crazycolt1 said:

Why is it hard for you to have any blame at all on Polian? From what I have read and what was said Polian did his job without any interference from Irsay. If you going to put Polian up you have to accept the fact he was not perfect. Right now Grigson is taking heat from most but yet he has done as good of a job as Polian did in his first 4 years with the Colts. It took Polian 9 years to do what he did in Buffalo 4 years in a row. Was that because he changed his style of drafting as you mentioned? While Jim Kelly was a great QB he was not as good as Manning. You have to admit that Polian was a great GM but with a less than stellar post season record with the Colts. Was Polain a better GM with the Bills as he was with the Colts?

 

lots of rabblerabble just for me to reply by saying...I never once said there was no blame at all on Bill Polian.  The simple fact that Minnesota's defenses back then had all the same issues as the colt defenses under Dungy pretty much tells me what I need to know.  

 

BTW, yes, Manning wound up a much better QB than Jim Kelly...but that was't proven until Manning had been in the league for a while.  Polian was surrounding Manning with top-level talent from day 1.  So the attempted reasoning of "While Jim Kelly was a great QB he was not as good as Manning." because Polian was surrounding Manning long before they knew how good he would turn out to be.

[crazycolt1]

3 minutes ago, Jason_S said:

 

lots of rabblerabble just for me to reply by saying...I never once said there was no blame at all on Bill Polian.  The simple fact that Minnesota's defenses back then had all the same issues as the colt defenses under Dungy pretty much tells me what I need to know.  

 

BTW, yes, Manning wound up a much better QB than Jim Kelly...but that was't proven until Manning had been in the league for a while.  Polian was surrounding Manning with top-level talent from day 1.  So the attempted reasoning of "While Jim Kelly was a great QB he was not as good as Manning." because Polian was surrounding Manning long before they knew how good he would turn out to be.

That was kinda my point. Polian stacked the offense while leaving the defense to starve. Not to mention the less than average special teams depth. We sat and watched the most potent offense in the NFL take leads just to watch the defense and special teams play give it away in the playoffs. Oh well, another off season thread. I will be glad when there are more current issues to discuss.

[Myles]

On 7/21/2016 at 1:04 PM, crazycolt1 said:

Dungy might have done a little better had Polian  paid as much attention to the defense as he did with the offense? Dungy built a powerful defense in Tampa before being hired by the Colts. Good enough to dominate a super bowl the very next season. There is more to having a great defense than having two players who play great. (Freeney and Mathis)

He wasn't the GM in Tampa, was he?

I understand there were various factors involved in the Colts lousy defense with Dungy, but he was one of them.   Polian moreso in my opinion.  

[crazycolt1]

1 hour ago, Myles said:

He wasn't the GM in Tampa, was he?

I understand there were various factors involved in the Colts lousy defense with Dungy, but he was one of them.   Polian moreso in my opinion.  

Tony was responsible for deriving  the Tampa Two defense from what he learned from Chuck Noll. It was Tony Dungy who was pretty much the first defensive head coach to be able to defend the west coast offense. At Tampa personnel were brought in on his recommendations including players and coaches. That didn't happen very much with Polian running the show at Indy. Polian was a well known control freak and would let it be known.

[JPFolks]

On 7/19/2016 at 11:16 PM, Bogie said:

 

Stats can be incredibly misleading. 

 

What that leaves out is that Manning had Polian who was a solid GM that built amazing teams around their quarterback. Compare that to Luck who is stuck with Grigson who has proven so far that he can't build a team. 

 

Add in Tony Dungy too, possibly the best defensive minded coach of the 2000's, meanwhile Luck's best coach was Bruce Arians for just 1 year. If Irsay don't regret letting Arians go, he will in the near future when this team is 8-8 at best for the next few years. 

Arian's would not have taken Pagano's job unless Pagano hadn't been able to return, so your point is meaningless.  Arians was never going to be the Colts head coach in the scenario.  The PR hit would have crushed both Arians AND Irsay.  He spoke of his deep appreciation and love towards Pagano for resurrecting  his career just when he and his wife were sure he was done in coaching.  It simply was not an option to happen.  

[Narcosys]

I seriously can't tell you how tired I am of these comparison topics.  Seriously.  I mean I'm not the greatest Luck fan here, but this is absurd.  Six years from now were going to have a topic "Manning vs Luck, the first 10 years"

 

 

---

---

[Jason_]

29 minutes ago, Narcosys said:

I seriously can't tell you how tired I am of these comparison topics.  Seriously.  I mean I'm not the greatest Luck fan here, but this is absurd.  Six years from now were going to have a topic "Manning vs Luck, the first 10 years"

 

 

---

---

 

You're right..we will.  So better to get used to it now.  I'd recommend just skipping over these types of threads and not reading them of if you find them that annoying. ;) 

 

ps. I also find them incredibly annoying...but they're going to happen regardless