Anyone else worried?

[BOTT]

1 minute ago, jshipp23 said:

Agree 100%, but still ready for a new philosophy..

It took Reich one presser to figure out how to use Luck, Chuckles was dumbfounded for 5 yrs. turn him loose.

[Trueman]

2 minutes ago, jshipp23 said:

Lol..And the thing is,Hilton is basically the only guy Luck has ever had in 6 years..Never had a RB, big play TE, or good #2, 3 WRs..Hell, Peyton had James, Harrison, Wayne, Clark, Stokely, Garcon, Collie, Pollard, Rhodes, Addai..We have literally given him nothing to work with and a crappy offensive scheme and you wonder why he holds the ball too long and gets sacked..

A lot of that was because of that offensive scheme designed around 7-step drop backs with a terrible OL as well. 

 

Grigson tried to get Luck weapons too , he just sucked at it. Andre Johnson, Fleener, DHB, Dorset etc. Again, it wasn't because we tried to change our philosophy that we failed. It's because Grigson was TERRIBLE.

[jshipp23]

2 minutes ago, Trueman said:

 

The last 6 years had nothing to do with failing at trying to be something else. 

 

It failed because of a disastrous GM and coach. (Sorry Chuck , I love ya)

We were trying to make an indoor team with a generational QB a Big, slow,ground and pound team built to win outside in AFC North ..See the problem with that logic?

[jshipp23]

1 minute ago, Trueman said:

A lot of that was because of that offensive scheme designed around 7-step drop backs with a terrible OL as well. 

 

Grigson tried to get Luck weapons too , he just sucked at it. Andre Johnson, Fleener, DHB, Dorset etc. Again, it wasn't because we tried to change our philosophy that we failed. It's because Grigson was TERRIBLE.

Still doesn't change the fact he has never had any other weapons or even a legit RB...How bout we give him something to work with finally..

[Trueman]

2 minutes ago, jshipp23 said:

We were trying to make an indoor team with a generational QB a Big, slow,ground and pound team built to win outside in AFC North ..See the problem with that logic?

A big ground and pound team that invested how many picks/money on the lines (both sides)? Grigson didn't draft Kelly until his final year.

[southwest1]

I've read through 3 pages of this thread & I'm still trying to figure out what Trueman's point behind this topic was.

 

a. Slam Tony Dungy 

 

b. Minimize Bill Polian's career as a GM

 

c. Praise Ballard but not tell anybody why he favors Chris over Bill

 

d. What is more important to him? A smothering defense or a fast paced offense that can 35 points on average? 

 

e. Has less than 100 posts & acts like he owns this forum & routinely insults regulars while claiming he wants a fruitful discussion. 

 

f. All the above. 

[jshipp23]

5 minutes ago, BOTT said:

It took Reich one presser to figure out how to use Luck, Chuckles was dumbfounded for 5 yrs. turn him loose.

I know right...He was fired 3 years late..

[LJpalmbeacher2]

3 minutes ago, Trueman said:

A big ground and pound team that invested how many picks/money on the lines (both sides)? Grigson didn't draft Kelly until his final year.

Griggs like drafted 4 OL in one draft.

[Trueman]

2 minutes ago, southwest1 said:

I've read through 3 pages of this thread & I'm still trying to figure out what Trueman's point behind this topic was.

 

a. Slam Tony Dungy 

 

b. Minimize Bill Polian's career as a GM

 

c. Praise Ballard but not tell anybody why he favors Chris over Bill

 

d. What is more important to him? A smothering defense or a fast paced offense that can 35 points on average? 

 

e. Has less than 100 posts & acts like he owns this forum & routinely insults regulars while claiming he wants a fruitful discussion. 

 

f. All the above. 

Well, I'm here , you could ask me. 

[Trueman]

Just now, LJpalmbeacher2 said:

Griggs like drafted 4 OL in one draft.

 

Which year of his regime? And how many picks in the top 2 rounds outside of Kelly?

[buccolts]

5 minutes ago, southwest1 said:

I've read through 3 pages of this thread & I'm still trying to figure out what Trueman's point behind this topic was.

 

a. Slam Tony Dungy 

 

b. Minimize Bill Polian's career as a GM

 

c. Praise Ballard but not tell anybody why he favors Chris over Bill

 

d. What is more important to him? A smothering defense or a fast paced offense that can 35 points on average? 

 

e. Has less than 100 posts & acts like he owns this forum & routinely insults regulars while claiming he wants a fruitful discussion. 

 

f. All the above. 

 

It was a yes or no question.

Are you worried.

Seems neither answer was correct, though.

[jshipp23]

10 minutes ago, Trueman said:

A big ground and pound team that invested how many picks/money on the lines (both sides). Grigson didn't draft Kelly until his final year.

I mean if you look at our line you got Costanzo 1st rd, Mewhort 2nd, Kelley 1st round, Clark 3rd round, Haeg 4th rd,Cheriolous was a 1st rd for Det..We spent a 1st on Werner...smh..In the last 5 yrs we drafted Dorsett in the back of 1st that was it..I just want to fix oline in free agency no more rookies..

[Aaron86]

4 minutes ago, southwest1 said:

I've read through 3 pages of this thread & I'm still trying to figure out what Trueman's point behind this topic was.

 

a. Slam Tony Dungy 

 

b. Minimize Bill Polian's career as a GM

 

c. Praise Ballard but not tell anybody why he favors Chris over Bill

 

d. What is more important to him? A smothering defense or a fast paced offense that can 35 points on average? 

 

e. Has less than 100 posts & acts like he owns this forum & routinely insults regulars while claiming he wants a fruitful discussion. 

 

f. All the above. 

While I agree with your observation. I have way under 100 post but I have been reading and keeping up with the Colts through this forum for at least 3 years.

[LJpalmbeacher2]

Just now, Trueman said:

 

Which year of his regime? And how many picks in the top 2 rounds outside of Kelly?

I think it was hos last? 

 

[southwest1]

10 minutes ago, Trueman said:

Well, I'm here , you could ask me. 

After 3 pages, if you haven't laid out a specific thesis., it's too late. It was a rhetorical question. 

 

Okay, in the interest of making you feel welcome & being nice, I'll ask you. 

 

If you can narrow it down to a simple sentence, what do you really want to know from this fanbase? How this regime will win faster than pervious ones?

[Trueman]

Just now, LJpalmbeacher2 said:

I think it was hos last? 

 

Yeah, which is what I mean. 

 

This narrative that we tried to build an AFC north team , doesn't really correlate with the positions Grigson spent money/assets on. 

 

I'm not sure anyone wanted him to take Dorsett in the 1st round , or to spend significant cash on Andre Johnson , or to draft back to back TE's in Luck's draft class.

 

Hell, he even flipped a 1st for Trent Richardson which doesn't indicate he was too concerned with our trenches. 

 

Yeah, when Chuck said he wanted to build a monster , he likely envisioned a potent 3-4 defence with a solid running game. But Grigson didn't really give him the pieces to show he shared that vision. 

[Trueman]

9 minutes ago, southwest1 said:

After 3 pages, if you haven't laid out a specific thesis., it's too late. It was a rhetorical question. 

 

Okay, in the interest of making you feel welcome & being nice, I'll ask you. 

 

If you can narrow it down to a simple sentence, what do you really want to know from this fanbase? How this regime will win faster than pervious ones?

Well first off, I'd like to apologize if I sounded arrogant, it genuinely wasn't my intention. I think you could at least admit I received a fair amount of stick as well.

 

But to answer your question , I got the answers I was looking for regarding our defence, which honestly was the main concern of mine. I was under impression we'd be reverting back to the Tampa 2 , but it looks like it won't be a complete mirror image. 

 

Time wasn't a variable I was concerned with. It was mainly about philosophical approaches towards roster construction. 

[Trueman]

18 minutes ago, jshipp23 said:

I mean if you look at our line you got Costanzo 1st rd, Mewhort 2nd, Kelley 1st round, Clark 3rd round, Haeg 4th rd,Cheriolous was a 1st rd for Det..We spent a 1st on Werner...smh..In the last 5 yrs we drafted Dorsett in the back of 1st that was it..I just want to fix oline in free agency no more rookies..

 

Yeah, the Werner pick hurt , as did the Jerry Hughes trade. 

[jshipp23]

7 hours ago, Trueman said:

 

Yeah, the Werner pick hurt , as did the Jerry Hughes trade. 

I see you know your stuff, not trying to give you a hard time.. I respect what you are trying to say even if I might not agree with it all, but I  see where you are coming from..Bottom line is Irsay owned a restaurant past 6 years, and hired a manager who couldn't shop for the right food, for a chef that didn't know how to cook..Thankfully it's under new management now and they are creating and new theme and menu..

[Trueman]

1 minute ago, jshipp23 said:

I see you know your stuff, not trying to give you a hard time I respect what you are trying to say..I might not agree with it all, but I can see where you are coming from..

Yeah , when I come to a Colts forum and I say that I think Polian and Dungy cost us rings, I don't expect a red carpet to be unrolled at my feet. 

 

I made a similar post about Brady vs Manning and their run defences and how I felt it showed some of the reasons as to why we didn't win as much as I feel we should have. 

 

It wasn't nearly as ridiculed , and I said the same things. I dunno maybe it's because I created a post about the new regime? Who knows. 

 

Either way, I can leave if people find me too brash or arrogant. I'm really not that type of person. 

[southwest1]

3 minutes ago, Trueman said:

Well first off, I'd like to apologize if I sounded arrogant, it genuinely wasn't my intention. I think you could at least admit I received a fair amount of stick as well.

 

But to answer your question , I got the answers I was looking for regarding our defence, which honestly was the main concern of mine. I was under impression we'd be reverting back to the Tampa 2 , but it looks like it won't be a complete mirror image. 

 

Time wasn't variable I was concerned with. It was mainly about philosophical approaches towards roster construction. 

No worries. The reason why you faced some heat early in this thread was because it isn't wise to act like Dungy & Polian played no lasting role in Peyton Manning's development is shaky ground to walk on. Yes, #18 was an elite QB who erased a lot of defenses weaknesses on our roster throughout the 2000's. But, both Tony & Bill where successful elsewhere in Tampa & Buffalo/Carolina long before they joined forces in INDY. 

 

Yes, some variation of Tampa 2 seems likely moving forward. Until we see 3-4 drafts of Ballard's it's difficult to make an lasting assessments yet. 

 

I agree with JS23. If we get Barkley, take pressure off Luck, & open up the play action pass we actually help our defense. 

 

Sorry, if I came across as obnoxious. I honestly thought you were going elaborate on Frank Reich & how this hire would help Andrew release the ball faster & take his game to the next level vs Dungy & Pagano who cut their teeth on defense. 

 

It's fine to have contrary opinions just try not to ruffle feathers with regulars that have at least 1,000 posts. They are entitled to a high degree of respect that was earned & you'll reach that plateau eventually too. It's all good. 

 

 

[jshipp23]

2 minutes ago, Trueman said:

Yeah , when I come to a Colts forum and I say that I think Polian and Dungy cost us rings, I don't expect a red carpet to be unrolled at my feet. 

 

I made a similar post about Brady vs Manning and their run defences and how I felt it showed some of the reasons as to why we didn't win as much as I feel we should have. 

 

It wasn't nearly as ridiculed , and I said the same things. I dunno maybe it's because I created a post about the new regime? Who knows. 

 

Either way, I can leave if people find me too brash or arrogant. I'm really not that type of person. 

It was great era, I'll be glad if we can replicate that success..But all 3 of them had  flaws..Polian had his share of misses towards the end of his tenure, Peyton choked his share of times in the Playoffs, and Dungy was good, but far from great...We had some extremely talented teams that could've won more Super Bowls for sure...I like this Ballard/Reich combination, I think we will be back in the conversation soon..I still think we need to build an elite offense first and foremost, but we do need a better defense that attacks like the Seahawks run..We got a decent defense talent wise right now..A good defensive end and ILB will make it more than servicable...They lost a lot of games last year because the offense couldn't stay on the field or score enough..

[GoColts8818]

35 minutes ago, Trueman said:

 

Yeah, the Werner pick hurt , as did the Jerry Hughes trade. 

Those I can 100% agree with you on.  Those two moves did more damage than trading a first for Richardson IMO.  It doesn’t make the later good just makes it not the worst thing Grigson did while here.

[Trueman]

4 minutes ago, southwest1 said:

No worries. The reason why you faced some heat early in this thread was because it isn't wise to act like Dungy & Polian played no lasting role in Peyton Manning's development is shaky ground to walk on. Yes, #18 was an elite QB who erased a lot of defenses weaknesses on our roster throughout the 2000's. But, both Tony & Bill where successful elsewhere in Tampa & Buffalo/Carolina long before they joined forces in INDY. 

 

Yes, some variation of Tampa 2 seems likely moving forward. Until we see 3-4 drafts of Ballard's it's difficult to make an lasting assessments yet. 

 

I agree with JS23. If we get Barkley, take pressure off Luck, & open up the play action pass we actually help our defense. 

 

Sorry, if I came across as obnoxious. I honestly thought you were going elaborate on Frank Reich & how this hire would help Andrew release the ball faster & take his game to the next level vs Dungy & Pagano who cut their teeth on defense. 

 

It's fine to have contrary opinions just try not to ruffle feathers with regulars that have at least 1,000 posts. They are entitled to a high degree of respect that was earned & you'll reach that plateau eventually too. It's all good. 

 

 

 

No concerns about the offence. If anything l'm excited by it. 

 

I'm not sure I want Reich to implement everything Philly did , but it's hard to argue with the results and Wentz's similarities to Luck. Mike Lombardi has a pretty interesting take on how he views Philly's offence. He calls it "battleship football". It's pretty unique and they had historically great conversion rates on 3rd and 6  or longer. 

 

Honestly , I don't care if we don't reinvent the wheel , I'd just like some creativity/ingenuity and like everyone else, have Luck take less hits. 

[Yoshinator]

I think we'll attempt to do things differently this time. Our team is pretty bare right now with very few playmakers. Luck isn't in Manning's league, never has been and probably never will be. He can't carry the team. I think Irsay, Ballard, and Reich all know that we have to build a team around him. The draft will say a lot about which direction we go. Nelson gets us that elite O-Lineman we desperately need, Barkley gets us the elite RB Luck never had to take pressure off him, and Chubb gives the beginning of a pass rush that could give us a formidable defense. FA will affect our choice, but Ballard will essentially be choosing our destiny and the Colts identity by whichever pick we take at no3, or possibly by trading down in the draft. 

 

We won't copy the previous regime, not only is Luck 6 years into his career already, but we don't even have an offense around him. When the whole team is healthy, the defense is probably better as a unit now and more talented. I think Barkley is the right choice as BPA, but for need I see us trading down for Nelson and acquiring more picks to make us a complete team. That's the philosophy I see Ballard having with this team. Lots of impact players with a balanced approach.

[Trueman]

12 minutes ago, jshipp23 said:

It was great era, I'll be glad if we can replicate that success..But all 3 of them had  flaws..Polian had his share of misses towards the end of his tenure, Peyton choked his share of times in the Playoffs, and Dungy was good, but far from great...We had some extremely talented teams that could've won more Super Bowls for sure...I like this Ballard/Reich combination, I think we will be back in the conversation soon..I still think we need to build an elite offense first and foremost, but we do need a better defense that attacks like the Seahawks run..We got a decent defense talent wise right now..A good defensive end and ILB will make it more than servicable...They lost a lot of games last year because the offense couldn't stay on the field or score enough..

 

Yeah look, by no means am I saying Polian and Dungy are scrubs, they have a solid body of work outside of their time as Colts as well. 

 

But, Polian's rigid philosophies cost us, I believe that. And I'm not going to apologize for it. 

 

Ballard seems to be much more in tune with how I believe rosters should be built , and the avenues to getting better players.

 

I don't expect us to create a Seattle defence, although I'd love it. They have done an unbelievable job finding undervalued talent to fit their scheme. Although it looks like it's starting to crumble a bit now. 

 

 

[southwest1]

4 minutes ago, Jared Cisneros said:

I think we'll attempt to do things differently this time. Our team is pretty bare right now with very few playmakers. Luck isn't in Manning's league, never has been and probably never will be. He can't carry the team. I think Irsay, Ballard, and Reich all know that we have to build a team around him. The draft will say a lot about which direction we go. Nelson gets us that elite O-Lineman we desperately need, Barkley gets us the elite RB Luck never had to take pressure off him, and Chubb gives the beginning of a pass rush that could give us a formidable defense. FA will affect our choice, but Ballard will essentially be choosing our destiny and the Colts identity by whichever pick we take at no3, or possibly by trading down in the draft. 

 

We won't copy the previous regime, not only is Luck 6 years into his career already, but we don't even have an offense around him. When the whole team is healthy, the defense is probably better as a unit now and more talented. I think Barkley is the right choice as BPA, but for need I see us trading down for Nelson and acquiring more picks to make us a complete team. That's the philosophy I see Ballard having with this team. Lots of impact players with a balanced approach.

That's what I love about you Jared. You pull the band aid right off & lay it out on the table warts & all. I like regulars who are blunt because they tell me exactly where their head is at. 

 

Do you think we can compete for our division this yr if we can keep Luck upright? I do, but that's more my heart than my head since we have missed the playoffs too often for my tastes & I get greedy when I wanna end this drought pronto. 

[chrisfarley]

14 minutes ago, Jared Cisneros said:

I think we'll attempt to do things differently this time. Our team is pretty bare right now with very few playmakers. Luck isn't in Manning's league, never has been and probably never will be. He can't carry the team. I think Irsay, Ballard, and Reich all know that we have to build a team around him. The draft will say a lot about which direction we go. Nelson gets us that elite O-Lineman we desperately need, Barkley gets us the elite RB Luck never had to take pressure off him, and Chubb gives the beginning of a pass rush that could give us a formidable defense. FA will affect our choice, but Ballard will essentially be choosing our destiny and the Colts identity by whichever pick we take at no3, or possibly by trading down in the draft. 

 

We won't copy the previous regime, not only is Luck 6 years into his career already, but we don't even have an offense around him. When the whole team is healthy, the defense is probably better as a unit now and more talented. I think Barkley is the right choice as BPA, but for need I see us trading down for Nelson and acquiring more picks to make us a complete team. That's the philosophy I see Ballard having with this team. Lots of impact players with a balanced approach.

Good thoughts. That 3rd pick could help define Ballard's career as well.   Also, I wonder if Matt E Pluribus Unum will want to draft Bradley Chubb?

[Yoshinator]

2 minutes ago, southwest1 said:

That's what I love about you Jared. You pull the band aid right off & lay it out on the table warts & all. I like regulars who are blunt because they tell me exactly where their head is at. 

 

Do you think we can compete for our division this yr if we can keep Luck upright? I do, but that's more my heart than my head since we have missed the playoffs too often for my tastes & I get greedy when I wanna end this drought pronto. 

If Luck is healthy all year, I see our wins at 8-10 depending on FA and the draft this year. Honestly, if we do take Barkley and get an elite O-Lineman in FA and either round 2 or 3, that alone could push us to 10 wins if everything else is average. You saw what happened with the Jags and Fournette. We can come close this year IMO if we set the groundwork.

[Yoshinator]

1 minute ago, chrisfarley said:

Good thoughts. That 3rd pick could help define Ballard's career as well.   Also, I wonder if Matt E Pluribus Unum will want to draft Bradley Chubb?

Did he coach Chubb in college? If so, that could be a deciding point. As long as we cover our bases as far as the O-Line goes, I'll go along with Chubb. There's a whole FA and Draft to build around him.

[Trueman]

25 minutes ago, Jared Cisneros said:

I think we'll attempt to do things differently this time. Our team is pretty bare right now with very few playmakers. Luck isn't in Manning's league, never has been and probably never will be. He can't carry the team. I think Irsay, Ballard, and Reich all know that we have to build a team around him. The draft will say a lot about which direction we go. Nelson gets us that elite O-Lineman we desperately need, Barkley gets us the elite RB Luck never had to take pressure off him, and Chubb gives the beginning of a pass rush that could give us a formidable defense. FA will affect our choice, but Ballard will essentially be choosing our destiny and the Colts identity by whichever pick we take at no3, or possibly by trading down in the draft. 

 

We won't copy the previous regime, not only is Luck 6 years into his career already, but we don't even have an offense around him. When the whole team is healthy, the defense is probably better as a unit now and more talented. I think Barkley is the right choice as BPA, but for need I see us trading down for Nelson and acquiring more picks to make us a complete team. That's the philosophy I see Ballard having with this team. Lots of impact players with a balanced approach.

 

I think Andrew can be in Manning's league. I think the coaching Andrew has had so far  , along with his ..shall we say "kinder" disposition have been the main inhibitors preventing him from being the best he can be. 

 

Manning had a lot of "f-you" in him. 

 

If Luck had Tom Moore and a coach and GM not named Grigson and Chuck , I think we'd be seeing the "top rated prospect since Manning or Elway".

 

I disagree that Luck can't carry a team. I think he carried a bad coach and front office , plus a poor roster to the playoffs 3 years in a row. (And as a rookie)

[chrisfarley]

2 minutes ago, Jared Cisneros said:

Did he coach Chubb in college? If so, that could be a deciding point. As long as we cover our bases as far as the O-Line goes, I'll go along with Chubb. There's a whole FA and Draft to build around him.

nope, he did not.  if we could somehow build D with Chubb and snag a top-rung free agent (Norwell), get some linebacker free agents, and another or two o-lineman steals in the draft, could be good.  

[Yoshinator]

1 minute ago, Trueman said:

 

I think Andrew can be in Manning's league. I think the coaching Andrew has had so far  , along with his ..shall we say "kinder" disposition have been the main inhibitors preventing him from being the best he can be. 

 

Manning had a lot of "f-you" in him. 

 

If Luck had Tom Moore and a coach and GM not named Grigson and Chuck , I think we'd be seeing the "top rated prospect since Manning or Elway".

That very well could be true. Luck has problems that he has never corrected, such as holding on to the ball too long (his WR's have been average, but sometimes you have to run or throw the ball away). He also has committed a lot of turnovers. He falls behind early in games and puts the team and himself in tough situations. The other thing that isn't based on coaching that I don't like about Luck is his passion for the game. I'm not talking about his kind demenaur, I'm talking about how he doesn't live for the game. How he could survive without football and be okay with it. Peyton lived and breathed football, and if he wasn't playing, it killed him inside. Luck doesn't have the passion Peyton did and it shows when he doesn't improve weaknesses he's had since college. 

[CF4L]

3 minutes ago, Trueman said:

 

I think Andrew can be in Manning's league. I think the coaching Andrew has had so far  , along with his ..shall we say "kinder" disposition have been the main inhibitors preventing him from being the best he can be. 

 

Manning had a lot of "f-you" in him. 

 

If Luck had Tom Moore and a coach and GM not named Grigson and Chuck , I think we'd be seeing the "top rated prospect since Manning or Elway".

 

Would we? 

. 

 

The truly elite QBs can work with anyone thrown at them. 

 

Manning managed to thrive in Denver after the Colts and he parted ways. and went to 4 SBs with 4 different coaches. 

 

I think Luck is very good but I never thought he was on Manning's level and found it to be a rather unrealistic expectation to begin with.

 

His ceiling to me is Brett Favre at best. 

 

Which I'm okay with but others don't see to believe that for some reason.

[Yoshinator]

11 minutes ago, chrisfarley said:

nope, he did not.  if we could somehow build D with Chubb and snag a top-rung free agent (Norwell), get some linebacker free agents, and another or two o-lineman steals in the draft, could be good.  

Linebacker is definitely a concern. It's hard to get great ones. You either have to draft high, or massively overpay to get the occasional elite one that hits the market. I would love to trade down for Quinton Nelson, pick up a 2nd and a 3rd while doing so, and then trade up to the mid-1st to get trumaine edmunds again. I'd trade two 2nd's and a 3rd to get that deal done.

[Trueman]

3 minutes ago, Jared Cisneros said:

The other thing that isn't based on coaching that I don't like about Luck is his passion for the game. I'm not talking about his kind demenaur, I'm talking about how he doesn't live for the game. How he could survive without football and be okay with it. Peyton lived and breathed football, and if he wasn't playing, it killed him inside. Luck doesn't have the passion Peyton did and it shows when he doesn't improve weaknesses he's had since college. 

Are you sure that's really fair? 

 

Luck hasn't shown me anything to doubt his passion isn't the same as Peyton's... I think they're just different people who show themselves differently...

 

I dunno, maybe you've seen something I haven't.. 

[Yoshinator]

1 minute ago, Trueman said:

Are you sure that's really fair? 

 

Luck hasn't shown me anything to doubt his passion isn't the same as Peyton's... I think they're just different people who show themselves differently...

 

I dunno, maybe you've seen something I haven't.. 

I think Luck has a brilliant IQ, but not a brilliant football IQ. Peyton had a brilliant football IQ. He lived and breathed the game. Luck is a lot more simple of a person. He's sorta nerdy where he reads lots of books, plays board games. A lot more relaxed and doesn't have such a serious outlook on life. However, you only get out of something what you put into it, and that's why Manning got so much out of football. He made it his life, Luck has a life outside of football.

[Trueman]

5 minutes ago, CF4L said:

 

Would we? 

. 

 

The truly elite QBs can work with anyone thrown at them. 

 

Manning managed to thrive in Denver after the Colts and he parted ways. and went to 4 SBs with 4 different coaches. 

 

I think Luck is very good but I never thought he was on Manning's level and found it to be a rather unrealistic expectation to begin with.

 

His ceiling to me is Brett Favre at best. 

 

Which I'm okay with but others don't see to believe that for some reason.

I always think Elway for a comp. Elway's arm was one of a kind though.

 

I think Luck has made it work. I really just think he's had more obstacles to overcome. Roster/coaching/injuries... he's friggin carried a below average team (on and off the field)

 

I dunno man, I think he can be just as good. I really do.

[Trueman]

2 minutes ago, Jared Cisneros said:

I think Luck has a brilliant IQ, but not a brilliant football IQ. Peyton had a brilliant football IQ. He lived and breathed the game. Luck is a lot more simple of a person. He's sorta nerdy where he reads lots of books, plays board games. A lot more relaxed and doesn't have such a serious outlook on life. However, you only get out of something what you put into it, and that's why Manning got so much out of football. He made it his life, Luck has a life outside of football.

Yeah , I'm not sure that's enough evidence to suggest he's not as passionate.

 

I think they both have high IQ's on and off the field, period. 

[BOTT]

13 minutes ago, Jared Cisneros said:

That very well could be true. Luck has problems that he has never corrected, such as holding on to the ball too long (his WR's have been average, but sometimes you have to run or throw the ball away). He also has committed a lot of turnovers. He falls behind early in games and puts the team and himself in tough situations. The other thing that isn't based on coaching that I don't like about Luck is his passion for the game. I'm not talking about his kind demenaur, I'm talking about how he doesn't live for the game. How he could survive without football and be okay with it. Peyton lived and breathed football, and if he wasn't playing, it killed him inside. Luck doesn't have the passion Peyton did and it shows when he doesn't improve weaknesses he's had since college. 

You are on a roll....and not in a good way.