Flash7
-
Posts
4,129 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
1
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Gallery
Events
Blogs
Posts posted by Flash7
-
-
Good post, up until the last paragraph. To me it seems like the logic would be to gain many additional draft picks from trading Luck and then using those gained draft picks in a trade scenario to get Barkley or the next great QB prospect next year? Barkeley or the next great QB will also be a very high draft pick and will require a large amount of draft picks in return, similar to Luck. If this were the case, I would argue that choosing Luck may be better in the long run as he is projected to be a better QB.Really causes I could give u eight good reasons. And I have yet to see anyone even try an attempt to answer my one questions I have for you luck fans.
But my eight good reasons, well how about 8 draft picks in the 1st and 2nd rounds the next two years. Maybe even an extra 3rd. Sure could make that defense look real good the next couple years. But on another note I'm sure Jim Irsay would say he could give you 28 million reasons why.
But has for that question, let's say we trade Peyton and do take luck and the "experts" are wrong and he's just a average QB at best. Where do we go from there?
Keep in mind cause he's a 1st overall we have to stick with him for his rookie contract(could you imagine mark Sanchez(5thpick) on this team now). and because he's mediocre we finish in the middle of the pack, unable to get another good draft pick to get a chance at another elite prospect QB. not to mention it'll have to be at the end of lucks contract because we would still try to put pieces around him and they wouldn't take another QB high in the draft cause they wouldn't what to make him feel threatened which could delay his progress.
My thought? we could always trade up next year and get Barkley (or the next great QB prospect, they always seem to come up with) if manning shows he's not gonna be able to stick it out for another 4-5 years. If he is who we thought he is, the GOAT, then the players thos draft picks could bring in would almost guarantee sucsess for Peytons successor. It's rebuilding without losing.
Either way you look at it, it will be highly unlikely that the Colts will draft in this position again for a long time. If we trade the picks and shore up our defense, with Manning as a QB, we will pick near last for the next ____ years. If we draft Luck, and keep Manning, Manning will continue to play with this team who has shown an improvement in the run game, and have added O- lineman. We'll be choosing at the end of the draft. If we draft Luck and only keep Luck, ( Manning is released, traded, or retires?) then we are in a full rebuilding state. Our defense may change dramatically, as well as our offense. It would be hard to say where we will end up, but unlikely to have the #1 pick.
-
In the Bowl game against Oklahoma State, Luck made all of the types of throws that you would look for in a highly skilled QB. You cannot deny that he threw the ball deep, mid range and short range, all with accuracy. You also cannot deny that he made a lot of calls at the line to set up the best possible run against the defense that he saw. If you argue that Stanford has a great running game, you're also making a point that Luck can call a heck of a game at the line.
Luck does not have the "wow" factor that RGIII has because he's mostly a pocket passer. He's very accurate and gets rid of the ball fast. There's nothing flashy about that. The thing with Luck is that there isn't anything that he doesn't do well. We saw him change plays at the line of scrimmage, look off safeties to make passes in tight windows down the sideline, let the defensive pressure come within a few feet of him before throwing the ball to free up and set-up the screen play, and scramble to gain first downs when necessary. He has great fundamentals and a solid throwing motion. His arm is not weak and is actually above average. This will be proven at the combine, if he participates.
I've made this comparison before, but Andrew Luck reminds me of the football version of Tim Duncan, AKA "The Big Fundamental." He's not flashy but does everything extremely well.
Now, I'm not saying that we have to draft Luck, but if we do, I can definitely see why.
-
You may be right in that he wouldn't care who was behind him, and that may not be the reason why he may want to be traded. Rather it would be because the Colts had a chance to build a team to push for a few more SuperBowls with him as the QB and instead they drafted a QB, which would be of no help to him. Manning may then feel that if he were to win a SuperBowl, it may be with another team that is just a QB away from a legitimate shot at winning the SB.I can see people thinking that maybe Luck doesn't want to sit behind Manning, but I don't understand why anyone would think Manning cares who's behind him. Not to the extent that he would rather be traded.
-
There may be another highly touted QB to come out since _________, as you have mentioned. The odds are that he would be the first ick in the draft. What are the odds that we would have that pick?Yes, there will be. There will always be college players who are the next big thing and will be the most highly touted prospect since ___________. It is absolutely baffling to me how many of you seem to genuinely believe that Luck has no peers. That's just ridiculous. Why do you believe that? Because his name is all over ESPN? Are any of you pro football scouts who are trained to evaluate players' potential?
Oh, also, to all you who keep spouting that he's the "best since Elway"... Do you know how old Elway was when he won his first Super Bowl? 37. If he had been your QB, you would have already given him up as "over the hill."
-
Is it possible that the head coaching decision is also tied to Peyton Manning's health? Since we don't know Manning's status as of yet, perhaps Irsay isn't ready to make that decision. If it appears that Manning is healthy, and Manning will play next year, Irsay may want to keep Caldwell. He has already stated that he likes continuity. The players have played hard for him and Manning has publically endorsed Caldwell. With Manning back next year, Caldwell's job will be much easier and he can work out his last year of his contract.
However, if we draft Luck and somehow Manning isn't ready to play or is traded (unlikely) then Irsay may decide to fire Caldwell and hire a new coach since we will be in full transition mode at that time regardless. Luck will come in and learn a new system and the Colts will move forward as a team in transition.
-
I don't mean to be argumentative, but for the sake of discussion, lets start with this....That's what I'm suggesting .....Flash,.....
Even if RG III is the 3rd best NFL ready QB.....he may be the one most willing to sit behind Manning for 4 years..
I dont KNOW but the way Luck adresses the issue suggests to me that he has absolutely no enthusiam for coming to Indianapolis if Manning is still here..
..and not is NOT in Luck's best interest to replace Peyton Manning as a rookie from of of town..with an otherwise weak offense..
. I can almost guarantee you that will not go well.
///I think if we trade Luck to Cleveland for their top 2 picks (#4 $26 and #37) we can use the 4th pick on RG III (no one will take him before then) and the next three picks can be used on Offenseive line. cornerback, wide reciver...
Andrew Luck will find it MUCH easier to succeed Colt McCoy than he will Peyton manning...
Manning will get help in the O-line and WR in case we cant regain Reggie..
..and If Manning is reinjured.....here come the Heisman Trophy winner..world class athlete...off the bench to try to save the day...in a no-lose scenario..
UIf Manning is OK (and indications are he will be) RG III realizes he needs time as an apprentice and would embface going to 'Manning school' much more so than Luck appears to...
Plus..RG III has great speed..some say../..better than anyone else in the NFL..
In his 4 years waiting he can be used in certain packages near the goal line. He can be used to run back kicks.
You could even make him a slot receiver on gimmick plays..The Colts are a slow team and RG III is the fastest player we could find
I think a pick trade is best for ALL concerned...
1. We do not know that RGIII will be any more willing to sit behind Manning than Luck would. That's an assumption and we cannot base business decisions on assumptions. The FO will have to find out for sure during interviews.
2. Regardless of who the QB is, it will be very tough to follow Manning. It would be just as hard for RGIII as it would be for Luck.
3. Andrew Luck will not find it easier to succeed in Cleveland as he will have no supporting cast, and the Browns would have given away their draft picks to obtain him, ensuring a dismal future.
4. If Manning is reinjured, regardless of if it's RGIII or Luck, we will go through growing pains. The Heisman trophy winner will not be here to dave the day.
5. RGIII has great speed. Our offense is based on timing, which negates his speed. The only speed that he will need is reading a defense and getting rid of the ball as fast as Peyton has been. He may be able to avoid the rush better than Manning, which is a credit to him.
6. I'm not big on gimmick plays, or having a QB play receiver, or return kicks. It's happened before, but that doesn't mean that we have to do it.
-
I agree, that's the real question. Is it better to draft Luck or trade the pick?But can we get picks to solve our needs AND get Mannings successor...that's the question...
I can see both sides of the arguement. If we trade the pick we can definately shore up the defense and add extra O-line or wr starters or depth. It would make us a solid team. My fear with this approach would be that we would draft Manning's successor either in another draft, or in the later rounds. As we may see in this year's draft, there aren't many high quality DT's. Last yer and the year before there were highly touted DT's. Similarly, it may be possible that there are available quarterbacks in later drafts, but none as talented as Luck. When we need a QB, we may be in a down year, like this year for DT's. Furthermore, even if there were highly touted QB's in the upcoming drafts, we may not be in a position to draft the most talented QB available, like we are this year. If you are going to build a team, I would argue that you should start with the best QB available.
If you are suggesting that we trade the pick and draft RGIII, that's a whole other argument based on how you have him graded. I know that you are high on RGIII. I think he's very talented, but not the best fit for what we do.
-
It doesn't take a Manning to have a 10 win season. Alex Smith has more than 10 wins this season.Who are you? Are u NFL scout or are you a fan like me. Because you really like to shut everyone's opinion down if it isn't about how great luck is. As Irsay said there won't be another peyton anytime soon, so I am trying to figure out how we are going to get back to 10 win seasons if he is no peyton. Please help me understand.
If you are talking about having 10 winning seasons in a row, well we couldn't even do that with Manning moving forward as he may not play for another 10 seasons. If that's the case, then it would make sense to draft a successor that has shown in college all of the tangibles and intangibles to be a successful QB in the NFL.
-
Mac, I agree with you to some extent but also feel that Polian knows that his time is over and he will most likely retire. However, his son is still a working man and still needs other opportunities. He may be giving his son positive accomplishments that his son might not have truely earned. In a sense, he's just padding his son's resume.So a father tries to give credit to his son for positive accomplishments while diverting negative attention to himself, and you think it's "standard double speak"? I call it being a good father and an honorable professional.
The way that people portray Polian on here you would think that he would be making these public appearances just to turn red in the race, point fingers, and pat himself on the back. It sounded to me that he is making the appearances to thank the fans, say goodbye, and to bolster the guy who fired him in the eyes of anyone who might have a problem with the decision. He sounded more relaxed than I've probably ever heard him. What exactly is the point of dissecting his words and claiming it represents another example of some perceived personality flaw - particularly if you are "not a huge Polian hater". Just a small one I'm guessing.
-
Luck played it right. He really can't comment on any one particular team and tip his hand. He should remain neutral and not alienate any team hoping to draft him. If he says he is very excited about coming to Indianapolis and play behind Manning, in essense, he's saying that this is where he would like to be to the other teams. Instead, he gave generic answers that still kept all of the teams interested.You're missing the point....I said he wasnt as stupid as he looks..(he has a dumb look, lots of us do)
That's not a comment on what you said at all....
Luck did not say he's be honored to play with Manning.
Or that he'd dreamed of playing on the same team with Manning.
Or that he was thrilled to learn from a family friend.
He could have said all those things...
He didnt..
That worries me
-
Manning worked with Collie and Garcon in the off season because they are receivers. He worked with them to get his timing down with them, which is a direct benefit to Manning. He plays with only one intention, which is to win the Super Bowl every year. I really don't think that he will sit down and develop a game plan just for RGIII. If what you are saying was true, then we would have seen Manning work in the off season to help develop Painter..Come on...you KNOW Manning would work with him in off season like he did with Collie and Garcon...
Nobody said its easy....No rookie QB has it easy...
..and Manning knows the game..most of the top QBs do....Are you saying that Manning is too dumb to design and offense to use skills he does not have..
..and I think you KNOW that Mannng wa syoung once and did roll out some
....there's an assumption here that RG3 Cant learn but that Andrew Luck could...
I think that's just wrong.....
.....and no one on the NFL has RG3's combination of size and speed..That's the payoff...
I want you all to look right into the computer in front of you and tell me honestly that RG3 cannot be a smaller version of Cam Newton??
The assumption is not that RGIII can't learn the system. The assumption is that he may not be best suited for our system. I may be wrong. I would rather start with a QB that has shown he can work in a pro style offense.
Cam Newton may not fit into our style of offense either, so if RGIII is a smaller Cam Newton, then you're arguing that RGII may not fit what we currently do. If you are for changing the offense to suit his talents, the that may be an option.
-
You make it sound like it's so easy. Sorgi, Painter, and Orlovsky have been learning behind Manning for years. It has not translated into good quarterback play. The QB position is very unique. Either you have "it" or you don't. It is clear that they don't...dont say he couldnt learn from Manning because the offense was different.....Its the concept.....we will roll out more...we will incorporate the QB's mobility...
.....Griffin could learn how to adjust and read pro defenses and tricks at the line from Manning....
..and the experinece he would gain watching it done live would be invaluable...and Manning could design a hybrid attack for him
...again....His TD/INt ratio is very low .....He takes care of the ball. Watch him inthe bowl..
the more you watch him...the more you are converted
As for RGIII, I honestly can't say whether he has "it" or not. You would have to agree with me that he comes out of a very different offensive system and that he would be considered more of a project. He has great potential and upside, however, would you be willing to gamble your first round pick for RGIII? This is where we may differ. I wouldn't.
Also, Manning would design a hybrid attack for RGIII? Because Manning is such a dual threat QB? Manning would take time out of practice and not focus on the upcoming game, and instead teach RGIII to run a spread attack? I don't see this happening.
You mentioned that we could incorporate more role outs, which may be an option, however, having the QB roll out also changes the timing of the play. Remember, we are an offense based on timing.
-
I am not saying that RGIII is a bad quarterback. I think he's a very dynamic QB with amazing athletic ability. The Colt's offense is based on recognition of the defense and timing. RGIII played in a spread system that required him to make completely different reads. It would be a very big transition for RGIII to learn the Colt's offense. It's possible that he could learn the offense, but having a QB with blazing speed throw the ball within 2 seconds of the snap really negates his speed. RGIII would be better served to play on a team that changes their offense to better suit his abilities. If the Colts change their offense to suit his needs, then the argument that he could learn behind Manning is moot. He would just learn about watching game film and preparation, and not the current offense. He would essentially be a rookie when he starts 3-4 years from now if we have to change our offense to suit him.
This is not a knock against him. Like I said, he is a good quarterback but maybe not the best option for the Colts.
-
Let me explain this to you. Luck is a college football player. He plays for Stanford. He plays football, usually on Saturdays. He wins the games that he plays, all but one this year. Last year he won the Fed Ex Orange Bowl and has won numerous awards this year. He has won more games than RGIII.What the heck are you talking about? How is Luck a proven winner? What has he won exactly?
-
Let's say that the Colts lose this weekend, and secure the first overall pick in the draft. Some fans will think that we lost on purpose, regardless. I would be okay with a loss, but not with the team tanking.
What if the team tanks and gets the first overall draft pick? And then they trade the pick for a bounty of draft picks. The players they draft with those picks make an immediate impact on next year's team and we are a Super Bowl contender. Would you still not be a fan of the Colts because they tanked a meaningless game?
-
Let's start with this: In the Colts system, you really can't draft a developing QB. You have to draft a QB that has proven to be a winner and has the tangibles and intangibles. Peyton Manning had that coming out of college. He was incredibly touted as a draft prospect. For those that say draft a QB in the later rounds to sit and learn behind Peyton makes no sense.
Remember Einstein's definition of insanity is to repeatedly do the same things yet expect a different result. It would be like drafting Sorgi, or Painter all over gain. So drafting guys that didn't excel in college but expecting them to produce at the NFL level is not the best way to go.
Let's understand what our offense is all about. It's about recognizing what the defense is doing on every snap, audible-ing to the play that would have the best possible result against that defensive scheme, and having the recognition and timing to make accurate completions in the face of a pass rush. This sounds more like Andrew Luck than RGIII. I would say that RGIII is a great athlete, however Andrew Luck is a better fit. If he's not available in this upcoming draft, it doesn't mean that RGIII would magically be a better fit for our system because he's the best available QB prospect.
-
Imagine, instead of signing Collins, starting Painter, or Orlovsky, we get to start Matt Ryan. That wouldn't be good for the Colts? I'd take that any day over what we currently have. Matt Ryan is a good Quarterback. If you compare him to Manning, of course he wouldn't stack up, but who would? You can't compare the next QB to Manning. Given that, Matt Ryan is a heck of a good alternative and if Luck is Matt Ryan, then he's a top pick hands down.It would be the more sensible option, but it won't happen, because people are watching Aaron Rodgers, and not Andrew Luck.
Andrew Luck is Matt Ryan. That isn't good for the future of the Colts.
-
I'm glad we won. I was happy to see Reggie make that final play and for the team to fight as hard as they did. HOWEVER, I would rather that we lost this game, clinched the 1st pick, and won every game next season with Manning. There was absolutely no point t win this game.
All those that say "I wan us to win no matter what," give it some thought. Tonight's loss hurt us more than it helped us. It may have cost us the first overall pick and perhaps made the FO think that there's not much wrong with the team, when we all know that there's plenty wrong with the team.
-
If we got rid of Caldwell today, then it would change a lot of peoples minds. We would want to win. Since losing is the only way we can gaurantee that Caldwell will be let go, it's causing an internal battle. Of course I want the Colts to win, but maybe not at the expense of keeping Caldwell?
-
That's unfair... It's not that I don't want him back, I'm stating facts. He doesn't yet have the clearance that he needs to be on the field. Also, at this point, I'd rather he not come back this season just for one game.Its almost as if you dont want him back, Flash
I would argue that it would hurt the team more to win with Manning than without him. They need to prove to themselves that they can win on their own and that they are not a 1-man team. With Manning coming back and winning the game for them it will prove that they are not good without him, which will further ruin their psyche.
-
Practicing would mean being involved in team activities and practicing with the team, not just throwing to receivers while rehabing. He's not taking snaps and practicing with the team. HE HAS NOT BEEN CLEARED TO DO THIS! He has been cleared to throw and increase workouts and that's what he's been doing.Working out and throwing the ball IS practicing to play/.
He's not going to block or tackle anybody
Signs suggest he'll give it a try......that's all I'm saying.
If we're 0-15....dont bet you life he wont go../He's preparing to play...clearly
I don't know why you don't get this. He will need his doctor's clearance to practice and then clearance to play. Since this has not happened, he will not play.
-
This takes the whole season into account. There may have been some quick strikes, but not enough to mathematically skew 369 pass attempts one way or another. Using statistics and math, there will be a variance, but the amount of data is more than enough to state that these are accurate numbers. Also take into account winning percentages. If Baylor was such a quick strike offense, they would have more wins.Does that take into account the amount of time their respective offenses were on the field? Or the quick strike touchdown abilities of the teams (Average yard per pass attempt)? Consider RGIII and the Baylor offense score rather quickly, afterall for the longest time he had more touchdowns than incompletions, this means they are efficient and score on quicker drives..
RGIII's average yards per attempt were 10.8 while Luck's was 9.3.
-
He has been cleared to increase his workouts and throw the ball. He is not cleared to practice or to play. So no, he will not play the last game of the season.
-
RGIII has 369 pass attempts this year.
Luck has 373 pass atempts this year.
The notion that RGIII is a passing quarterback while Luck plays in a run first system may not be true. Luck has attempted more passes than RGIII, so either Luck is not in a run first system and has an effective running game to go along with the passing game, or RGIII is not as much of a passing quarterback as some may think.
Andrew Luck Is Just Like Peyton...
in NFL Draft, Scouting, and Free Agent Talk
Posted
Your argument negates that Luck can read a defense and call a run play designed to attack that defense's weakness. Instead, it has nothing at all to do with him and only Stanford's O-line and runninbacks. My argument states that they all play a factor, including Luck's ability to call plays against the defense.