Luck Era vs Manning Era

[jvan1973]

How did Peyton help Luck shape his game? The two were never on the same field together as far as I know and Luck plays a completely different style given his athleticism. And I believe Archie (Peyton's dad) said his son and Luck could not co-exist so together so I will have to disagree on this point.

In terms of your second point, I would imagine most fans here would rather have the rings than a great leader or spokesman. In the end, greatness is determined by the hardware and it is what every team and every player strives for. If Luck does win more than one SB his era will be considered more successful. All the other stuff is just window dressing.

In terms of Peyton paving for the way for college players? Exactly how has he done this? If anything, the running QBs like Cunningham, Vick, McNair have paved the way for the more untraditional style QBs like RG, Kaep, Wilson, etc. Peyton and the scores of other QBs before him are the traditional drop by guys. Colleges have not been cpying that the last 10-15 years, it was already there.

Manning passing academy

[Jason_]

How did Peyton help Luck shape his game? The two were never on the same field together as far as I know and Luck plays a completely different style given his athleticism. 

At Peyton's summer passing academy.  Quote below is from http://www.cbssports.com/nfl/blog/eye-on-football/20563117/bruce-arians-hints-andrew-luck-is-more-advanced-than-peyton-manning-at-the-same-point

 

Additionally, let's not forget that Luck often attended the Manning Passing Academy. He learned from the very guy he ended up replacing, and it's showing with the way he's performed through the first four games of his NFL career

 

And I believe Archie (Peyton's dad) said his son and Luck could not co-exist so together so I will have to disagree on this point.

 

No, Archie said that he didn't think that Peyton and Andrew would WANT to be on the same team, because both being on the same team would mean one of them would be on the bench, and both are such great competitors that they would both want to be on the field.  He never said they "could not co-exist".

[Callie]

Nicely put lass. Well, time to fire up my Game Pass and watch that ending again........this has got me in the mood to see it again....

 

I get REALLY into football. When Reggie almost had that last TD I got up and then ah.

So I started pacing. I jumped up and down so badly when we scored.

[Balzer40]

I get REALLY into football. When Reggie almost had that last TD I got up and then ah.

So I started pacing. I jumped up and down so badly when we scored.

 

 

Your husband/boyfriend is a lucky man. I've never found a good woman that gets into football like I do.

[amfootball]

At Peyton's summer passing academy.  Quote below is from http://www.cbssports.com/nfl/blog/eye-on-football/20563117/bruce-arians-hints-andrew-luck-is-more-advanced-than-peyton-manning-at-the-same-point

 

 

 

 

No, Archie said that he didn't think that Peyton and Andrew would WANT to be on the same team, because both being on the same team would mean one of them would be on the bench, and both are such great competitors that they would both want to be on the field.  He never said they "could not co-exist".

http://content.usatoday.com/communities/thehuddle/post/2011/12/archie-manning-tries-to-backtrack-on-peytonluck-comments-but-did-he/1

[amfootball]

Manning passing academy

Attending his passing academy is not the same thing as saying Peyton helped him shape his game. That would indicate that he and Peyton spent a lot of time one-on-one together. I really don't see much of Peyton's game in Luck at all. Maybe it is just me but they are totally different players. Do others see it differently?

[jvan1973]

http://content.usatoday.com/communities/thehuddle/post/2011/12/archie-manning-tries-to-backtrack-on-peytonluck-comments-but-did-he/1

that article says exactly what you quoted in that post

[jvan1973]

Attending his passing academy is not the same thing as saying Peyton helped him shape his game. That would indicate that he and Peyton spent a lot of time one-on-one together. I really don't see much of Peyton's game in Luck at all. Maybe it is just me but they are totally different players. Do others see it differently?

talk to me in five years and I'll answer then

[amfootball]

Yes, I know. I was refuting Jason previous' post.

that article says exactly what you quoted in that post

[amfootball]

talk to me in five years and I'll answer then

He reminds me the most of Elway. I can see why he got compared to him coming out of college. He just does not have the rifle arm like Elway but everything else is very similar - big, smart, runs well, knows when to run, clutch, stands tall in the pocket...all Elway IMO.

[Jason_]

Yes, I know. I was refuting Jason previous' post.

 

How were you "refuting" my post?  The article you linked says exactly what I did.  I personally listened to the comments from Archie on both days.  He never said that they "could not co-exist" and the closest mention of that in the article is where the writer says:

 

One day after expressing doubt that both Peyton Manningand Andrew Luck could happily coexist on the Colts if Indianapolis drafts Luck next spring, Archie Manning(Peyton's father) tried to do a 180 Wednesday.

 

First, this is not a direct quote of what Archie said the previous day.  Second, the "tried to do a 180" is media spin.  He did not do a 180 because he never said they could not co-exist.  The closest to quoting what Archie said the day before was further down the article,

 

Initially asked on FOXSports radio about the possibility of Peyton and Luck being teammates, Archie replied: "I don't think it'd necessarily be great for either one.  "I think Andrew's the type of mature player ... he can walk right in (and play)."

 

So again, he said he didn't think it would be in the best interest of either player to be on the same team, and that he didn't think that they would WANT to be on the same team because each is so competitive that they would each want to be on the field.  That's not the same thing as saying they could not co-exist on the same team.  The bottom line is he was trying to compliment Luck and say that Luck was good enough to play right away and didn't need to sit on the bench for a year or more getting up to speed like many QB's do.

[Qwiz]

He reminds me the most of Elway. I can see why he got compared to him coming out of college. He just does not have the rifle arm like Elway but everything else is very similar - big, smart, runs well, knows when to run, clutch, stands tall in the pocket...all Elway IMO.

I think of Roethlisberger personally. I would also compare him to Manning in terms of reads and stuff.

[Qwiz]

How were you "refuting" my post?  The article you linked says exactly what I did.  I personally listened to the comments from Archie on both days.  He never said that they "could not co-exist" and the closest mention of that in the article is where the writer says:

 

 

 

First, this is not a direct quote of what Archie said the previous day.  Second, the "tried to do a 180" is media spin.  He did not do a 180 because he never said they could not co-exist.  The closest to quoting what Archie said the day before was further down the article,

 

 

Initially asked on FOXSports radio about the possibility of Peyton and Luck being teammates, Archie replied: "I don't think it'd necessarily be great for either one.  "I think Andrew's the type of mature player ... he can walk right in (and play)."

 

So again, he said he didn't think it would be in the best interest of either player to be on the same team, and that he didn't think that they would WANT to be on the same team because each is so competitive that they would each want to be on the field.  That's not the same thing as saying they could not co-exist on the same team.  The bottom line is he was trying to compliment Luck and say that Luck was good enough to play right away and didn't need to sit on the bench for a year or more getting up to speed like many QB's do.

So he was saying that they shouldn't coexist...not that they can't coexist...right? :hmm:

[colts_mp]

I think of Roethlisberger personally. I would also compare him to Manning in terms of reads and stuff.

Lol you can't be serious.  Luck has played 1 year and you compare him to Manning in reading ability?  Did Luck's league-leading interception total help you come to that conclusion?

[Dustin]

Lol you can't be serious. Luck has played 1 year and you compare him to Manning in reading ability? Did Luck's league-leading interception total help you come to that conclusion?

He didn't lead the league in interception s.

[Qwiz]

Lol you can't be serious.  Luck has played 1 year and you compare him to Manning in reading ability?  Did Luck's league-leading interception total help you come to that conclusion?

Of all the things that have been said in this thread about 12's "strengths", you choose my assessment of his reading ability to critique? From what I saw (in his game versus us anyway) he did have at least some semblance of a good pre-snap read. I'm not saying he's as good at it as the Almighty One, I was just saying that he possibly could be as good one day. Manning is a seasoned vet and is one of the best, obviously. If you couldn't tell already by reading through this thread, I'm not a big Andrew Luck fan. Why would I try and raise him on a pedestal?

[GoColts8818]

Lol you can't be serious. Luck has played 1 year and you compare him to Manning in reading ability? Did Luck's league-leading interception total help you come to that conclusion?

you do know Peyton threw 10 more picks as a rookie than Luck did right?

I would agree compare rookie Andrew to MVP level Peyton on any level is crazy however to say you see signs Andrew could reach Peyton's level one day based on what people saw from both their rookie years is fair to say.

[jvan1973]

Lol you can't be serious. Luck has played 1 year and you compare him to Manning in reading ability? Did Luck's league-leading interception total help you come to that conclusion?

might want to check that stat.. Brees and Romo had more interceptions. and Andy had 10 less picks than Peyton did his rookie year

[House]

I think of Roethlisberger personally. I would also compare him to Manning in terms of reads and stuff.

HOW DARE YOU!

Never compare anyone to The Lord Peyton Manning!

[Qwiz]

HOW DARE YOU!

Never compare anyone to The Lord Peyton Manning!

I'm surprised I didn't get struck down by lightning! I have broken the 11th Commandment!

[House]

I'm surprised I didn't get struck down by lightning! I have broken the 11th Commandment!

It's going to be much worse than lightning. Footballs will rain on you from the sky for 10 days and nights.

[Qwiz]

It's going to be much worse than lightning. Footballs will rain on you from the sky for 10 days and nights.

Lol good thing I played receiver.

[House]

Lol good thing I played receiver.

Also they're on fire. Forgot to mention that.

[Qwiz]

Also they're on fire. Forgot to mention that.

     Okay never mind I'm screwed then

[House]

Okay never mind I'm screwed then

Just repent. Manning is merciful.........

[Qwiz]

Just repent. Manning is merciful.........

I think Jeff Saturday would disagree. I've seen that fight! But, nonetheless...  I hope that will be enough to erase my comparison...

[OlBlu]

He didn't lead the league in interception s.

 

But he did lead the league in turnovers....

[Dustin]

But he did lead the league in turnovers....

He also led the league in 3rd and long conversions and game winning drives.

[House]

He also led the league in 3rd and long conversions and game winning drives.

Nope doesn't matter.

[colts_mp]

might want to check that stat.. Brees and Romo had more interceptions. and Andy had 10 less picks than Peyton did his rookie year

you're right on the stat.  i should have said Sanchez tying interception total.  And everyone on here should know YOU CAN'T COMPARE ROOKIE YEARS THAT ARE 14 YEARS APART.  The passing game is totally different now.  

[amfootball]

What Quizboy just said above in post #373. :-)

 

How were you "refuting" my post?  The article you linked says exactly what I did.  I personally listened to the comments from Archie on both days.  He never said that they "could not co-exist" and the closest mention of that in the article is where the writer says:

 

 

 

First, this is not a direct quote of what Archie said the previous day.  Second, the "tried to do a 180" is media spin.  He did not do a 180 because he never said they could not co-exist.  The closest to quoting what Archie said the day before was further down the article,

 

 

Initially asked on FOXSports radio about the possibility of Peyton and Luck being teammates, Archie replied: "I don't think it'd necessarily be great for either one.  "I think Andrew's the type of mature player ... he can walk right in (and play)."

 

So again, he said he didn't think it would be in the best interest of either player to be on the same team, and that he didn't think that they would WANT to be on the same team because each is so competitive that they would each want to be on the field.  That's not the same thing as saying they could not co-exist on the same team.  The bottom line is he was trying to compliment Luck and say that Luck was good enough to play right away and didn't need to sit on the bench for a year or more getting up to speed like many QB's do.

[Jason_]

So he was saying that they shouldn't coexist...not that they can't coexist...right? :hmm:

 

Basically, yes.  He said they were both good enough to be starters and that neither one would be well-served by being on the bench, and that neither of them would want to be on the bench.  However he also emphasized that if they were both on the same team that they would have no problems actually getting along and doing what's best for the team.

 

What Quizboy just said above. :-)

 

Right, which is not what you originally said. Was just correcting you, that's all. ;)

[jvan1973]

What Quizboy just said above in post #373. :-)

you said Archie said they couldn't. he didn't say that

[amfootball]

I don't even remember what we are taking about anymore. My head hurts...

you said Archie said they couldn't. he didn't say that

[OlBlu]

I think he's just a troll, he post on pacersdigest all the time. Usually to disagree and get everyone riled up. Now he has found this forum, nice

 

I got everyone riled up because I questioned whether Luck was the best QB in the draft before the Colts selected him. I also said that I thought RGIII was better and would be an immediate star. After two games, I said that RGIII was a lock for Rookie of the Year. After I saw Wilson play for Seattle I suggested that both he and RGIII were ahead of Luck and Tannehill was very close. This wasn't a popular view even though it turned out that I was right. People had bought into the Luck koolaid before he ever played a game. I still think that Wilson and RGIII are much better and that gap will be even bigger this year. This doesn't mean that I am not a Colts fan, I just never bought into the Luck hype and I thought he was the most overhyped player in NFL history. I still believe that.

[Dustin]

I got everyone riled up because I questioned whether Luck was the best QB in the draft before the Colts selected him. I also said that I thought RGIII was better and would be an immediate star. After two games, I said that RGIII was a lock for Rookie of the Year. After I saw Wilson play for Seattle I suggested that both he and RGIII were ahead of Luck and Tannehill was very close. This wasn't a popular view even though it turned out that I was right. People had bought into the Luck koolaid before he ever played a game. I still think that Wilson and RGIII are much better and that gap will be even bigger this year. This doesn't mean that I am not a Colts fan, I just never bought into the Luck hype and I thought he was the most overhyped player in NFL history. I still believe that.

And you're still wrong. Sorry if we don't trust the football knowledge of a guy who doesn't even know what type of offense we ran.

[OlBlu]

And you're still wrong. Sorry if we don't trust the football knowledge of a guy who doesn't even know what type of offense we ran.

 

I could give a rat's behind what you trust. I know one of the big selling points on Luck was that he was the most pro ready QB available for the Colts offense. If it wasn't pure west coast, it was close. If the coach set him up to be a bomber and not take advantage of short receivers then that was a coaching problem. He wouldn't have taken so much punishment if he had made those short passes. I tend to think that was you saw was what you got and Luck won't change his spots much in seasons to come. I think both RGIII and Wilson have more upside than Luck too.... So, get your hate on and call me a troll because I don't think Luck is all that some of you claim.....

[Dustin]

I could give a rat's behind what you trust. I know one of the big selling points on Luck was that he was the most pro ready QB available for the Colts offense. If it wasn't pure west coast, it was close. If the coach set him up to be a bomber and not take advantage of short receivers then that was a coaching problem. He wouldn't have taken so much punishment if he had made those short passes. I tend to think that was you saw was what you got and Luck won't change his spots much in seasons to come. I think both RGIII and Wilson have more upside than Luck too.... So, get your hate on and call me a troll because I don't think Luck is all that some of you claim.....

It was a coaching thing. That's what the offense was. 7 step drops and wait for a play to develop downfield.

[Balzer40]

I got everyone riled up because I questioned whether Luck was the best QB in the draft before the Colts selected him. I also said that I thought RGIII was better and would be an immediate star. After two games, I said that RGIII was a lock for Rookie of the Year. After I saw Wilson play for Seattle I suggested that both he and RGIII were ahead of Luck and Tannehill was very close. This wasn't a popular view even though it turned out that I was right. People had bought into the Luck koolaid before he ever played a game. I still think that Wilson and RGIII are much better and that gap will be even bigger this year. This doesn't mean that I am not a Colts fan, I just never bought into the Luck hype and I thought he was the most overhyped player in NFL history. I still believe that.

 

 

 

You couldn't be more wrong on everything you just said. My guess is, that when Luck continue's to prove you wrong this yr. you'll disappear. It's easy to show up and say you told everybody so about RG3 winning ROTY after the fact, especially since everybody and their brother knew he had rookie of the yr. wrapped up before he ever ran a play last season. The media went on a full out RG3 love affair before the season started.

[bavanlan]

I think he's just a troll, he post on pacersdigest all the time. Usually to disagree and get everyone riled up. Now he has found this forum, nice

 

 

No seriously, on pacersdigest I'm pretty sure everyone there can't stand the guy. While I'm not a member there I have read the forums for years. His posting style is literally just to tick everyone off. I do agree with you on the manning/bronco fans as well.

 

 

Nailed it.