jvan1973 Posted March 26, 2013 Share Posted March 26, 2013 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 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jason_ Posted March 26, 2013 Share Posted March 26, 2013 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". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Callie Posted March 26, 2013 Share Posted March 26, 2013 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. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Balzer40 Posted March 26, 2013 Share Posted March 26, 2013 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. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
amfootball Posted March 26, 2013 Share Posted March 26, 2013 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 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
amfootball Posted March 26, 2013 Share Posted March 26, 2013 Manning passing academyAttending 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? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jvan1973 Posted March 26, 2013 Share Posted March 26, 2013 http://content.usatoday.com/communities/thehuddle/post/2011/12/archie-manning-tries-to-backtrack-on-peytonluck-comments-but-did-he/1that article says exactly what you quoted in that post Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jvan1973 Posted March 26, 2013 Share Posted March 26, 2013 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 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
amfootball Posted March 26, 2013 Share Posted March 26, 2013 Yes, I know. I was refuting Jason previous' post.that article says exactly what you quoted in that post Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
amfootball Posted March 26, 2013 Share Posted March 26, 2013 talk to me in five years and I'll answer thenHe 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. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jason_ Posted March 26, 2013 Share Posted March 26, 2013 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. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Qwiz Posted March 26, 2013 Share Posted March 26, 2013 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. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Qwiz Posted March 26, 2013 Share Posted March 26, 2013 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: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
colts_mp Posted March 26, 2013 Share Posted March 26, 2013 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? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dustin Posted March 26, 2013 Share Posted March 26, 2013 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. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Qwiz Posted March 26, 2013 Share Posted March 26, 2013 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? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GoColts8818 Posted March 26, 2013 Share Posted March 26, 2013 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. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jvan1973 Posted March 26, 2013 Share Posted March 26, 2013 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 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
House Posted March 26, 2013 Share Posted March 26, 2013 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! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Qwiz Posted March 26, 2013 Share Posted March 26, 2013 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! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
House Posted March 26, 2013 Share Posted March 26, 2013 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. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Qwiz Posted March 26, 2013 Share Posted March 26, 2013 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. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
House Posted March 26, 2013 Share Posted March 26, 2013 Lol good thing I played receiver.Also they're on fire. Forgot to mention that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Qwiz Posted March 26, 2013 Share Posted March 26, 2013 Also they're on fire. Forgot to mention that. Okay never mind I'm screwed then Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
House Posted March 26, 2013 Share Posted March 26, 2013 Okay never mind I'm screwed then Just repent. Manning is merciful......... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Qwiz Posted March 26, 2013 Share Posted March 26, 2013 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... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OlBlu Posted March 26, 2013 Share Posted March 26, 2013 He didn't lead the league in interception s. But he did lead the league in turnovers.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dustin Posted March 26, 2013 Share Posted March 26, 2013 But he did lead the league in turnovers....He also led the league in 3rd and long conversions and game winning drives. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
House Posted March 26, 2013 Share Posted March 26, 2013 He also led the league in 3rd and long conversions and game winning drives.Nope doesn't matter. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
colts_mp Posted March 26, 2013 Share Posted March 26, 2013 might want to check that stat.. Brees and Romo had more interceptions. and Andy had 10 less picks than Peyton did his rookie yearyou'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. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
amfootball Posted March 26, 2013 Share Posted March 26, 2013 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. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jason_ Posted March 26, 2013 Share Posted March 26, 2013 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. ;) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jvan1973 Posted March 26, 2013 Share Posted March 26, 2013 What Quizboy just said above in post #373. :-)you said Archie said they couldn't. he didn't say that Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
amfootball Posted March 26, 2013 Share Posted March 26, 2013 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 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OlBlu Posted March 26, 2013 Share Posted March 26, 2013 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. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dustin Posted March 26, 2013 Share Posted March 26, 2013 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. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OlBlu Posted March 26, 2013 Share Posted March 26, 2013 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..... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dustin Posted March 26, 2013 Share Posted March 26, 2013 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. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Balzer40 Posted March 26, 2013 Share Posted March 26, 2013 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. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bavanlan Posted March 26, 2013 Share Posted March 26, 2013 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. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts