Will Andrew Luck be ranked above Robert Griffin III on the Top 100?

[Qwiz]

Taking away a star WR, is not an apples to apples comparison for taking away a strong running game.

Having a good running attack will always have more impact than 1 quality reciever.

Not always. Our leading rusher had 3 TDs and 437 rushing yards in 2009 and Andre still put up 1569 yards receiving. That was the year we went 9-7 and had our first winning record too.

[House]

Not always. Our leading rusher had 3 TDs and 437 rushing yards in 2009 and Andre still put up 1569 yards receiving. That was the year we went 9-7 and had our first winning record too.

I was speaking for a QB. If a QB has a good/great running game, it opens up so much more for them, than having no running game and a great WR.

Your team has had it's most success not with having just AJ, but having Foster and the ground game opening up the offense.

If I had to chose, I would take a good/great run game over having one A+ WR.

[Qwiz]

I was speaking for a QB. If a QB has a good/great running game, it opens up so much more for them, than having no running game and a great WR.

Your team has had it's most success not with having just AJ, but having Foster and the ground game opening up the offense.

If I had to chose, I would take a good/great run game over having one A+ WR.

I was speaking for QBs too. Matt put up his best career yardage that year I mentioned. It is true that we have the most success now because of having a great running game. I was just saying that it (having a great receiver and a lackluster run game) can be done and can lead to a winning season. (Nearly a playoff year but I won't get into that lol).

[House]

I was speaking for QBs too. Matt put up his best career yardage that year I mentioned. It is true that we have the most success now because of having a great running game. I was just saying that it (having a great receiver and a lackluster run game) can be done and can lead to a winning season. (Nearly a playoff year but I won't get into that lol).

What I was meaning wasn't that a QB can't have a great year with only a star WR (Matt Stafford), but QB are the most dangerous when they have a strong ground game to back them up (Schaub). And even if you don't have a grade A WR you can still have success with average WRs, and a great run game.

That's why to me, comparing RG3 not having a ground game, and Luck not having Reggie, don't equal out apples to apples. A ground game does so much more for the entire team (time of possession, D getting more rest) than a single WR does.

Just my opinion though.

[Qwiz]

What I was meaning wasn't that a QB can't have a great year with only a star WR (Matt Stafford), but QB are the most dangerous when they have a strong ground game to back them up (Schaub). And even if you don't have a grade A WR you can still have success with average WRs, and a great run game.

That's why to me, comparing RG3 not having a ground game, and Luck not having Reggie, don't equal out apples to apples. A ground game does so much more for the entire team (time of possession, D getting more rest) than a single WR does.

Just my opinion though.

True, but Wayne was the only guy that broke 1000 in a high passing offense. I suppose it depends on if one can imagine Hilton being a number one. I see what you are saying though. I look at the comparison as greatest weapon vs greatest weapon. We can just agree to disagree on this one lol.

[House]

True, but Wayne was the only guy that broke 1000 in a high passing offense. I suppose it depends on if one can imagine Hilton being a number one. I see what you are saying though. I look at the comparison as greatest weapon vs greatest weapon. We can just agree to disagree on this one lol.

Yeah it's no big deal really lol. I've just always viewed a great run attack as much greater than a great WR.

[Derakynn]

Surprise twist: neither are in the top 100.

[Narcosys]

Yeah let's take Reggie Wayne away from Luck and see what happens.

He would have 3,019 yards and 18 TD's.

meanwhile RG3 had 3200 and 20 TD's.

Difference? RG3's yards were assisted from a good run game, Andrews was not.

[Narcosys]

Not always. Our leading rusher had 3 TDs and 437 rushing yards in 2009 and Andre still put up 1569 yards receiving. That was the year we went 9-7 and had our first winning record too.

Qwizboy he was talking about a good run game, not a bad one. Had you had a good run game in combo with that 1500 yds, you might have taken the division. That's the impact he's talking about.

[All_My_Posts_Are_Hyperbole]

Predicting such far in advance is pure folly. He's got a bigger marketing machine behind him (Griffin), but I have faith that Luck will be better. In the session in London, Luck talked openly about the read option, and did think it had a place in the game (wasn't a fad), but that it would become less of a weapon as DC's work on it more.....

 

I'd like to see Griffin with less gimmick plays to see how he does. He's still going to be a great player, but I'll stick with our man....

I think the list comes out before the beginning of next season...I don't think that makes it too far in advance. 

[Dustin]

He would have 3,019 yards and 18 TD's.

meanwhile RG3 had 3200 and 20 TD's.

Difference? RG3's yards were assisted from a good run game, Andrews was not.

 

Also, his INTs likely would have been down. Most of them (10 exactly) were on passes forced to Wayne.

[Vance]

He would have 3,019 yards and 18 TD's.

meanwhile RG3 had 3200 and 20 TD's.

Difference? RG3's yards were assisted from a good run game, Andrews was not.

 

But he threw the ball much more. More opportunities for yards.

[Dustin]

But he threw the ball much more. More opportunities for yards.

 

Luck targeted Reggie 213 times on 627 pass attempts.

 

627-213= 414 pass attempts.

 

3,019/414= 7.3 YPA

 

And if we take Reggie away then we have to take away the INTs he threw towards him as well (10)

 

18-10= 8

 

So his final stat line looks like:

 

233-424 (53% completion percentage) 18 TDs 8 INTs 3,019 yards at 7.3 YPA. 

 

So with no #1 receiver, no run game, no offensive line and no defense to take the pressure off, his passer rating jumps up by 7 points to 83.3.

[Truefan88]

Let's look back 20yrs from now and RG3 won't be on an all time 100 list and I bet Luck will be near the top for his longevity let Griffin have his early but quick fame.

[Narcosys]

But he threw the ball much more. More opportunities for yards.

Um ok? I don't understand what your getting at. That's beside the point. You asked to take away Wayne from luck like Morris from RG3. I have you the numbers of luck without Wayne and they were comparable to RG3. Like I said tho, lucks numbers were not aided by a superior run game.

[Narcosys]

Luck targeted Reggie 213 times on 627 pass attempts.

627-213= 414 pass attempts.

3,019/414= 7.3 YPA

And if we take Reggie away then we have to take away the INTs he threw towards him as well (10)

18-10= 8

So his final stat line looks like:

233-424 (53% completion percentage) 18 TDs 8 INTs 3,019 yards at 7.3 YPA.

So with no #1 receiver, no run game, no offensive line and no defense to take the pressure off, his passer rating jumps up by 7 points to 83.3.

Owned... Dude if I could double like. +1

[Qwiz]

Qwizboy he was talking about a good run game, not a bad one. Had you had a good run game in combo with that 1500 yds, you might have taken the division. That's the impact he's talking about.

Yeah, I understand what he was saying. I'm simply saying that it's possible to have a great receiver, a mediocre or horrible run game, and still have a legitimate shot at the playoffs. I know that having a run game is much preferred to go with those 1500 yards. That's obvious lol.

[Qwiz]

Luck targeted Reggie 213 times on 627 pass attempts.

 

627-213= 414 pass attempts.

 

3,019/414= 7.3 YPA

 

And if we take Reggie away then we have to take away the INTs he threw towards him as well (10)

 

18-10= 8

 

So his final stat line looks like:

 

233-424 (53% completion percentage) 18 TDs 8 INTs 3,019 yards at 7.3 YPA. 

 

So with no #1 receiver, no run game, no offensive line and no defense to take the pressure off, his passer rating jumps up by 7 points to 83.3.

Ah, but who's to say he doesn't force those balls in another direction or takes on the belief that another receiver will bail him out like he expected from Wayne in separate situations? I know we can only speak hypothetically with stats but I do believe that his INTs could have actually gone up as well. We could play both sides of the fence on this issue.

[Dustin]

Ah, but who's to say he doesn't force those balls in another direction or takes on the belief that another receiver will bail him out like he expected from Wayne? I know we can only speak hypothetically with stats but I do believe that his INTs could have actually gone up as well. We could play both sides of the fence on this issue.

 

Who's to say he doesn't throw more TDs because he's not always trying to force the ball to Reggie? When targeting Reggie his passer rating was 57.9. So while Reggie was awesome for us this year, Luck's desire to get the ball to him basically every play was a big reason why his passer rating was so low.

[Qwiz]

Who's to say he doesn't throw more TDs because he's not always trying to force the ball to Reggie? When targeting Reggie his passer rating was 57.9. So while Reggie was awesome for us this year, Luck's desire to get the ball to him basically every play was a big reason why his passer rating was so low.

Yeah I see what you mean. It definitely could have had a positive effect too. I suppose Hilton/Allen could have gotten more receptions as well, but it's all just guessing I suppose.

[BigMac]

This is a topic that analysts have talked about over the last few weeks and I cannot believe how many of them think that Luck will not. The way I see it, Luck started an ENTIRE season without injury and won more games than RG3 did last year. He also had more yards and TD passes along with all of the 4th quarter comebacks and game winning drives that he executed. Robert Griffin III had a better completion percentage, however, a big part of that is because he did not throw the ball nearly as much and when he did it was short high-percentage passes.The fact that RG3 won Offensive Rookie of the Year just shows you that the award is nothing but a big popularity contest. It is up to the players votes though. Id love to see what everyone else thinks

 

It wasn't a popularity contest. Luck had a terrible QB rating and RGIII was second in the entire NFL. I think both will improve a lot this year but I think RGIII will have the advantage.

[unitaswestand]

I have to say that the top 100 is a joke.  I realize it is rated my players and they play against the people.  But this is the "best players".   I love my boy Andrew Luck.  But are he and RG3 right now better than Eli Manning? Patrick Peterson?  Clay Matthews?  I wouldn't put them above those players.  And that is not a shot at Luck.   If you took players by position, Matthews and Peterson are arguably the best 2-3 at their position.  Luck is not one of the top 3 QBs in the league...YET.

[Valpo2004]

Yeah I see what you mean. It definitely could have had a positive effect too. I suppose Hilton/Allen could have gotten more receptions as well, but it's all just guessing I suppose.

 

There are so many if's about the idea of Luck without Reggie that it would be impossible to determine what would happen.  How would the defenses adjust their coverage.  Etc etc.

 

Same thing with having a running game and having an offensive line that isn't the 2nd worst in the NFL.  Also having a defense so he's not playing from behind a lot.

 

Anyways I guess we will know Thursday next week who's ahead of who.  But my guess is RG3 is placed ahead of Luck because it's still a popularity contest.

 

Quite frankly I'm surprised to see both of them go this high.  We're in the 20's now and either RG3 or Luck is going to be revealed there.  The other one it sounds like may be in the teens.  

 

I think people where just so blown away with both of them that they may have quite frankly over ranked them.  Not to say both of them don't deserve to be on the top 100.  But top 30 and top 20???  I'm not so sure.  

[Qwiz]

There are so many if's about the idea of Luck without Reggie that it would be impossible to determine what would happen.  How would the defenses adjust their coverage.  Etc etc.

 

Same thing with having a running game and having an offensive line that isn't the 2nd worst in the NFL.  Also having a defense so he's not playing from behind a lot.

 

Anyways I guess we will know Thursday next week who's ahead of who.  But my guess is RG3 is placed ahead of Luck because it's still a popularity contest.

 

Quite frankly I'm surprised to see both of them go this high.  We're in the 20's now and either RG3 or Luck is going to be revealed there.  The other one it sounds like may be in the teens.  

 

I think people where just so blown away with both of them that they may have quite frankly over ranked them.  Not to say both of them don't deserve to be on the top 100.  But top 30 and top 20???  I'm not so sure.  

Yep, I agree completely. These are two rookies who, though they did well, still have only had one season under their belt and who knows how well they perform from now on. A lot of more proven guys should be in these higher ranked spots. But hey, we all know the media loves their quarterbacks...especially these two. So I'm not too surprised that they're ranked this high.

[PMan Escape Plan]

who cares

[schwamm]

Looking forward to the always useful and soon to be released top 100 top 100 lists list... and the top 100 dumbest claims made in a top 100 list list... not to forget the top 100 common mistakes made in any published top 100 list list...

[Ohio Colt]

I'm late to the party and this is a lot of thread. What was luck ranked

[SeenSawConqured]

I have to say that the top 100 is a joke.  I realize it is rated my players and they play against the people.  But this is the "best players".   I love my boy Andrew Luck.  But are he and RG3 right now better than Eli Manning? Patrick Peterson?  Clay Matthews?  I wouldn't put them above those players.  And that is not a shot at Luck.   If you took players by position, Matthews and Peterson are arguably the best 2-3 at their position.  Luck is not one of the top 3 QBs in the league...YET.

 

Patrick Peterson is not top 2-3 at his position.  Not even close.

[BleedBlu8792]

Patrick Peterson is not top 2-3 at his position. Not even close.

Revis is the obvious #1 but I don't think you could go wrong with saying Peterson and Sherman are the next best. I'm having a hard time thinking of any corners league wide that I could put into that group. Peterson shut down A LOT of big time WR's last year, not to mention his contributions on ST's.

[Valpo2004]

Yep, I agree completely. These are two rookies who, though they did well, still have only had one season under their belt and who knows how well they perform from now on. A lot of more proven guys should be in these higher ranked spots. But hey, we all know the media loves their quarterbacks...especially these two. So I'm not too surprised that they're ranked this high.

 

That and both of them won double digit games.  And as I've said before, like it or not, fair or not, wins are considered a quarterback stat.

 

I wouldn't be surprised to see Joe Flacco up there because his team won the SB and he played so well in the playoffs.  

[Qwiz]

That and both of them won double digit games.  And as I've said before, like it or not, fair or not, wins are considered a quarterback stat.

 

I wouldn't be surprised to see Joe Flacco up there because his team won the SB and he played so well in the playoffs.  

Ugh...Joe Flacco...I think that he is going to come crashing down to earth and he is going to make the Ravens and the makers of this list look silly

[Valpo2004]

Ugh...Joe Flacco...I think that he is going to come crashing down to earth and he is going to make the Ravens and the makers of this list look silly

 

Yeah, it would not surprise me if the Ravens did not even make the playoffs this year.  I think they got decidedly worse this off season.  

[SeenSawConqured]

Revis is the obvious #1 but I don't think you could go wrong with saying Peterson and Sherman are the next best. I'm having a hard time thinking of any corners league wide that I could put into that group. Peterson shut down A LOT of big time WR's last year, not to mention his contributions on ST's.

 

You said top 2-3 at his position, that means that Peterson as a punt returner is not relevant to this discussion.  If you wanted to grade them as overall players, it would be a lot closer.  But comparing Peterson to Sherman at the CB position is laughable.  Sherman is a lot closer to Revis than Peterson is to Sherman. 

 

Take a look at some of the breakdown from last season.  This is an unbiased professional who studied the coaches film and did a CB breakdown based on what he saw.  Some really good analysis.

 

Sherman:

http://presnapreads.com/2013/05/16/richard-sherman-the-numbers-the-tape-the-verdict/

 

One word: Elite

 

 

Peterson:

http://presnapreads.com/2013/05/19/patrick-peterson-the-numbers-the-tape-the-verdict/#more-605

 

Looks like a scrub in comparison to Revis and Sherman. His tape seemed full of mistakes. Very surprised that he struggles to be physical at times. I thought the only receiever he struggled against was Crabtree, boy was I wrong.

[BleedBlu8792]

You said top 2-3 at his position, that means that Peterson as a punt returner is not relevant to this discussion. If you wanted to grade them as overall players, it would be a lot closer. But comparing Peterson to Sherman at the CB position is laughable. Sherman is a lot closer to Revis than Peterson is to Sherman.

Take a look at some of the breakdown from last season. This is an unbiased professional who studied the coaches film and did a CB breakdown based on what he saw. Some really good analysis.

Sherman:

http://presnapreads.com/2013/05/16/richard-sherman-the-numbers-the-tape-the-verdict/

One word: Elite

Peterson:

http://presnapreads.com/2013/05/19/patrick-peterson-the-numbers-the-tape-the-verdict/#more-605

Looks like a scrub in comparison to Revis and Sherman. His tape seemed full of mistakes. Very surprised that he struggles to be physical at times. I thought the only receiever he struggled against was Crabtree, boy was I wrong.

Yep, I stand corrected about Peterson.

From that read on him, it sounds like he's too generous in his coverage and doesn't have confidence in his ability. The potential is there, but isn't any good if he doesn't use it. Thanks for those articles.