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

[amfootball]

What they should do is only poll the defensive players on the QBs. They will let you know who they think is not only better but harder to defend.

[AntonMcG]

Nailed it.  You can't project how Griffin would do in Luck's scheme last year but so long as he stays in our scheme you could reasonably expect to remain at ~65% on completions even if he threw 600+ times.  Because math.

 

 

I don't think that extra sixth of a second is terribly meaningful in a comparison between the two players, especially considering how Griffin was particularly inclined to use his legs to buy time in the face of a pass rush.  Both guys need to improve on their reads.  Griffin may have tended to hold onto the ball longer than was advisable but he also made substantially less mistakes throwing the football than Luck.

 

Neither player will become elite if they don't clean up their flaws over the next couple of seasons.

 

 

Throwing volume doesn't change anything unless you assume that the increase in volume comes with a radical alteration of how the offense works, which is not something you can project with any small degree of accuracy.  In other words, it's absolutely pointless to say that Griffin would have the same % as Luck in that Colts scheme because you have absolutely no way of knowing whatsoever.  Griffin's numbers might have dropped or he might STILL have completed more passes with less interceptions were he placed in Luck's shoes.

 

I'll concede that if that's truly what was being argued then my point about the math may not have been terribly relevant.  However, those kinds of "what if" scenarios are pretty useless in the grand scheme of things.

 

Well they're not if you use any degree of logic. Running games and play-action are designed to help make throws easier, a higher throwing volume means less running game, and less integrity in play-action.

[MikeVander]

1. Lost? It should be fumbles period.

You really don't think fumbles lost is a bigger deal than fumbles in general? A fumble that you recover could just be interpreted as a sack or a run loss, but a fumble loss is directly turning the ball over. 

 

Much bigger deal in football. 

[Dustin]

You really don't think fumbles lost is a bigger deal than fumbles in general? A fumble that you recover could just be interpreted as a sack or a run loss, but a fumble loss is directly turning the ball over.

Much bigger deal in football.

Ok, but the QBs have basically no effect on if it's recovered or not.

[House]

You really don't think fumbles lost is a bigger deal than fumbles in general? A fumble that you recover could just be interpreted as a sack or a run loss, but a fumble loss is directly turning the ball over.

Much bigger deal in football.

No because there is no skill to fumbles lost, and recovered. It's sheer luck.

Griffin fumbles, the ball is grabbed by his teammate, and scored for a Redskin touchdown. What does this tell us about Griffin? Nothing. He was fortunate, that's all.

Putting the ball on the turf, recovered or lost, is always a no no.

[Nobody]

Ok, but the QBs have basically no effect on if it's recovered or not.

No because there is no skill to fumbles lost, and recovered. It's sheer luck.

Griffin fumbles, the ball is grabbed by his teammate, and scored for a Redskin touchdown. What does this tell us about Griffin? Nothing. He was fortunate, that's all.

Putting the ball on the turf, recovered or lost, is always a no no.

Exactly, thank you.

[Qwiz]

Well let's just settle this by saying that both QBs fumbled a lot and they should both take the right steps to prevent such high numbers from happening again. Sounds good to me lol.

[aceinthehouse]

I think you can make a case for EITHER Luck or RG3 being a head of one another.

For all the arguments Luck has, RG3 has them as well.

 

RG3 helped lead the Redskins to 4th in the NFL in pts scored & NFC East Division title(27.2)

RG3 had 7 combined turnovers (5 INT's & 2 lost fumbles)

67% completion rate & 102+ QB rating

and on & on

 

Lets just wait to see who steps up, in their Sophomore season.

Should be interesting.

[MikeVander]

Ok, but the QBs have basically no effect on if it's recovered or not.

QBs can recover fumbles as well.

 

 

Griffin fumbles, the ball is grabbed by his teammate, and scored for a Redskin touchdown. 

I don't think that situation is a fumble lost. I think that's a fumble recovered. What I was speaking to specifically was if the fumble results in a turnover. 

 

Putting the ball on the turf, recovered or lost, is always a no no.

Well, duh. I'm not sure what you're trying to say? Everyone knows QBs should try to avoid fumbling at all.

[House]

QBs can recover fumbles as well.

I don't think that situation is a fumble lost. I think that's a fumble recovered. What I was speaking to specifically was if the fumble results in a turnover.

Well, duh. I'm not sure what you're trying to say? Everyone knows QBs should try to avoid fumbling at all.

Whoosh

[NewColtsFan]

Well....   for what it's worth,  60-51 just aired and the first of the class of 2012 was just named....

 

Seattle's Russell Wilson was 51st.

 

Still to come,  Luck and RG3....

 

Others too, of course,  but was offering context for those 3....

[CrazyCaliColtFan]

I think Wilson is very under rated... but seeing how the media has always played homerism games it doesn't surprise me. Proof is on the field I spose

[MikeVander]

Whoosh

, good point about quarterbacks fumbling is a "no no". You should be an NFL analyst, honestly.

 

Whooooshhh.

[House]

, good point about quarterbacks fumbling is a "no no". You should be an NFL analyst, honestly.

Whooooshhh.

The fact that you missed the whole point of my post, and were oh so clever in your response just compounds why I said "whoosh" in the first place.

Your trying to make the distinction that a fumble lost is soooo much worse than a fumble recovered.

I then presented you with the fact that the only thing separating the two is sheer luck. Then posed the question about the scenario RG3 found himself in, and it went completely over your head as well.

In game a fumble lost is horrible, no doubt about it. But when coaches and trainers look on tape they don't make the distinction that a fumble recovered is somehow a good thing. It is a fortunate thing, but needs to be corrected nonetheless. Thus a fumble lost and a fumble recovered, is still a "no no."

There's no such thing as a good fumble. Period.

Hopefully this tediously explained post helps clarify for you.

[MikeVander]

Your trying to make the distinction that a fumble lost is soooo much worse than a fumble recovered.

I then presented you with the fact that the only thing separating the two is sheer luck. Then posed the question about the scenario RG3 found himself in, and it went completely over your head as well.

A fumble lost is much worse than a fumble recovered. One is a turnover, that is when the other team gets the ball, and the other can count as a loss of yards.

Basically: Your team wants to have the ball, and you don't want the other team to have it. So you see, a fumble lost is much worse than a fumble recovered.

 

It doesn't appear to apply to luck, either. In looking at the numbers, RG3 fumbled 12 times and lost only 2. Andrew Luck fumbled 10 times and lost 5. (I will need to explain the math to you)

 

The Redskins have a 6:1 ratio on fumbles recovered to lost; the Colts have a 2:1 ratio on fumbles recovered to lost. 6 is a bigger number than 2. Large differences between the ratios show that luck isn't entirely involved, and there is something The Redskins are doing.

 

I hope this helps explains better.

[trueblueblood]

Well, at least luck will be ranked higher than Wilson... If anyone cares.

http://www.nfl.com/top100/2013

[Valpo2004]

Well....   for what it's worth,  60-51 just aired and the first of the class of 2012 was just named....

 

Seattle's Russell Wilson was 51st.

 

Still to come,  Luck and RG3....

 

Others too, of course,  but was offering context for those 3....

 

Quite frankly, presuming Luck is on the top 100 I'm surprised he outranked Wilson.  

 

I'm not sure what happened exactly, if people just went back and started actually watching Luck play but it seems like a bandwagon has formed on Luck now.  Because during the season all we kept hearing was how Luck was ok but Wilson and RG3 where better.  

 

Now people wouldn't want RG3 on their team because surprise surprise running out in the open all the time isn't good for a QB's long term health.  

 

But I'm not sure why they got off of Wilson.  Maybe they started watching and realized what a insane bunch of all stars Wilson is surrounded by.  

 

I still expect RG3 to be higher though, it's a popularity contest in the end and RG3 is going to win popularity contests through superior charisma

[House]

A fumble lost is much worse than a fumble recovered. One is a turnover, that is when the other team gets the ball, and the other can count as a loss of yards.

Basically: Your team wants to have the ball, and you don't want the other team to have it. So you see, a fumble lost is much worse than a fumble recovered.

It doesn't appear to apply to luck, either. In looking at the numbers, RG3 fumbled 12 times and lost only 2. Andrew Luck fumbled 10 times and lost 5. (I will need to explain the math to you)

The Redskins have a 6:1 ratio on fumbles recovered to lost; the Colts have a 2:1 ratio on fumbles recovered to lost. 6 is a bigger number than 2. Large differences between the ratios show that luck isn't entirely involved, and there is something The Redskins are doing.

I hope this helps explains better.

Again totally missing my point. In game yes it is always worse to lose a fumble. But after the game you don't get bonus points when coaches are going over the film because the fumble was recovered. They will look at both the exact same way. As a mistake that needs to be corrected. RG3 doesn't get praise in the film room and in practice because he fumbled a ball and his teammate just happened to be the guy it bounced towards.

You can teach proper technique for falling on a ball, and all kinds of stuff, but ultimately it comes down to who's lucky enough to have the ball when the action stops. How much skill is involved at the bottom of a scrum? Let me answer that for you. Not much.

Recovered or lost also says extremely little about the QBs themselves, but you also seem unwilling to understand that as well. Fumbles are fumbles regardless of the end result. I also like how in your mind you can't get lucky 10 time out of 12, but that it a whole nother issue.

However it appears your more concerned about being clever (I will have to explain cleverness to you) than actually comprehending how fumbles, recovered or lost, are viewed by coaches, and why 12 fumbles is worse than 10, recovered or lost.

[SilentHill]

Quite frankly, presuming Luck is on the top 100 I'm surprised he outranked Wilson.  

 

I'm not sure what happened exactly, if people just went back and started actually watching Luck play but it seems like a bandwagon has formed on Luck now.  Because during the season all we kept hearing was how Luck was ok but Wilson and RG3 where better.  

 

Now people wouldn't want RG3 on their team because surprise surprise running out in the open all the time isn't good for a QB's long term health.  

 

But I'm not sure why they got off of Wilson.  Maybe they started watching and realized what a insane bunch of all stars Wilson is surrounded by.  

 

I still expect RG3 to be higher though, it's a popularity contest in the end and RG3 is going to win popularity contests through superior charisma

 

Luck did more with less than any other rookie QB. That is a fact, and that is why he should be ranked at the top of them.

[Valpo2004]

Luck did more with less than any other rookie QB. That is a fact, and that is why he should be ranked at the top of them.

 

I agree, but getting people outside of the Colt's fan base to recognize that was a struggle last year.  

[aceinthehouse]

I think Luck will be around 40ish...(40-49)

 

I think RG3 will be around 20ish...(20-29)

[emac]

I think Luck should be higher than RGIII. Take Alfred Morris away from RGIII it's a different situation. With that said Luck put up better numbers than RGIII (except interceptions - but threw more passes) last season. Everyone is on the Kaepernick, Wilson and RGIII bandwagon.....at the end of the day it will be Luck and Wilson to succeed.

[BleedBlu8792]

I think Luck should be higher than RGIII. Take Alfred Morris away from RGIII it's a different situation. With that said Luck put up better numbers than RGIII (except interceptions - but threw more passes) last season. Everyone is on the Kaepernick, Wilson and RGIII bandwagon.....at the end of the day it will be Luck and Wilson to succeed.

Ballard would have done the same in that offense. That scheme with Shanahan is a RB's dream.

[goodCOLTSwin]

Luck is bound to be. The combination of his talent and savvy, rapport with coaching staff, multiple weapons at WR, TE, and RB, much improved offensive line and more aggressive defense will leave him having an even higher perception with the press and sportscasters.

 

Would like to ask all Colts fans to be aware that former Colts great during the 70's, Bubba Smith #78, passed away this week.  I was a big fan as a kid and recall his being compared to Big Daddy Lipscomb. He later starred in Police Academy films. Think good thoughts for him and his family. Do Good.

[SeenSawConqured]

For all the talk about fumbles vs. fumbles lost, we should also take a look at interceptions dropped.  Luck led the league in dropped interceptions last year, and was very fortunate he did not set the intercepion record for a rookie.

 

http://www.footballoutsiders.com/stat-analysis/2013/adjusted-interceptions-2012

[Malakai432]

Lol this is like comparing a BMW to an Audi, they both make incredible cars.

[House]

Lol this is like comparing a BMW to an Audi, they both make incredible cars.

Lame.

Pick a side and start fighting or get off the Internet.

[Jules]

Lame.

Pick a side and start fighting or get off the Internet.

 

You know when you really think about it....human beings love to argue, to fight.

[All_My_Posts_Are_Hyperbole]

Luck probably won't rank better than RGIII. RGIII is the sexy pick. Unfortunately, unless RGIII takes a serious step back with his game or Luck wins more Lombardi Trophies people will put him ahead of Luck for his whole career. See Tom Brady and Peyton Manning.

[braveheartcolt]

Luck probably won't rank better than RGIII. RGIII is the sexy pick. Unfortunately, unless RGIII takes a serious step back with his game or Luck wins more Lombardi Trophies people will put him ahead of Luck for his whole career. See Tom Brady and Peyton Manning.

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....

[NewColtsFan]

For what little it's worth, and I know this is not the players who voted on the NFLN's top-100....

 

But....

 

Over on NFL.com,  there is a poll asking viewers who they think will be the top QB under 25....

 

And the fans have voted, and the last I looked Luck was the leader with 32 percent...

 

Frankly, I was surprised that more fans picked Luck than anyone else.   Thought it would be RG3...

 

All I'm saying is the fans appear to be coming around...  perhaps the players are too....    that's my hunch....

[Crunked]

To me, this stuff is like power rankings......who cares who has the most power.....who cares who fans or media think is the top 100 players.......Give me a voted by peers poll.....then you have my interest....walks out singing....."you remind me of a man (what man?) Oh the man with the power (what power?) Oh the power of voodoo (Who do?, Who do? ) Who do what?

[Malakai432]

Lame.

Pick a side and start fighting or get off the Internet.

Ack if you force me to choose, I'll join the Decepticons.

[Qwiz]

Ack if you force me to choose, I'll join the Decepticons.

[LockeDown]

As long as Griffins best weapon is Garçon, then Luck should overtake Griffin in the publics eye this coming season. The Redskins virtually had no draft this go round and the Colts were major players. Add Griffins injury and the fact that he wasn't asked to read defenses as much and be a pocket passer also helps Luck. You are going to see some media gurus jump off the Griffin bandwagon and on to Lucks. That's my guess anyway.

[Vance]

I think Luck should be higher than RGIII. Take Alfred Morris away from RGIII it's a different situation. With that said Luck put up better numbers than RGIII (except interceptions - but threw more passes) last season. Everyone is on the Kaepernick, Wilson and RGIII bandwagon.....at the end of the day it will be Luck and Wilson to succeed.

 

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

[Stephen]

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

 

^{wont be long before that happens I think he'll actually do just as good being that ty Hilton is his main scorer}

[GoColts8818]

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

teams did that late in the year Luck still put up good numbers. Also funny till last year the argument was Reggie was just a product of Manning and Marvin now he's why Luck had a good rookie year, funny how people spin things to try to make a point. When Garçon was out hurt the Redskins struggled to move the ball especially passing. So no question he had an impact on the Redskins success on offense. With that said good QBs and good WRs good hand-and-hand very rarely does one excel at the top of his game without the other.

[House]

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

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.

[Qwiz]

teams did that late in the year Luck still put up good numbers. Also funny till last year the argument was Reggie was just a product of Manning and Marvin now he's why Luck had a good rookie year, funny how people spin things to try to make a point. When Garçon was out hurt the Redskins struggled to move the ball especially passing. So no question he had an impact on the RedsTkins success on offense. With that said good QBs and good WRs good hand-and-hand very rarely does one excel at the top of his game without the other.

One of Griffin's best games, against the Eagles(the first game) when Griff posted a 93% completion percentage, Garcon had a whopping 5 yards on 3 receptions for zero touchdowns. Garcon only caught a fifth of the TDs that Griffin threw as well, so I don't think he is the guy a lot of people make him out to be. He was a great asset when he was playing but Griffin still put up a lot of yards without him. I say if you take away any QBs weapons or best weapon then of course he won't perform as well, but the good ones make do. One could argue that Griffin's best weapon was his running game which he contributed greatly to himself and one could also say that 12's best weapon was Wayne. I think it's a good comparison.