Is Andrew Luck Really That More Talented Then Matt Barkley?

[noah larson]

Just watching the games, i'm just as much impressed with Barkley then Luck. I see Barkley making really tough throws all over the field with great accuracy. He wasn't helped that much in last weeks game with all the drops that his recievers had but i'm actually seeing a higher upside with him then Luck. I base that off it seems like he has a little more zip to his passes then Luck. I'm no expert at evaluating talent but i would like to hear some of your opinions this!!

[J@son]

Strap in folks.....this is gonna be a bumpy ride.

Seriously though, Barkley's biggest problem from what I've seen of him is a tendency to focus on Robert Woods and throw to him even when he's not open. Personally, I think a lot of the Luck hype is carried over from last year. Last year he was a phenom because, as a sophomore, he was playing well beyond his years. However since then, I do think the talent gap has closed at least somewhat and that the talent differential isn't as large a margin as they hype would have many to believe. But that's just my Average Joe, casual fan observation.

[doogansquest]

Jason's right in that we are just average fans making observations.

I don't think there's a big difference between them. Barkley has certainly closed the gap. Last year, it was no question who was more talented. Luck was ready to play in the NFL, Barkley was not. Now I think they both can do well.

Luck may have peaked early, too, for all we know. Not a lot has changed in his game. He also has the best offensive line in college football, along with a pretty good defense, and a powerful ground game behind him. Barkley has a team with NCAA restrictions on scholarships, player and post-season eligibility, etc.

[jskinnz]

I am not a NFL scout nor did I stay in a Holiday Inn Express last night (why would you?) and I have only seen Luck play a few times on TV. But there is enough buzz about the guy from people in the know (scouts and GM's) that suggests that he is better than Barkley and by a healthy margin. Urban Meyer talked about him on the Dakich show and raved about his leadership. So not only does he appear to be a solid passer but he is a great athlete and the type of guy you want leading your team. There is a reason he is said to be the best QB prospect since Elway.

[noah larson]

I just think if the Colts decided that they were taking a QB with their first pick no matter what that, i would prefer to trade back to the 5-10 spot and take Barkley. Even though Luck will be ready to start sooner then Barkley, Peyton will be back and we won't need him too. Moving back like that would save us roughly 2-3 million a year on our back up QB and a couple more picks to improve our seconday.

Edited November 3, 2011 by noah larson

[pacolts56]

I am not a NFL scout nor did I stay in a Holiday Inn Express last night (why would you?) and I have only seen Luck play a few times on TV. But there is enough buzz about the guy from people in the know (scouts and GM's) that suggests that he is better than Barkley and by a healthy margin. Urban Meyer talked about him on the Dakich show and raved about his leadership. So not only does he appear to be a solid passer but he is a great athlete and the type of guy you want leading your team. There is a reason he is said to be the best QB prospect since Elway.

There it is right there.

We're all entitled to our opinions, and it's one thing to have a zillion draft websites proclaiming a guy the 1st overall pick six months before Draft Day.

But when coaches, scouts and GMs do so it adds credibility to the players status.

Not that those folks can't be wrong about it....but there is so much consensus around Luck that its hard to ignore.

[doogansquest]

There it is right there.

We're all entitled to our opinions, and it's one thing to have a zillion draft websites proclaiming a guy the 1st overall pick six months before Draft Day.

But when coaches, scouts and GMs do so it adds credibility to the players status.

Not that those folks can't be wrong about it....but there is so much consensus around Luck that its hard to ignore.

It does had to the credibility, or safety of the pick. But the question was whether or not he's THAT much better than Barkley. Given that the buzz began before the credence, Luck hasn't progressed much from last year when people expected him to declare. Barkley wasn't even considered an NFL-worthy prospect by many "experts" after the 2010 season. Now, he's jumping into a lot of top 5's. He's progressed a ton, and could play another year in college. The buzz wasn't there for Barkley a year ago, but if it weren't for Luck getting a season's head start on the media acclaim, Barkley would probably be considered for the top overall pick this year.

Polian also nailed it on the head on his talk show when he outlined, in explicit detail, the exact phraseology and buzz surrounding Ryan Leaf. While many draw upon that comparison, weakly, to suggest we not take Luck, I prefer not to. But it can't be ignored that nearly 100% of the "experts" had him as a more NFL-ready prospect than Manning, with better mechanics, leadership qualities, team player attitude, and a stronger arm.

I doubt Luck will end up like Leaf, but this sort of hype around a player isn't unheard of. He's just had it going for over a year. Reggie Bush had far more hype around him, and he was a situational, though undersized athlete in a position that no one values that highly anymore.

[BmoreColt]

In my humble opinion, Luck is over rated. Much like Tebow, players, coaches, scouts, etc. all are falling in love with the intangibles and attributes that this guy brings to the table and not the raw talent. Yeah he is a good leader, with strong physical attributes: however, Luck has below average arm strength, as I have seen time and time again. His completion percentage is largely attributed to the 3 TE sets that Stanford runs out of, since they play smash mouth football! He does not fit many passing systems in the NFL, he is more of a game manager and fits what Harbaugh is doing with Alex Smith San Francisco, managing the game and playing smash mouth football, obviously a very similar system to what he coach at Stanford!

[pacolts56]

It does had to the credibility, or safety of the pick. But the question was whether or not he's THAT much better than Barkley. Given that the buzz began before the credence, Luck hasn't progressed much from last year when people expected him to declare. Barkley wasn't even considered an NFL-worthy prospect by many "experts" after the 2010 season. Now, he's jumping into a lot of top 5's. He's progressed a ton, and could play another year in college. The buzz wasn't there for Barkley a year ago, but if it weren't for Luck getting a season's head start on the media acclaim, Barkley would probably be considered for the top overall pick this year.

Polian also nailed it on the head on his talk show when he outlined, in explicit detail, the exact phraseology and buzz surrounding Ryan Leaf. While many draw upon that comparison, weakly, to suggest we not take Luck, I prefer not to. But it can't be ignored that nearly 100% of the "experts" had him as a more NFL-ready prospect than Manning, with better mechanics, leadership qualities, team player attitude, and a stronger arm.

I doubt Luck will end up like Leaf, but this sort of hype around a player isn't unheard of. He's just had it going for over a year. Reggie Bush had far more hype around him, and he was a situational, though undersized athlete in a position that no one values that highly anymore.

I don't think Barkley was draft eligible last year, was he? He's a true junior this year.

That might explain some measure of the greater hype around Luck...who redshirted a season.

[pacolts56]

In my humble opinion, Luck is over rated. Much like Tebow, players, coaches, scouts, etc. all are falling in love with the intangibles and attributes that this guy brings to the table and not the raw talent. Yeah he is a good leader, with strong physical attributes: however, Luck has below average arm strength, as I have seen time and time again. His completion percentage is largely attributed to the 3 TE sets that Stanford runs out of, since they play smash mouth football! He does not fit many passing systems in the NFL, he is more of a game manager and fits what Harbaugh is doing with Alex Smith San Francisco, managing the game and playing smash mouth football, obviously a very similar system to what he coach at Stanford!

This year yes.....last season absolutely not. Luck's primary receivers were his WRs.

As for his arm strength he flicked the ball 60 yards in the air against USC last week....and here is a 45 yd pass to his WR, Seattle rookie Doug Baldwin.

http://youtu.be/tBz2ZOTXlKg

Edited November 3, 2011 by pacolts56

[J@son]

This year yes.....last season absolutely not. Luck's primary receivers were his WRs.

As for his arm strength he flicked the ball 60 yards in the air against USC last week....and here is a 45 yd pass to his WR, Seattle rookie Doug Baldwin.

I have no doubt I'm going to get all kinds of flack for this, but that pass was underthrown. Is that because the 42 yard pass was stretching the limits of his arm strength? Is it because he underestimated Baldwin's speed? Maybe he threw the ball a little quicker than he wanted because he wasn't sure the LB coming on a read-blitz would be picked up.

I do disagree with "below average" arm strength but I wouldn't give him much more than above average to good arm strength either. It's certainly more than enough for him to be successful in the NFL though so not something you'd worry about unless you're looking for Bledsoe or Russell type arm strength.

My question is can he consistently deliver the ball into the correct spot on pro-style timing routes with timing and accuracy. Throwing the ball to where you're anticipating the receiver to be against zone coverage is much more difficult than throwing to a WR or TE who has beaten man coverage on a Post, Go or Corner route. This is one area where I do think Foles is more proven than Luck (awaits further flack). This is not through any fault of Luck's but when your team runs the ball as well as Stanford does, he's going to be throwing more often than not against man coverage because teams are stacking up to stop the run. Arizona lacks the consistent running game that Stanford has, and what running game they do have comes after the pass has been established. So Foles, more often than not, is facing teams who are playing pass-first instead of run-first like Stanford typically sees.

[pacolts56]

I have no doubt I'm going to get all kinds of flack for this, but that pass was underthrown. Is that because the 42 yard pass was stretching the limits of his arm strength? Is it because he underestimated Baldwin's speed? Maybe he threw the ball a little quicker than he wanted because he wasn't sure the LB coming on a read-blitz would be picked up.

I do disagree with "below average" arm strength but I wouldn't give him much more than above average to good arm strength either. It's certainly more than enough for him to be successful in the NFL though so not something you'd worry about unless you're looking for Bledsoe or Russell type arm strength.

My question is can he consistently deliver the ball into the correct spot on pro-style timing routes with timing and accuracy. Throwing the ball to where you're anticipating the receiver to be against zone coverage is much more difficult than throwing to a WR or TE who has beaten man coverage on a Post, Go or Corner route. This is one area where I do think Foles is more proven than Luck (awaits further flack). This is not through any fault of Luck's but when your team runs the ball as well as Stanford does, he's going to be throwing more often than not against man coverage because teams are stacking up to stop the run. Arizona lacks the consistent running game that Stanford has, and what running game they do have comes after the pass has been established. So Foles, more often than not, is facing teams who are playing pass-first instead of run-first like Stanford typically sees.

No flack Jason.....but all I can say at this point is let's wait and see how these guys pan out.

No amount of video, expert (former scouts/GMs) opinions, cherry-picked stats or otherwise will change alot of minds about Andrew Luck or the rest of this QB crop. Their performance as an NFL QBs will....for better or worse.

But we WILL need a QB in 4 years or less, probably less. I just hope they don't screw it up.

[J@son]

http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2011/11/02/phil-simms-not-sold-on-andrew-luck/related/

Just for consideration.

an excerpt,

“But the one thing I don’t see, I just don’t see big time NFL throws. I don’t care what anybody says. I’ve watched a lot of him. He never takes it and rips it in there.

[noah larson]

http://profootballta...w-luck/related/

Just for consideration.

an excerpt,

That's the exact same thing that i see from Luck, he has really good touch passes but haven't seen him put that zip on the ball. In the NFL you're going to have to rifle that ball into your reciever sometimes. Maybe he does have that ability but i havent seen it in the hanful of games i watched. I am in no way a Luck hater, i just think Barkley is a lot closer to him then most people realize.

[GoGoColts]

I am a little concerned about luck because of all the hype surrounding him. Once the ESPN hype machine starts on somebody, you hear all of these analyses coming from every direction, but because of laziness or lack of knowledge, most of the myriad of analyses are based on one or two truly expert opinions which are just as flawed as anything.

This is the kind of hype that surrounded Reggie Bush. There is a Polian on staff at Stanford so we are getting some inside information so if we decided to draft and not trade him, he will be what he is cracked up to be.

[husker61]

for everyone saying you have to "zip the ball in there", when is the last time manning "zipped the ball in there"? it's a good thing the colts weren't in the arm strength camp when they drafted manning, because they would have ended up with ryan leaf. a big time arm is not a necessity in the nfl. in fact, how many college qb's hide weaknesses in their game with a big arm, only to flop in the nfl.

[chad72]

Let us not forget Polian did bring Mark Sanchez in for a tryout during the 2009 draft year, the only first round QB he brought in that year.

So we at least know that he does have good regard for the Pro style system that USC runs. He may very well pull the trigger on Matt Barkley if we are picking No.2 if he has him rated highly.

Edited November 3, 2011 by chad72

[J@son]

Let us not forget Polian did bring Mark Sanchez in for a tryout during the 2009 draft year, the only first round QB he brought in that year.

So we at least know that he does have good regard for the Pro style system that USC runs. He may very well pull the trigger on Matt Barkley if we are picking No.2 if he has him rated highly.

Last year he scouted Andy Dalton and Colin Kaepernick. Any idea what type of offenses they ran at TCU and Nevada respectively?

[JoKeR]

From what I've heard Luck isn't the hardest thrower or the most athletic of the Qbs but can put zip on the ball and is very athletic. Along with that hes makes the best decisions and is extremely accurate. He can also change his throws on the fly from a over armed or side armed if needed. Extremely accurate thrower when running even.

Barkley is a good QB with a strong arm who's athletic as well. He doesn't have the quite the raw talent that Luck has and intangibles like decision making and leadership are not on the same level.

Luck is the total package, the others are missing something that he has.

[chad72]

Last year he scouted Andy Dalton and Colin Kaepernick. Any idea what type of offenses they ran at TCU and Nevada respectively?

Yes, they were both slotted as 2nd round QBs and the Colts were doing their due diligence on them as value picks for round 2, should they fall. They didn't fall when the Colts picked. I think Sanchez's case was different since the Colts did not work out Freeman, the other QB that went in that first round that year. So, they must have felt his potential was higher. and he was a better fit.

TCU does have Pro style formations, so Andy Dalton must have been higher on their list, plus he was a senior QB too -

http://ncaastrategie...yles-pro-style/

Colin Kaepernick, hard to explain, just like the Colts attended Nate Davis' Pro day . Nevada runs a pistol offense (http://en.wikipedia....erican_football)- one of the few teams that runs it. Kaepernick participated in that QB camp of Eli and Peyton's and the word was he raised a lot of eyebrows with his athleticism and potential as a raw product. It could very well be that the Colts just decided to check him out to see if the raw potential could be polished, who knows!!!

Of course, we are all speculating as to why they did this and did that , that is not hard to see .

Edited November 3, 2011 by chad72

[noah larson]

for everyone saying you have to "zip the ball in there", when is the last time manning "zipped the ball in there"? it's a good thing the colts weren't in the arm strength camp when they drafted manning, because they would have ended up with ryan leaf. a big time arm is not a necessity in the nfl. in fact, how many college qb's hide weaknesses in their game with a big arm, only to flop in the nfl.

He use to have a really strong arm but has lost some of it the last 2 to 3 years. Which will happen to anybody that has as many pass attemps as he has. I also noticed that he's a little slower on his play action, he use to get 7 yards of space before the defensive end could even take two steps. It's to bad that he doesn't have the arm strength and quickness he use to becuase he is mentally far ahead of where he was at 10 years ago.

[Flash7]

Here's a visual comparison of Luck and Barkley. I don't think that you can go wrong with either. By the way, there's plenty of evidence on here that Luck can zip the ball, as well as Barkley.

[noah larson]

Here's a visual comparison of Luck and Barkley. I don't think that you can go wrong with either. By the way, there's plenty of evidence on here that Luck can zip the ball, as well as Barkley.

Thanks for the videos the throw Luck made at 1:13 did seem like to have a lot of zip on it.

[husker61]

He use to have a really strong arm but has lost some of it the last 2 to 3 years. Which will happen to anybody that has as many pass attemps as he has. I also noticed that he's a little slower on his play action, he use to get 7 yards of space before the defensive end could even take two steps. It's to bad that he doesn't have the arm strength and quickness he use to becuase he is mentally far ahead of where he was at 10 years ago.

the first time i read your post i thought you were talking about luck.

Edited November 4, 2011 by husker61

[hnrbacha]

The answer is NO!! all of the andrew luck hype carried over from last season. i'll give him the credit for an awesome junior year, but turning down the draft has led into a relatively mediocre senior year. Matt Barkley would fit well in the colts system. In college, he targets one reciever (Robert Woods). But the col.ts have several threats: clark, wayne, garcon. While luck is more talented, the colts would be better of drafting barkley in the second round, and getting some better secondary coverage in round 1.

[Flash7]

The answer is NO!! all of the andrew luck hype carried over from last season. i'll give him the credit for an awesome junior year, but turning down the draft has led into a relatively mediocre senior year. Matt Barkley would fit well in the colts system. In college, he targets one reciever (Robert Woods). But the col.ts have several threats: clark, wayne, garcon. While luck is more talented, the colts would be better of drafting barkley in the second round, and getting some better secondary coverage in round 1.

Sorry, but so far he's having a better year than last year.

Andrew Luck Stats

CMP ATT PCT YDS AVG TD LNG INT RAT 2011

• STAN
  

174 242 71.9 2218 9.2 23 62 4 176.9

• STAN
  

263 372 70.7 3338 9.0 32 81 8 170.2

• STAN
  

162 288 56.3 2575 8.9 13 63 4 143.5

Edited November 4, 2011 by Flash777

[noah larson]

the first time i read your post i thought you were talking about luck.

lol

[chad72]

One thing is for sure. Just like Cam Newton and all the highly touted QBs coming out of college going in round 1 and being the No.1 pick (just like Peyton), people are going to hype him up so much and then look for every opportunity to see Andrew Luck fail.

[super8todd]

Jason's right in that we are just average fans making observations.

I don't think there's a big difference between them. Barkley has certainly closed the gap. Last year, it was no question who was more talented. Luck was ready to play in the NFL, Barkley was not. Now I think they both can do well.

Luck may have peaked early, too, for all we know. Not a lot has changed in his game. He also has the best offensive line in college football, along with a pretty good defense, and a powerful ground game behind him. Barkley has a team with NCAA restrictions on scholarships, player and post-season eligibility, etc.

True that we are all just fans with opinions.. But the expert NFL scouts say yes, Luck is that much better.

[Ramblinwreck7]

I am not a NFL scout nor did I stay in a Holiday Inn Express last night (why would you?) and I have only seen Luck play a few times on TV. But there is enough buzz about the guy from people in the know (scouts and GM's) that suggests that he is better than Barkley and by a healthy margin. Urban Meyer talked about him on the Dakich show and raved about his leadership. So not only does he appear to be a solid passer but he is a great athlete and the type of guy you want leading your team. There is a reason he is said to be the best QB prospect since Elway.

Tim Tebow is a better leader in my opinion.

[Ramblinwreck7]

Here's a visual comparison of Luck and Barkley. I don't think that you can go wrong with either. By the way, there's plenty of evidence on here that Luck can zip the ball, as well as Barkley.

The one thing I noticed was the Andrew Luck got 10 minutes to throw every ball from his O-line... He won't even get close to having the much time in the NFL. Plus, most of the passes that I could see from the beginning of the snap were play action, I stopped watching at 3:13 though.

And Matt Barkley throws off his back foot WAYYY to much. Maybe I'm wrong, but I thought you were supposed to step into your throws.

Edited November 8, 2011 by Ramblinwreck7

[oldunclemark]

I just think if the Colts decided that they were taking a QB with their first pick no matter what that, i would prefer to trade back to the 5-10 spot and take Barkley. Even though Luck will be ready to start sooner then Barkley, Peyton will be back and we won't need him too. Moving back like that would save us roughly 2-3 million a year on our back up QB and a couple more picks to improve our seconday.

This man is making sense

[Ramblinwreck7]

Anyways, we still don't need a quarterback.

Edited November 8, 2011 by Ramblinwreck7

[super8todd]

Anyways, we still don't need a quarterback.

Yes we do. Ours isn't able to play... It would be a Ramblinwreck to expect Manning to pull our rebuilding Colts team to 8-8 for another 2 years and accomplish nothing for anyone. Time to rebuild is now. We owe Manning a favor to get him to a competitive team for his remaining 2-3 years so he can at least get another ring.

[Ramblinwreck7]

Yes we do. Ours isn't able to play... It would be a Ramblinwreck to expect Manning to pull our rebuilding Colts team to 8-8 for another 2 years and accomplish nothing for anyone. Time to rebuild is now. We owe Manning a favor to get him to a competitive team for his remaining 2-3 years so he can at least get another ring.

No your just straight wrong. We owe it to Manning to load this team with talent to make us elite the next few years so that we can win a few more Super Bowls for him. Go rebuild a team that needs it. You Luck lovers act like all of the players that we will draft will disappear once Manning retires... we don't need a quarterback.

[J@son]

No your just straight wrong. We owe it to Manning to load this team with talent to make us elite the next few years so that we can win a few more Super Bowls for him. Go rebuild a team that needs it. You Luck lovers act like all of the players that we will draft will disappear once Manning retires... we don't need a quarterback.

lol...don't they though? makes no sense. Maybe there's a new draft rule that we didn't know about..."If you pass on Luck, then any players you draft instead of him will be forced to retire when Peyton Manning retires." :slaphead:

[DJ33]

If the Colts have to move Manning to draft Luck, they must do it. Who cares how Manning is feeling? Indy must think long-term.

[Ramblinwreck7]

If the Colts have to move Manning to draft Luck, they must do it. Who cares how Manning is feeling? Indy must think long-term.

Indy must look short term, mid term, and long term. Once again, you people confuse me with how the only part of the colts that matters is "the future." The next 5 years is just as important as the 5 years after that... Gosh I can't stand this logic.

[super8todd]

No your just straight wrong. We owe it to Manning to load this team with talent to make us elite the next few years so that we can win a few more Super Bowls for him. Go rebuild a team that needs it. You Luck lovers act like all of the players that we will draft will disappear once Manning retires... we don't need a quarterback.

It seems we sure do NEED a quarterback right now. When Peyton goes out for half a season next year, Oh Gee... we took Luck.. he steps in and makes sure we don't go 0-16 ever again.. and gives us a head-up on our rebuilding project that everyone realizes we need to do.. except for a few unrealistic fantasyland Manning or nothing lovers on this forum. He isn't made of magic, he only creates it on the field when he's healthy... and that isnt happening for more than 2 more years. Its time to face the future or be left to relive the past.

[super8todd]

lol...don't they though? makes no sense. Maybe there's a new draft rule that we didn't know about..."If you pass on Luck, then any players you draft instead of him will be forced to retire when Peyton Manning retires." :slaphead:

What makes no sense is to not draft the only can't miss draft decision of the past 2 decades.... even Polian can't screw up this pick, he just has to write four letters down on the card come April. :slaphead: