Andrew Luck is old school but as NFL fans, do we need to prepare ourselves for different kind of QBs?

[chad72 6,607]

Andrew Luck fits the mold of old school to a tee, quiet on and off the field, let his play do the talking on the field. A lot like the Peyton, Brady, Brees' type of QBs. Yeah, once you show something on the field, you can do your commercials, it is every man's prerogative, IMO.

 

Then come in folks like Cam Newton, RG3, and pretty soon Johnny Manziel. If a guy does not refrain from a little showboating but can back it up on the field with fire and good play, would his shenanigans be more reflective of the times we live in and not on his true commitment to football?

 

Are we judging them too harshly for being a product of the times even if their football talent is visibly good? I know this is the Midwest and folks like things quieter. One of the things Irsay knew was that he could sell Andrew Luck to this franchise and city far more easily than RG3 and it would be easier for Indy to buy in with Luck's personality.

 

We are used to DBs being prima donnas (Deion Sanders, Sherman etc.) and WRs (Irvin, TO, Ocho Cinco etc.) but do we need to get used to QBs with a little personality in the new era? Is that really bad if that does not become a distraction for their teammates and helps them keep a swagger necessary for them to win? Though in a different sport, I see the same characteristics in Lebron too. Some showboating but lots of talent and focus to back it up.

 

 

Thoughts??? (maybe this could be in NFL General???)

[lennymoore24 256]

There is no "new QB" type in the NFL.  They were saying that about Bobby Douglas for the Bears in the early 70s.  Or Randall Cunningham.  Kaepernick and Wilson happened to be drafted by the two teams with arguably the best talent in the NFL.  Put them on the Bucs and Browns and are we talking about this now?  Luck, on the other hand,  would do well on any team he played on.

 

I think QBs need to hold themselves to a certain level.

[southwest1 2,092]

Andrew Luck fits the mold of old school to a tee, quiet on and off the field, let his play do the talking on the field. A lot like the Peyton, Brady, Brees' type of QBs. Yeah, once you show something on the field, you can do your commercials, it is every man's prerogative, IMO.

 

Then come in folks like Cam Newton, RG3, and pretty soon Johnny Manziel. If a guy does not refrain from a little showboating but can back it up on the field with fire and good play, would his shenanigans be more reflective of the times we live in and not on his true commitment to football?

 

Are we judging them too harshly for being a product of the times even if their football talent is visibly good? I know this is the Midwest and folks like things quieter. One of the things Irsay knew was that he could sell Andrew Luck to this franchise and city far more easily than RG3 and it would be easier for Indy to buy in with Luck's personality.

 

We are used to DBs being prima donnas (Deion Sanders, Sherman etc.) and WRs (Irvin, TO, Ocho Cinco etc.) but do we need to get used to QBs with a little personality in the new era? Is that really bad if that does not become a distraction for their teammates and helps them keep a swagger necessary for them to win? Though in a different sport, I see the same characteristics in Lebron too. Some showboating but lots of talent and focus to back it up.

 

 

Thoughts??? (maybe this could be in NFL General???)

I've said this before, but I admire 3 things most about Andrew Luck: 1. He will throw a pick, admit it immediately, & demand a better performance the next offensive series. 2. Whenever Chewbacca/neck beard gets sacked, he jumps up, slaps the pass rusher's helmet, smiles & says nice hit man. 3. I love his anti-technology persona with the outdated/obsolete flip phone because it conveys the impression that Andrew doesn't give a darn about what's trendy or popular. He just likes what he likes & does what works for him.

 

Andrew knows that nerds run the world & defy conventional wisdom everyday. The word nerd is a complement BTW. 

 

I don't judge him too harshly. I just like that Andrew makes no excuses & goes about mastering his QB craft like a musician plays their instrument until their fingers bleed, tapes up their fingers, & does the same thing tomorrow. Practice builds confidence & confidence leads to consistency. 

[TKnight24 2,097]

I agree with Lenny, Kap & Wilson are nothing more than explosive game managers

[southwest1 2,092]

You do raise a good question though Chad. Is it better to adopt the Jerry Rice philosophy of just be a silent, methodical assassin on the field, score TDs, & act like you've been there before & will return to the endzone in another minute or is it better to smack talk like Philip Rivers & Jay Cutler used to do earlier in their QB careers? 

 

I've always preferred the silent assassination approach myself. The 1 thing I worry about slightly with Andrew is this: I don't like seeing my franchise QB tackle a LB after throwing a pick or deflected ball.

 

Look, I love Andrew's competitive fire to stop a ball carrier & get the football back, but INDY is toast if Luck goes down for the season & besides SW1 is never gonna crucify you for a rare turnover. It happens man. Just please don't screw up your neck, shoulder, or arm making a tackle. Let em go. Our D will get the ball back for you & allow you to make our adversary pay for that fluke of a turnover.  

[southwest1 2,092]

I agree with Lenny, Kap & Wilson are nothing more than explosive game managers

Wilson is a pocket passer vs CK who is a scrambler 1st to me. Wilson will have a longer career because of this fact & more rings too. Yeah, I agree with TK, put both men on either the Browns or the Vikings & I don't see either of them winning a SB. Good point! 

 

But Luck will carry whatever squad he played for at least to the Championship Game easy.

[Surge89 208]

Andrew Luck fits the mold of old school to a tee, quiet on and off the field, let his play do the talking on the field. A lot like the Peyton, Brady, Brees' type of QBs. Yeah, once you show something on the field, you can do your commercials, it is every man's prerogative, IMO.

 

Then come in folks like Cam Newton, RG3, and pretty soon Johnny Manziel. If a guy does not refrain from a little showboating but can back it up on the field with fire and good play, would his shenanigans be more reflective of the times we live in and not on his true commitment to football?

 

Are we judging them too harshly for being a product of the times even if their football talent is visibly good? I know this is the Midwest and folks like things quieter. One of the things Irsay knew was that he could sell Andrew Luck to this franchise and city far more easily than RG3 and it would be easier for Indy to buy in with Luck's personality.

 

We are used to DBs being prima donnas (Deion Sanders, Sherman etc.) and WRs (Irvin, TO, Ocho Cinco etc.) but do we need to get used to QBs with a little personality in the new era? Is that really bad if that does not become a distraction for their teammates and helps them keep a swagger necessary for them to win? Though in a different sport, I see the same characteristics in Lebron too. Some showboating but lots of talent and focus to back it up.

 

 

Thoughts??? (maybe this could be in NFL General???)

 

 

2 things.  In your example only one QB has shown that he "may" have the ability to become a premier QB in this league and that is Cam.  The other 2 are extremely over hyped by the media, just like Tim Tebow.  They have talent yes.  But to excel at the QB position you must have poise.  You must practice that poise and live it and it will show itself on the field.  That is why you see these flashy guys come in make one splash for a year and then fade away.  They just don't have it between the ears.  RG3 will most likely never be the same he just isn't in the environment that will nurture him.  Manziel is an * who will most likely have a great 1st year and then slowly regress into nothingness with his off the field issues and/or injuries.  

 

The other is that of these 3 QBs you mention they all have one thing in common.  They are gimmicky.  Gimmicks don't last long in the NFL.  Cam has the potential to overcome that, but the question will be will he. 

 

So no I don't believe anyone will have to adjust to the "new" breed because the new breed is just another flop waiting to happen like every decade of the NFL.  The QB's that excel time and time again are the ones who understand the game and can change.  They don't rely on a physical trait but the mental capability to learn.  

 

In the NFL everyone is talented, heck they are in the NFL!.  What separates the cream from the rest is the mental capability and work ethic. Or else we would just have a bunch of superstars on every team.  

[oldunclemark 2,434]

I don't see a new bred of QBs.....Wilson isn't anything new...

 

....running QBs don't last in the NFL...Russell W. will change his ways or he'll be Mike Vick....Kaep will run less and less as time goes by..

 

and so will Cam....or else

 

Look at all the top college guys in the draft ...Most are pocket passers

 

the Brady, Brees, Manning (and Luck) mode is still the present and the future

[lollygagger8 3,305]

I love Luck and his neck beard having nerdy flip phone using self just fine. 

[Old Colt 152]

Let us not forget, Luck can run with the best of the QB's.  His diffierence is he doesn't build his game around his running.....but when called on to run, he is as dangerous, elusive and quick as any in the league.

[JoshPhilpot 0]

Andrew Luck fits the mold of old school to a tee, quiet on and off the field, let his play do the talking on the field. A lot like the Peyton, Brady, Brees' type of QBs. Yeah, once you show something on the field, you can do your commercials, it is every man's prerogative, IMO.

 

Then come in folks like Cam Newton, RG3, and pretty soon Johnny Manziel. If a guy does not refrain from a little showboating but can back it up on the field with fire and good play, would his shenanigans be more reflective of the times we live in and not on his true commitment to football?

 

Are we judging them too harshly for being a product of the times even if their football talent is visibly good? I know this is the Midwest and folks like things quieter. One of the things Irsay knew was that he could sell Andrew Luck to this franchise and city far more easily than RG3 and it would be easier for Indy to buy in with Luck's personality.

 

We are used to DBs being prima donnas (Deion Sanders, Sherman etc.) and WRs (Irvin, TO, Ocho Cinco etc.) but do we need to get used to QBs with a little personality in the new era? Is that really bad if that does not become a distraction for their teammates and helps them keep a swagger necessary for them to win? Though in a different sport, I see the same characteristics in Lebron too. Some showboating but lots of talent and focus to back it up.

 

 

Thoughts??? (maybe this could be in NFL General???)

Irsay didn't draft Luck over RG3 because it would be easier to buy Lucks personality, he drafted Luck because he is the much better QB. And i'm glad we didn't draft RG3, The little respect I had for RG3 is gone now. I don't really care for all the showboating, but it doesn't really bother me that much either, what I really can't stand about RG3 is that this year when the Redskins had to get a couch they had to find a couch based on wether or not they could handle and deal with RG3 and I find that highly immature of him and is far past a little showboating.

[Mameluc 0]

there has always been qbs with those attitude and skills...you just see it more now because of technology social media etc.

 

 

Wilson? Kaep? Manziel? RGIII ? Tarkenton, Cunningham, even Mcnabb, Joe Namath, the QB

[Mameluc 0]

dont know why but i cant edit my own post...anyways i meant the Bears QB from the 80's whose name i have forgotten.

 

Boomer had some swagger also.

[BOTT 1,314]

dont know why but i cant edit my own post...anyways i meant the Bears QB from the 80's whose name i have forgotten.

 

Boomer had some swagger also.

Jim McMahon

[The Fish 929]

I agree with Lenny, Kap & Wilson are nothing more than explosive game managers

huh, what?

[SteelDragon 29]

You draft the Kaps and Wilsons when guys like Luck aren't available.  

[rsrobinson 0]

  Kaepernick and Wilson happened to be drafted by the two teams with arguably the best talent in the NFL.  Put them on the Bucs and Browns and are we talking about this now?  Luck, on the other hand,  would do well on any team he played on.

 

This is little more than hypothetical guesswork and Luck, so far, has done nothing to separate himself from either Wilson or Kaepernick to make that claim.  It would be much easier to make the case that the Browns and the Bucs would both be significantly better with Kaepernick, Wilson, or Luck at quarterback than what they have now.

[IinD 2,117]

Nothing wrong with flare or going against the norm. That's what brought us groups like the Beatles and guys like Elvis. Many hated Joe Namath at the time as well.

In the end when talking about anything in life, Al Davis had it right, just win baby.

No one will care in the end if the results are positive, whether its life, sports or entertainment. If Luck had Deion Sanders' attitude and brought home a Lombardi, no one would care or mention it.

[Defjamz26 1,947]

If anything Luck is the new model for QB's. He's got ideal size at 6'4" and 240 lbs. His passing abilities and mechanics are impeccable, and he has a inborn mental feel for the game that you can't teach. And he is also athletic enough to get it done on the ground, without relying on his legs as part of his game like guys like CK and RGIII.

 

Andrew Luck is literally the perfect model for new age QB's.

[Nadine 6,275]

I think there is nothing wrong with cashing in as much as you can as fast as you can

NFL careers can be short.........it's an opportunity and I'm not sure I would not do the same.

 

I did think people judged RG3 harshly.

 

I mean really what difference does it make?  He's not breaking the law or anything.

 

As far as popularity with the fans, I guess these guys and their publicists must factor that in.  Maybe some agents are too greedy to fast

[Indianapolis-Colts-Fan 0]

QBs are team leaders. Meant to lead. Not showboat around. If you don't want to lead and take the responsibility of that then don't be a QB.

[amfootball 3]

How is Wilson any different from Luck in terms of his demeanor? They seem like almost the same guy in terms of their drive, quiet nature and ability to lead their teams.

 

I really don't have any issue with the QBs that like the limelight. I enjoy the differing personalities. I just think when they come up short on the field then the media likes to blast them and blame any and all shortcomings on their personalities which is unfair.

[Synthetic 1,202]

You guys over analyze the quarterback position way too much.

[southwest1 2,092]

How is Wilson any different from Luck in terms of his demeanor? They seem like almost the same guy in terms of their drive, quiet nature and ability to lead their teams.

 

I really don't have any issue with the QBs that like the limelight. I enjoy the differing personalities. I just think when they come up short on the field then the media likes to blast them and blame any and all shortcomings on their personalities which is unfair.

A good post there amfootball. Yes, I suppose you're right not every QB can't be silent & methodical in their game day preparation. It probably is unfair that young gun QBs get neglected in favor of Brees, Brady, & Manning because fans seldom consider which field generals will be elite next like Newton, RW, Luck, or RG3. We do sort of wait until all the established vets retire, before we honestly breakdown who the next superstar QB will be & ignored markets like Buffalo & Cleveland hardly ever get a comprehensive team analysis as a viable post season threat in the next 2-3 seasons. 

 

The changing of the QB guard is happening as we speak & we are doing a disservice when we bypass every other QB not named Brees, Brady, Rivers, Rodgers, Ben, Eli, & Peyton. Thanks for the reminder. 

[BOTT 1,314]

How is Wilson any different from Luck in terms of his demeanor? They seem like almost the same guy in terms of their drive, quiet nature and ability to lead their teams.

 

I really don't have any issue with the QBs that like the limelight. I enjoy the differing personalities. I just think when they come up short on the field then the media likes to blast them and blame any and all shortcomings on their personalities which is unfair.

He isn't and I think that is why the OP didn't mention Wilson.

[amfootball 3]

He isn't and I think that is why the OP didn't mention Wilson.

Sure but he only put Luck as an "old school" QB and did not mention Wilson who I also think is a bit of a throw back.

[chad72 6,607]

How is Wilson any different from Luck in terms of his demeanor? They seem like almost the same guy in terms of their drive, quiet nature and ability to lead their teams.

 

I really don't have any issue with the QBs that like the limelight. I enjoy the differing personalities. I just think when they come up short on the field then the media likes to blast them and blame any and all shortcomings on their personalities which is unfair.

 

This is essentially what I was trying to get to. Can success co-exist with a flamboyant personality at the QB position? That is the essence of the thread.

 

Btw, mention of Andrew Luck will get folks to discuss this faster, so I did not bother listing more old school types 

 

I agree, Wilson has enough old school in him too, and Kaep is another flamboyant personality on the other side like Cam, RG3 etc.

[amfootball 3]

This is essentially what I was trying to get to. Can success co-exist with a flamboyant personality at the QB position? That is the essence of the thread.

 

Btw, mention of Andrew Luck will get folks to discuss this faster, so I did not bother listing more old school types 

 

I agree, Wilson has enough old school in him too, and Kaep is another flamboyant personality on the other side like Cam, RG3 etc.

I think success can co-exist with flamboyant personalities. Kaep almost won the SB last year and his teammates seem to love him. I think with the 25 and under generation, flamboyancy is almost expected anyways. There has never been a bigger microscope on the QB position then there is now.

 

I think what is more interesting is the fact that rookies are expected to start as soon as they get to the NFL which leads to some immaturity as they are deemed the franchise guy at 21 or 22 and they still have not developed as a person yet and the media is all over them. I think that is what happened to RG. Just so much coming at these guys.

[AntonMcG 3]

Sure but he only put Luck as an "old school" QB and did not mention Wilson who I also think is a bit of a throw back.

 

Because he mentioned Luck as old school on and off the field.

 

Wilson is not 'old school' on the field... especially from a measurable perspective.

[amfootball 3]

Because he mentioned Luck as old school on and off the field.

 

Wilson is not 'old school' on the field... especially from a measurable perspective.

I have no idea what old school on the field means. Wilson is Super Bowl champion. So whatever he has is working just fine.

[southwest1 2,092]

At the end of the day, all I care about are SB rings. Yes, I realize that Marino & Kelly never won rings & I still consider them world HOF QBs. Call me vain, call me short sided, call me selfish. All I care about is the bling baby preferably more than 1 ring ala Joe Montana, Terry Bradshaw, John Elway, Troy Aikman, Steve Young, Big Ben, Eli Manning, & Tom Brady. 

 

Andrew's on his quest to get his first 1 & hopefully more than 1. 

 

Amendement: Yes, I do despise Dallas to my core, but I do appreciate & admire the 3 rings that Troy was able to obtain. Yes I know, no QB ever wins any SB alone. 

[PaulBearer 0]

There is no "new QB" type in the NFL.  They were saying that about Bobby Douglas for the Bears in the early 70s.  Or Randall Cunningham.  Kaepernick and Wilson happened to be drafted by the two teams with arguably the best talent in the NFL.  Put them on the Bucs and Browns and are we talking about this now?  Luck, on the other hand,  would do well on any team he played on.

 

I think QBs need to hold themselves to a certain level.

I think those two QBs would have made the Bucs and Browns a whole lot better. So would Luck.

[PaulBearer 0]

At the end of the day, all I care about are SB rings. Yes, I realize that Marino & Kelly never won rings & I still consider them world HOF QBs. Call me vain, call me short sided, call me selfish. All I care about is the bling baby preferably more than 1 ring ala Joe Montana, Terry Bradshaw, John Elway, Troy Aikman, Steve Young, Big Ben, Eli Manning, & Tom Brady. 

 

Andrew's on his quest to get his first 1 & hopefully more than 1. 

You have to get there first...... Kelly did that very well and so has Peyton. Luck may never even get there. If they don't get an O-line he may not have a long career. If they don't play some defense, he might not get to the SB. He has a bye into the playoffs right now because the South has been so weak. But the division is going to be a lot stronger this year.

[PaulBearer 0]

If anything Luck is the new model for QB's. He's got ideal size at 6'4" and 240 lbs. His passing abilities and mechanics are impeccable, and he has a inborn mental feel for the game that you can't teach. And he is also athletic enough to get it done on the ground, without relying on his legs as part of his game like guys like CK and RGIII.

 

Andrew Luck is literally the perfect model for new age QB's.

No, he is not. He is old school. The new age QBs will be winning with their legs as much as their arms. Luck runs the ball very well but not as well as some of the new agers. Most of the QBs coming into the NFL run the ball well and often.

[Defjamz26 1,947]

No, he is not. He is old school. The new age QBs will be winning with their legs as much as their arms. Luck runs the ball very well but not as well as some of the new agers. Most of the QBs coming into the NFL run the ball well and often.

 

Nope. QB's like that don't last. Wilson is a special case. He runs to create more opportunities and when his OL  breaks down. All you need to have is enough athleticism to pick up an occasional 10 yard run and extend plays like how Ben does. Gimmicky run first QB's never succeed in the NFL. Never have, never will. If you can't win from the pocket, you can't win. No QB with that skill set has ever won an MVP or even a Superbowl. Even Vince Young was a passer first.

[southwest1 2,092]

You have to get there first...... Kelly did that very well and so has Peyton. Luck may never even get there. If they don't get an O-line he may not have a long career. If they don't play some defense, he might not get to the SB. He has a bye into the playoffs right now because the South has been so weak. But the division is going to be a lot stronger this year.

Yes, the Seahawks proved the old adage that "offense sells tickets, but defense wins championships." No argument there PB. I like that the AFC South just got tougher with new HC's for the Texans & Titans. It will make INDY tougher & with more resolve not weaker. 

 

I like our chances for a deep Playoffs run this year. Nobody in our division scares me. I respect them sure, but fear them no not 1 bit. We are competing against last year's achievements & trying to surpass them. Division races are never against a familiar foe, but rather self inflicted complacency & arrogant invincibility to  me. 2 dangers to always guard against. 

[Qwiz 118]

Nope. QB's like that don't last. Wilson is a special case. He runs to create more opportunities and when his OL  breaks down. All you need to have is enough athleticism to pick up an occasional 10 yard run and extend plays like how Ben does. Gimmicky run first QB's never succeed in the NFL. Never have, never will. If you can't win from the pocket, you can't win. No QB with that skill set has ever won an MVP or even a Superbowl. Even Vince Young was a passer first.

Wilson doesn't necessarily fall in the same category as say Vick or Griffin but he is a "running" quarterback and he did win a Super Bowl, albeit without having to run much given he could throw anywhere he wanted. If you look at the top two teams in the NFC, the most dominant conference right now, both QBs are running QBs and both have been in the Championship/Super Bowl the past two seasons, and Kaep came within a play of winning it. I'm not saying pocket passers are going to become extinct or anything but mobile quarterbacks can and will win championships.

[PaulBearer 0]

Nope. QB's like that don't last. Wilson is a special case. He runs to create more opportunities and when his OL  breaks down. All you need to have is enough athleticism to pick up an occasional 10 yard run and extend plays like how Ben does. Gimmicky run first QB's never succeed in the NFL. Never have, never will. If you can't win from the pocket, you can't win. No QB with that skill set has ever won an MVP or even a Superbowl. Even Vince Young was a passer first.

Well, that isn't true, Kaep, is that kind of player. Cam Newton can pass from the pocket but he is that kind of player. I don't think the new age QBs will last as long as the old ones but they will be the ones winning championships and then they will be replaced by another QB of the same ilk. QBs like Manning and Brady will become a thing of the past.

[southwest1 2,092]

Wilson doesn't necessarily fall in the same category as say Vick or Griffin but he is a "running" quarterback and he did win a Super Bowl, albeit without having to run much given he could throw anywhere he wanted. If you look at the top two teams in the NFC, the most dominant conference right now, both QBs are running QBs and both have been in the Championship/Super Bowl the past two seasons, and Kaep came within a play of winning it. I'm not saying pocket passers are going to become extinct or anything but mobile quarterbacks can and will win championships.

I always say this about RW. He is a pocket passer 1st & a scrambler 2nd. People used to say the same thing about Steve Young too that he was a runner vs pocket passer & it seemed like forever before people untwisted that myth or misconception. I'm not putting you in that wrong category QuizBoy. It just makes me laugh when analysts view him as a feet guy vs under the center guy. Watching all his home football games at UW-Madison confirmed that fact to me over & over again. I view RW like Drew Brees who snaps the ball under center & only slides right or left to change his launch point due to his vision being blocked by a defender due to his short height. 

 

You do make a valid point though the success of RW as a SB champion & CK being in 3 NFC Championship Games with 1 SB appearance does give more credibility to the fact that a QB with fast legs can win a SB & minimize the mandate for a pure pocket passer alone. 

[amfootball 3]

Wilson doesn't necessarily fall in the same category as say Vick or Griffin but he is a "running" quarterback and he did win a Super Bowl, albeit without having to run much given he could throw anywhere he wanted. If you look at the top two teams in the NFC, the most dominant conference right now, both QBs are running QBs and both have been in the Championship/Super Bowl the past two seasons, and Kaep came within a play of winning it. I'm not saying pocket passers are going to become extinct or anything but mobile quarterbacks can and will win championships.

I think the mobility is a must in today's game. You saw it first hand in the Super Bowl. Manning could not avoid the rush at all while Wilson was moving around and creating space. The defenses are so big and so fast and so complex now that you have to be able to move. Plus offenses can be more dynamic with a QB that is a threat with his legs. I felt the Colts to some extent have not taken advantage of Luck's athleticism. They should do more plays where they get him out in space. He is a smart, heady guy and knows to go down to avoid injury.