Jim Irsay And Another Cryptic Tweet Suggesting We Will Draft A Qb.

[Ramblinwreck7]

I wouldn't exactly call guys like Andrew Luck and Aaron Rodgers scramblers though, there basically quarterbacks who are a faster and can move a little better than a normal passing quarterback. But like I said, you don't have to be fast and athletic to extend the play. I'll mention Ben Rothlesburger's uncanny ability to avoid pressure and run around and break tackles. He's just a really big and non athletic quarterback. Peyton avoids pressure in the pocket so well that he extends plays all the time.

What I'm trying to say is that if you have great pocket awareness, it doesn't really matter if you are faster and more athletic than another quarterback. And I would say that Cam Newton is in a different league than Luck and most other quarterbacks in terms of running. He is so big and athletic that he is a quarterback who is also a runningback. He is playing well, but let's see him keep doing it.

[Xfiles]

Wow, now we are comparing Aaron Rodgers and Andrew Luck to Vince young??

Aaron and Andrew ARE in a new category, and they are totally different than Vince young, Michael vick, Randall Cunningham....it IS the evolution of the Quarterback, as suggested by Coltsman (in my opinion) and I totally agree.

[Ramblinwreck7]

Wow, now we are comparing Aaron Rodgers and Andrew Luck to Vince young??

Aaron and Andrew ARE in a new category, and they are totally different than Vince young, Michael vick, Randall Cunningham....it IS the evolution of the Quarterback, as suggested by Coltsman (in my opinion) and I totally agree.

Yall are weird... evolution of the quarterback has got to be one of the weirdest things I have ever heard on this site. Just give me a quarterback who can throw the ball and move around in the pocket, who cares if he can run around or not. That will just increase his chance of injury.

[Xfiles]

Yall are weird... evolution of the quarterback has got to be one of the weirdest things I have ever heard on this site. Just give me a quarterback who can throw the ball and move around in the pocket, who cares if he can run around or not. That will just increase his chance of injury.

LOL

Yes who cares.....apparently you dont, which is fine, but the rest of us care, NFL scouts care, Owners care, Coaches care, and even the players love a guy who can streak down the field for a first down when no one is open. You do realize someone is not open on every play in the NFL right? Unless that team is playing the Colts anyway....;)

[Ramblinwreck7]

LOL

Yes who cares.....apparently you dont, which is fine, but the rest of us care, NFL scouts care, Owners care, Coaches care, and even the players love a guy who can streak down the field for a first down when no one is open. You do realize someone is not open on every play in the NFL right? Unless that team is playing the Colts anyway.... ;)

You do realize that all of the best quarterbacks are passers, right, not scramblers? Running quarterbacks are overated and will continue to be. There's a reason that Peyton Manning, Drew Brees, and Tom Brady are probably the 3 best quarterbacks in the NFL. Not to mention all of the non athletic quarterbacks like Ben Rothlesburger, Matt Shaub, Matt Ryan who are all top NFL quarterbacks. You can name me one guy, Aaron Rodgers, and that's it...

[Xfiles]

You do realize that all of the best quarterbacks are passers, right, not scramblers? Running quarterbacks are overated and will continue to be. There's a reason that Peyton Manning, Drew Brees, and Tom Brady are probably the 3 best quarterbacks in the NFL. Not to mention all of the non athletic quarterbacks like Ben Rothlesburger, Matt Shaub, Matt Ryan who are all top NFL quarterbacks. You can name me one guy, Aaron Rodgers, and that's it...

Fail, Aaron Rodgers, Drew Brees, Big Ben, they are all adept SCRAMBLERS and have all won super bowls(4 combined I think) to Manning and Bradys 4, so it would seem that the line is changing, as suggested.

[Ramblinwreck7]

Fail, Aaron Rodgers, Drew Brees, Big Ben, they are all adept SCRAMBLERS and have all won super bowls(4 combined I think) to Manning and Bradys 4, so it would seem that the line is changing, as suggested.

Massive fail, if you think Drew Brees and Big Ben are scrambling quarterbacks, then your just clueless. I can run faster than both of those guys, just because Ben Rothlesburger can break tackles and rumble around doesn't make him a running quarterback... he's just good at extending plays. You just are not thinking, please start trying...

[Jason_]

Matt Barkley, Landry Jones, Nick Foles, RG3, Ryan Tannehill, EJ Manuel and the majority of the other top QBs can scramble as well if not better than Brees or Big Ben. If they can get 5-7 yards on a scramble then I'm happy with that and each of these guys can do at least that.

[pacolts56]

lol...I only laugh because I'm glad someone else sees the same thing. I'm not saying Luck is not a good Qb, but he is in a system that is very QB friendly and designed to make the QB look good by limiting what he has to do.

Well....as long as we're all in the laughing mood.....

You interpret Luck's responsibility of calling Stanford's plays or reading the defense and audibling their offense into the best run or pass play "limiting what he has to do'? rotfl

[Jason_]

Well....as long as we're all in the laughing mood.....

You interpret Luck's responsibility of calling Stanford's plays or reading the defense and audibling their offense into the best run or pass play "limiting what he has to do'? rotfl

By limiting what he has to do with his arm. I thought that would be understood but apparently not. Just like San Fran limits what Alex Smith has to do...and by that I mean limiting the number of plays he's forced to make per game because they rely more heavily on a powerful running game and playing strong defense...like Stanford typically does. ;)

[pacolts56]

By limiting what he has to do with his arm. I thought that would be understood but apparently not. Just like San Fran limits what Alex Smith has to do...and by that I mean limiting the number of plays he's forced to make per game because they rely more heavily on a powerful running game and playing strong defense...like Stanford typically does. ;)

Jason.....don't you think it's Stanford's lack of talented WRs that limits their passing offense....if we can really call it limited?

NONE of those WRs scare anyone....Owusu is okay, but he's Gonzo 2.0 with all the injuries. Whalen is a short-medium possession guy.

What Luck does with those TEs is pretty darn impressive considering opposing defenses know that Stanford's has very average talent at WR.

[Jason_]

Jason.....don't you think it's Stanford's lack of talented WRs that limits their passing offense....if we can really call it limited?

NONE of those WRs scare anyone....Owusu is okay, but he's Gonzo 2.0 with all the injuries. Whalen is a short-medium possession guy.

What Luck does with those TEs is pretty darn impressive considering opposing defenses know that Stanford's has very average talent at WR.

Do you really want to play the "lack of talent" card considering you know who my favorite college QB is? lol

Yes, Stanford does lack a speedy WR to stretch the field, but the TEs are just as capable at spreading the field due to their speed, height and pass catching ability.

Also, having possession receivers imo is a better indicator of a QBs ability because with possession receivers you have to throw timing routes with accuracy, timing and velocity. These are the types of throws I rarely see from Luck. Notice I didn't say never, but rarely. More often than not, they are able to establish their power running game and then he throws off playaction to WRs or TEs who are wide open. Easy passes to complete more often than not.

A couple of games back, the announcers were talking about how they talked with the Stanford coaching staff, who had just analyzed every throw that Luck has made over the course of the year. At that time, Luck was completing 97% of his passes off of play action. That is an incredible number in and of itself. However, his overall completion percentage for the year is at around 73%, so how low is his accuracy on straight up drop backs that the overall % comes down from 97 to 73? I could take the easy approach and say it would have to hover somewhere around 50% but I know that's likely not accurate because that would be assuming that Luck makes the same number of throws off play action that he does on straight drop backs and I'm sure that's not the case.

However, I do believe Luck's accuracy is overrated. That 97% completion percentage off playaction is more often than not to absolutely wide open receivers and even those throws are not always accurate, but because the receiver is so open he's able to adjust to the ball. Yes, for his college career, Luck is completing a very high percentage of his passes, but if you have WRs and TEs who can adjust to a poorly thrown ball, then the pass will still be completed. I can't give the QB credit for that any more than I would give blame to the QB for an incompleted pass if the pass was thrown accurately but was just dropped by the receiver.

The timing throws are the ones Luck has been struggling with lately....well imo all year to some extent but it's shown up more lately because their running game has been kept more in check so those wide open play action passes haven't been there the past couple of weeks like they were through the rest of the season. Luck is more often than not very accurate on slants and crossing routes, but his comeback and out routes are more often than not thrown high. And even with the accuracy on the crossing routes, Luck doesn't always have the ability to throw the ball with enough velocity to get the pass there quickly enough. In college that's not as big of a problem but in the NFL, many of those throws could wind up deflected or intercepted.

I know people are going to throw out the "well Manning's arm strength was a question coming out of college too" and to that I can only say that I never watched Manning play in college so I don't know how his arm strength would have compared to Lucks. I do believe though his arm strength is above average at best. Can it improve? Perhaps with the right strength and conditioning he can improve his arm strength somewhat but there's no way to know that it will improve enough that those types of throws will be able to be made with better velocity to fit them into the tight coverage windows he's going to face in the NFL.

As far as playcalling goes and being an offensive coordinator on the field, based on all that is said about Luck, yes I will give you that he is advanced beyond his years in this regard. However, imo this is more a luxury than a need for a QB. A QB NEEDS to be able to read coverage and make appropriate checks at the LOS. He needs to be able to audible when necessary. He does not need to be able to call every play for the offense throughout the course of the game..that's typically the OCs job. Now if we don't replace Christiansen then we may need our QB to continue being the OC on the field. However, if we can bring in a competent OC then a QB who can call his own plays no longer becomes a need. It would be a nice luxury to have but if the QB shows signs of struggling physically with being able to make every NFL type throw and pick apart zone coverage then having that luxury doesn't mean as much.

[Captain Americolt]

Do you really want to play the "lack of talent" card considering you know who my favorite college QB is? lol

Yes, Stanford does lack a speedy WR to stretch the field, but the TEs are just as capable at spreading the field due to their speed, height and pass catching ability.

Also, having possession receivers imo is a better indicator of a QBs ability because with possession receivers you have to throw timing routes with accuracy, timing and velocity. These are the types of throws I rarely see from Luck. Notice I didn't say never, but rarely. More often than not, they are able to establish their power running game and then he throws off playaction to WRs or TEs who are wide open. Easy passes to complete more often than not.

A couple of games back, the announcers were talking about how they talked with the Stanford coaching staff, who had just analyzed every throw that Luck has made over the course of the year. At that time, Luck was completing 97% of his passes off of play action. That is an incredible number in and of itself. However, his overall completion percentage for the year is at around 73%, so how low is his accuracy on straight up drop backs that the overall % comes down from 97 to 73? I could take the easy approach and say it would have to hover somewhere around 50% but I know that's likely not accurate because that would be assuming that Luck makes the same number of throws off play action that he does on straight drop backs and I'm sure that's not the case.

However, I do believe Luck's accuracy is overrated. That 97% completion percentage off playaction is more often than not to absolutely wide open receivers and even those throws are not always accurate, but because the receiver is so open he's able to adjust to the ball. Yes, for his college career, Luck is completing a very high percentage of his passes, but if you have WRs and TEs who can adjust to a poorly thrown ball, then the pass will still be completed. I can't give the QB credit for that any more than I would give blame to the QB for an incompleted pass if the pass was thrown accurately but was just dropped by the receiver.

The timing throws are the ones Luck has been struggling with lately....well imo all year to some extent but it's shown up more lately because their running game has been kept more in check so those wide open play action passes haven't been there the past couple of weeks like they were through the rest of the season. Luck is more often than not very accurate on slants and crossing routes, but his comeback and out routes are more often than not thrown high. And even with the accuracy on the crossing routes, Luck doesn't always have the ability to throw the ball with enough velocity to get the pass there quickly enough. In college that's not as big of a problem but in the NFL, many of those throws could wind up deflected or intercepted.

I know people are going to throw out the "well Manning's arm strength was a question coming out of college too" and to that I can only say that I never watched Manning play in college so I don't know how his arm strength would have compared to Lucks. I do believe though his arm strength is above average at best. Can it improve? Perhaps with the right strength and conditioning he can improve his arm strength somewhat but there's no way to know that it will improve enough that those types of throws will be able to be made with better velocity to fit them into the tight coverage windows he's going to face in the NFL.

As far as playcalling goes and being an offensive coordinator on the field, based on all that is said about Luck, yes I will give you that he is advanced beyond his years in this regard. However, imo this is more a luxury than a need for a QB. A QB NEEDS to be able to read coverage and make appropriate checks at the LOS. He needs to be able to audible when necessary. He does not need to be able to call every play for the offense throughout the course of the game..that's typically the OCs job. Now if we don't replace Christiansen then we may need our QB to continue being the OC on the field. However, if we can bring in a competent OC then a QB who can call his own plays no longer becomes a need. It would be a nice luxury to have but if the QB shows signs of struggling physically with being able to make every NFL type throw and pick apart zone coverage then having that luxury doesn't mean as much.

You wrote alot Jason. Lol i only got halfway, but i understand your point. If Luck becomes a colt i doubt he will make any sort of impact unles we have a power running game that will set up the play-action pass that Luck thrives off. I also don't see regular drop backs and hitting WR's that are covered or leading them with the pass. It helps pad the stats when you have 6 6' or 6 8' TE's who can run and catch. Colts don't have either of those. (bold)

[pacolts56]

Do you really want to play the "lack of talent" card considering you know who my favorite college QB is? lol Yes, Stanford does lack a speedy WR to stretch the field, but the TEs are just as capable at spreading the field due to their speed, height and pass catching ability. Also, having possession receivers imo is a better indicator of a QBs ability because with possession receivers you have to throw timing routes with accuracy, timing and velocity. These are the types of throws I rarely see from Luck. Notice I didn't say never, but rarely. More often than not, they are able to establish their power running game and then he throws off playaction to WRs or TEs who are wide open. Easy passes to complete more often than not. A couple of games back, the announcers were talking about how they talked with the Stanford coaching staff, who had just analyzed every throw that Luck has made over the course of the year. At that time, Luck was completing 97% of his passes off of play action. That is an incredible number in and of itself. However, his overall completion percentage for the year is at around 73%, so how low is his accuracy on straight up drop backs that the overall % comes down from 97 to 73? I could take the easy approach and say it would have to hover somewhere around 50% but I know that's likely not accurate because that would be assuming that Luck makes the same number of throws off play action that he does on straight drop backs and I'm sure that's not the case. However, I do believe Luck's accuracy is overrated. That 97% completion percentage off playaction is more often than not to absolutely wide open receivers and even those throws are not always accurate, but because the receiver is so open he's able to adjust to the ball. Yes, for his college career, Luck is completing a very high percentage of his passes, but if you have WRs and TEs who can adjust to a poorly thrown ball, then the pass will still be completed. I can't give the QB credit for that any more than I would give blame to the QB for an incompleted pass if the pass was thrown accurately but was just dropped by the receiver. The timing throws are the ones Luck has been struggling with lately....well imo all year to some extent but it's shown up more lately because their running game has been kept more in check so those wide open play action passes haven't been there the past couple of weeks like they were through the rest of the season. Luck is more often than not very accurate on slants and crossing routes, but his comeback and out routes are more often than not thrown high. And even with the accuracy on the crossing routes, Luck doesn't always have the ability to throw the ball with enough velocity to get the pass there quickly enough. In college that's not as big of a problem but in the NFL, many of those throws could wind up deflected or intercepted. I know people are going to throw out the "well Manning's arm strength was a question coming out of college too" and to that I can only say that I never watched Manning play in college so I don't know how his arm strength would have compared to Lucks. I do believe though his arm strength is above average at best. Can it improve? Perhaps with the right strength and conditioning he can improve his arm strength somewhat but there's no way to know that it will improve enough that those types of throws will be able to be made with better velocity to fit them into the tight coverage windows he's going to face in the NFL. As far as playcalling goes and being an offensive coordinator on the field, based on all that is said about Luck, yes I will give you that he is advanced beyond his years in this regard. However, imo this is more a luxury than a need for a QB. A QB NEEDS to be able to read coverage and make appropriate checks at the LOS. He needs to be able to audible when necessary. He does not need to be able to call every play for the offense throughout the course of the game..that's typically the OCs job. Now if we don't replace Christiansen then we may need our QB to continue being the OC on the field. However, if we can bring in a competent OC then a QB who can call his own plays no longer becomes a need. It would be a nice luxury to have but if the QB shows signs of struggling physically with being able to make every NFL type throw and pick apart zone coverage then having that luxury doesn't mean as much.

LOL....I know, I know....Foles doesn't have any help.....thats not what I'm talking about with Luck's strengths.

I just think your splitting hairs because we both know his drop-back completion rate is not 50%.....and we also know that busted routes and other factors go into accuracy rates as well.

And having great accuracy in play action off an effective running game a bad thing either. Like every other QB coming out...he will improve, assuming the Colts address the coaching and strength and conditioning situations properly.

But regarding the play-action, remember when Peyton actually had a competent offensive line during the 1st half of his career....and the stretch play with Edgerrin James was so effective that Peyton's play action off of that absolutely killed defenses?

Remember that "pick your poison" monicker that was attached to the Colts offense?.......it's a distant memory.

If Luck is our next QB we need to bring that back because Peyton has been saddled with increasingly lousy runblocking and our rushing attack has been on the suck end of the NFL for 4 years....and had Manning gotten injured sooner our record would have probably been nearly as crappy as it is now.

Regardless of whether we draft Luck or Foles or Griffin or Jones....we should play to their strengths coach them up where necessary and most of all, support them with a solid consistent running game which is a sound offensive approach anyway.

Address the long-absent balance that the Colts have sorely lacked because no college QB....NONE of them....will come in and come close to duplicating Manning's ability to mask the imbalance. IMO....Luck would by far, be best able to do it.

[Jason_]

Regardless of whether we draft Luck or Foles or Griffin or Jones....we should play to their strengths coach them up where necessary and most of all, support them with a solid consistent running game which is a sound offensive approach anyway.

Address the long-absent balance that the Colts have sorely lacked because no college QB....NONE of them....will come in and come close to duplicating Manning's ability to mask the imbalance.

Absolutely agree...no matter who our QB is next year we have got to start running the ball more and become more balanced offensively.

[Xfiles]

Massive fail, if you think Drew Brees and Big Ben are scrambling quarterbacks, then your just clueless. I can run faster than both of those guys, just because Ben Rothlesburger can break tackles and rumble around doesn't make him a running quarterback... he's just good at extending plays. You just are not thinking, please start trying...

We get it, you dont want luck. That's fine. If you believe I am not thinking, you are a clown, and welcome to my ignore list as you never have anything to add that is remotely correct.

[Mameluc]

Jason.....don't you think it's Stanford's lack of talented WRs that limits their passing offense....if we can really call it limited?

NONE of those WRs scare anyone....Owusu is okay, but he's Gonzo 2.0 with all the injuries. Whalen is a short-medium possession guy.

What Luck does with those TEs is pretty darn impressive considering opposing defenses know that Stanford's has very average talent at WR.

so what brady is doing with 2 TE sets is more impressive than what aaron rodgers is doing? no way

[Mameluc]

and if anything , last night game showed us something... the ravens kept the running game in check and they were forced to throw the ball and they couldnt do anything..offcourse his OL was blasted all game long but point is, you controll SF running game you controll the game...isnt that something has happened with stanford lately?

and why im comparing SF to stanford? its the same freaking offense, its Harbaugh's offense.

now of course, Luck does look like he is going to be much better than alex smith, and probably SF offense wuldnt be as anemic with Luck...but bah ive heard so much of this guy, all the hype and I was expecting muuuuuuuuuuuuuuuch more after seeing him play.

in any case, i hope he has a nice career, colts or not. He is a nice man.

[Restored]

Do you really want to play the "lack of talent" card considering you know who my favorite college QB is? lol

Yes, Stanford does lack a speedy WR to stretch the field, but the TEs are just as capable at spreading the field due to their speed, height and pass catching ability.

LOL I love you say TE's can stretch the field like WR's. If thats the case, why don't we all just draft and play with TE's instead of WR's and line them up on the outside like recievers because they are just as capable right? New England is attempting to do that with MODERATE success. They have no deep recieving game in the same way that Stanford doesn't, primarily because of injuries at the reciever position.

Also, having possession receivers imo is a better indicator of a QBs ability because with possession receivers you have to throw timing routes with accuracy, timing and velocity. These are the types of throws I rarely see from Luck. Notice I didn't say never, but rarely. More often than not, they are able to establish their power running game and then he throws off playaction to WRs or TEs who are wide open. Easy passes to complete more often than not.

Your missing a huge point in that with possession recievers they have to get OPEN which they normally don't do because they are just merely pass catchers and aren't known for being explosive threats. I don't know what games you watch but I've seen plenty of time throws and routes from Luck. Watch the 2nd half of that Cal game from last week in paticular and you will see Luck makes some good timing throws WHILE under pressure.

A couple of games back, the announcers were talking about how they talked with the Stanford coaching staff, who had just analyzed every throw that Luck has made over the course of the year. At that time, Luck was completing 97% of his passes off of play action. That is an incredible number in and of itself. However, his overall completion percentage for the year is at around 73%, so how low is his accuracy on straight up drop backs that the overall % comes down from 97 to 73? I could take the easy approach and say it would have to hover somewhere around 50% but I know that's likely not accurate because that would be assuming that Luck makes the same number of throws off play action that he does on straight drop backs and I'm sure that's not the case.

Why does it seem like your trying to discredit play-action as a viable passing means? Yes the running game helps but the QB still has to make the read and the throw. A 73% completion rate is stellar, regardless if its off play-action or not.

However, I do believe Luck's accuracy is overrated. That 97% completion percentage off playaction is more often than not to absolutely wide open receivers and even those throws are not always accurate, but because the receiver is so open he's able to adjust to the ball. Yes, for his college career, Luck is completing a very high percentage of his passes, but if you have WRs and TEs who can adjust to a poorly thrown ball, then the pass will still be completed. I can't give the QB credit for that any more than I would give blame to the QB for an incompleted pass if the pass was thrown accurately but was just dropped by the receiver.

The reciever isn't wide the frick open on every play-action pass. Sometimes defenders just flat out don't bite on the fake. So unless you've watched and analyzed every play-action pass Luck has ever thrown, which im sure you haven't, your point is invalid and has no merit.

The timing throws are the ones Luck has been struggling with lately....well imo all year to some extent but it's shown up more lately because their running game has been kept more in check so those wide open play action passes haven't been there the past couple of weeks like they were through the rest of the season. Luck is more often than not very accurate on slants and crossing routes, but his comeback and out routes are more often than not thrown high. And even with the accuracy on the crossing routes, Luck doesn't always have the ability to throw the ball with enough velocity to get the pass there quickly enough. In college that's not as big of a problem but in the NFL, many of those throws could wind up deflected or intercepted.

Comeback and out routes do indeed have to do with timing but when you are playing with WR's who are out of position due to injuries at the position, timing will be a little off. And thats across the board, from college to the pros. Look at Peyton last year. When he was playing with backup recievers and TE's his timing was off and it looked very much like Peyton was just flat out inaccurate and missing throws sometimes. Even though it more or less had to do with the fact that they haven't had the time and practice together to develop the timing needed.

I know people are going to throw out the "well Manning's arm strength was a question coming out of college too" and to that I can only say that I never watched Manning play in college so I don't know how his arm strength would have compared to Lucks. I do believe though his arm strength is above average at best. Can it improve? Perhaps with the right strength and conditioning he can improve his arm strength somewhat but there's no way to know that it will improve enough that those types of throws will be able to be made with better velocity to fit them into the tight coverage windows he's going to face in the NFL.

So you already are admitting that you "never really watched Manning play in college" so how can you make a valid comparison point? Luck has made plenty of tight coverage throws and some of them on the run I might add. I seriously think you just watched highlights of the Oregon-Standford game in your assesments.

As far as playcalling goes and being an offensive coordinator on the field, based on all that is said about Luck, yes I will give you that he is advanced beyond his years in this regard. However, imo this is more a luxury than a need for a QB. A QB NEEDS to be able to read coverage and make appropriate checks at the LOS. He needs to be able to audible when necessary. He does not need to be able to call every play for the offense throughout the course of the game..that's typically the OCs job. Now if we don't replace Christiansen then we may need our QB to continue being the OC on the field. However, if we can bring in a competent OC then a QB who can call his own plays no longer becomes a need. It would be a nice luxury to have but if the QB shows signs of struggling physically with being able to make every NFL type throw and pick apart zone coverage then having that luxury doesn't mean as much.

Are you serious? That's the point everyone makes is that he makes the proper reads and audibles at the LOS and gets his offense into the right plays. I don't know why you somehow think they are different factors.

[Jason_]

LOL I love you say TE's can stretch the field like WR's. If thats the case, why don't we all just draft and play with TE's instead of WR's and line them up on the outside like recievers because they are just as capable right? New England is attempting to do that with MODERATE success. They have no deep recieving game in the same way that Stanford doesn't, primarily because of injuries at the reciever position.

Good grief...I meant STANFORD'S TEs, not just any TE. I was referring specifically to Coby Fleener, Zac Ertz and Levine Toilolo.

Your missing a huge point in that with possession recievers they have to get OPEN which they normally don't do because they are just merely pass catchers and aren't known for being explosive threats. I don't know what games you watch but I've seen plenty of time throws and routes from Luck. Watch the 2nd half of that Cal game from last week in paticular and you will see Luck makes some good timing throws WHILE under pressure.

Possession receivers typically aren't explosive and that's why they're possession receivers. They run crisp routes and get to the spot where the QB is going to throw the ball. I did watch both halves of the Cal game as well as almost every other Stanford game this year...I believe I only missed one game early in the season. Yes, Luck did make a few nice throws in the 2nd half that were on time but even on those the throwing velocity left a little to be desired. My point is more often than not, he's not throwing those type of timing routes but rather crossing or deep routes off of play action.

Why does it seem like your trying to discredit play-action as a viable passing means? Yes the running game helps but the QB still has to make the read and the throw. A 73% completion rate is stellar, regardless if its off play-action or not.

Because that's what you want to read into what I'm saying. I'm not trying to discredit play action...quite the contrary. It's a very important piece to most team's passing success. The point I've been trying to make is that, due to the success of the Stanford running game, their play action is that much more effective than most team's have. Just as an example, Arizona's offense is in the bottom 5 in rushing in contrast to Stanford who is top 10. Wouldn't it then stand to reason that play action would be much more effective for Luck than for Nick Foles? Yes it would. And yes, the QB still has to make the read and the throw but it's a lot easier to do when the defense is selling out against the run.

The reciever isn't wide the frick open on every play-action pass. Sometimes defenders just flat out don't bite on the fake. So unless you've watched and analyzed every play-action pass Luck has ever thrown, which im sure you haven't, your point is invalid and has no merit.

I never said the receiver is "wide the frick open" every play action pass....but they are on a lot of them, and even if they're not "wide the frick open" they've more often than not gotten at least one to two steps on the defender. And no, I haven't analyzed every single play action pass Luck has ever thrown, I'm simply stating what I've seen as a trend in watching the majority of their games this year. There's no need to get upset because I'm questioning your hero's abilities. ;)

Comeback and out routes do indeed have to do with timing but when you are playing with WR's who are out of position due to injuries at the position, timing will be a little off. And thats across the board, from college to the pros. Look at Peyton last year. When he was playing with backup recievers and TE's his timing was off and it looked very much like Peyton was just flat out inaccurate and missing throws sometimes. Even though it more or less had to do with the fact that they haven't had the time and practice together to develop the timing needed.

This could very well be true, and I considered this for a while. However, especially on comeback routes I kept seeing Luck throw the ball high. I thought at first it might be because the WR wasn't running deep enough before coming back, therefore he wasn't in the position he was supposed to be in when Luck threw the ball. So I started paying even closer attention and rewinding and rewatching those types of plays and I realized that on the majority of those type of throws, the ball would have gone out of bounds if the WR had tried to go much deeper. Luck was throwing the right depth on the route but the passes were routinely thrown too high. On some occasions, the WR was able to make a leaping catch, but on others the pass went incomplete.

So you already are admitting that you "never really watched Manning play in college" so how can you make a valid comparison point? Luck has made plenty of tight coverage throws and some of them on the run I might add. I seriously think you just watched highlights of the Oregon-Standford game in your assesments.

What? I didn't make a comparison between Luck and Manning...I stated very clearly that I could not make a comparison because I didn't watch Manning in college. And I assure you I watched the entire game. I don't watch highlights. However on the contrary, I think there are a lot of people that are in love with Luck that do only watch highlights.

Are you serious? That's the point everyone makes is that he makes the proper reads and audibles at the LOS and gets his offense into the right plays. I don't know why you somehow think they are different factors.

The QBs job is to run the play that was called in to him by the OC or HC (whoever is playcaller) and then make the read on the defense to throw the ball to the correct receiver. In cases where the QB sees a blitz or a particular coverage he thinks he can exploit, then he makes the adjustment with the WR, changes or adjusts protection or perhaps audibles from pass to run or run to pass. This is how 31 NFL teams and 119 FBS teams do it so yes, I do consider the ability to call your own plays and to make reads and adjustments at the LOS to be different factors. I could honestly care less that Luck calls his own plays. The ability to call his own plays would have ZERO to do with my choice of a QB for the reasons I've already stated. If I have a good OC then the QB doesn't need to be able to call his own plays. Perhaps we're moving towards a new era of QBS who are their own play callers but it's going to be a while before this becomes a common phenomenon. Why do I say that? Because as of now the only other QB in NFL history that I know of who called his own plays the majority of the time was Jim Kelly. So that's 2 QBs....in HISTORY that are their own playcallers. Therefore the ability to do so does not factor into my decision on who the next QB should be. Does the fact that Luck calls his own plays give him an advantage when it comes to making reads and adjustments at the LOS? Yes, I'm sure it does but each of the other top 5-10 QB prospects also make correct reads and adjustments at the LOS and are still successful without being the one who calls their own plays. This is what makes them the top 5-10 QB prospects.

Yes, Luck is beyond his years in regards to playcalling and reading defenses, but if he doesn't have the physical tools to go along with that then he's just another QB who is not Peyton Manning. It was either Trent Dilfer or Steve Young (I believe Dilfer) earlier in the season who said what sets Manning apart is he is the one player in history who had the very high football IQ that he does but also has the physical abilities to go along with it. And by physical abilities I'm primarily referring to having the arm to be able to make consistent throws with a high degree of accuracy, correct timing and proper velocity. These are the things I don't see from Luck on a consistent basis. Yes he shows flashes and he makes a couple of good to great throws per game that are all him, but I have watched other QBs make those types of throws consistently because they're forced to for whatever reason (not having an effective running game, not having an elite-speed WR, or injuries to their best skill players etc).

[Mameluc]

i like those long reads lol

[Moncrief]

Jason were you in debate club in high school. But seriously though I like how you make your point get across.

[Mameluc]

Jason were you in debate club in high school. But seriously though I like how you make your point get across.

LOL, but thats a fair question

[Ramblinwreck7]

We get it, you dont want luck. That's fine. If you believe I am not thinking, you are a clown, and welcome to my ignore list as you never have anything to add that is remotely correct.

An ignore list? Yay! At least I made it. I don't believe you are not thinking, you are proving it to me as plain as daylight. Read your comments and maybe you, with a little thinking, will start to see that...