Aaron Rodgers: Luck Would Gain "invaluable" Experience From Sitting

[Restored]

http://www.nfl.com/n..._headline_stack

I find this to be interesting considering that a lot of people on here seem to think sitting is NOT the way to go with Luck. Take it from arguably the best QB playing right now and sit Luck. Let him learn the system for a few years behind Peyton and then come in and play.

"Peyton is obviously one of the greatest quarterbacks of all time, and for Andrew coming in -- who everybody is saying is going to be one of the most NFL-ready players ever -- if he's able to be fine with sitting behind Peyton for a couple years, I think it'd be invaluable," Rodgers told ESPN Radio's "Mike & Mike" show Wednesday.

[21isSuperman]

I agree with him. But with that said, having any QB sit and learn behind Peyton (or any veteran QB in the league, for that matter) would be invaluable experience. Heck, even if I got the chance to do that for a year, I would be ecstatic...and I am nowhere near an NFL-level QB.

[Restored]

I agree with him. But with that said, having any QB sit and learn behind Peyton (or any veteran QB in the league, for that matter) would be invaluable experience. Heck, even if I got the chance to do that for a year, I would be ecstatic...and I am nowhere near an NFL-level QB.

Right? So why not bring the kid in and let him sit behind Peyton a few seasons? To me this would be like Favre-Rodgers 2.0 with Peyton actually trying to teach Luck the system.

[ReMeDy]

Well Painter and Sorgi sure didn't learn a whole lot of anything sitting behind Manning. I think it's because Manning is either:

a.) Bad at coaching QB's

b.) Steals all the practice snaps (which I've heard is true)

c.) We're just having very bad luck with Manning's QB's. Maybe they have mentality issues.

d.) All or some of the above

[Andy]

Another reason why we should draft him... a person who has gone through what Luck will go through said it was invaluable. Now the Colts FO better not screw this up.

[jskinnz]

Another reason why we should draft him... a person who has gone through what Luck will go through said it was invaluable. Now the Colts FO better not screw this up.

Yep. There is a good reason to make a decision. Aaron Rodgers says it would be a good idea.

[BmoreColt]

LOL!! +1

[KyFan18]

Well Painter and Sorgi sure didn't learn a whole lot of anything sitting behind Manning. I think it's because Manning is either:

a.) Bad at coaching QB's

b.) Steals all the practice snaps (which I've heard is true)

c.) We're just having very bad luck with Manning's QB's. Maybe they have mentality issues.

d.) All or some of the above

Or maybe Sorgi and Painter suck. Yeah, that's probably it.

[Jason_]

And Manning said that starting from day 1 helped him more than anything in his development. There are positives and negatives for either scenario.

[21isSuperman]

And Manning said that starting from day 1 helped him more than anything in his development. There are positives and negatives for either scenario.

I remember Eli (I think) saying the same thing. Sitting behind the starter and learning was nice, but it won't prepare you for the actual game when you are in there going at full speed

[21isSuperman]

Right? So why not bring the kid in and let him sit behind Peyton a few seasons? To me this would be like Favre-Rodgers 2.0 with Peyton actually trying to teach Luck the system.

What about other QBs? I've heard there are lots of talented QBs in this draft. Luck is just considered the most pro-ready, but we don't necessarily need a guy who is pro-ready now to step in and play if Peyton is healthy. What about drafting a guy like Barkley and letting him learn from Peyton? For the record, I don't necessarily believe we should pass up on Luck, I am just playing Devil's advocate

[fvantagio]

You can practice, watch film and learn from the best all you want. But until you are on the field actually playing football then the only thing you are learning are the X's and O's. and for the record this is nothing like the favre to rodgers situation. The packers werent threatening to go 0-16 before drafting him. Regardless who is at QB this team wont be a contender until we have something that at least resembles a defense. Even Peyton Manning cant do it, so why risk it on the chance that Luck might be as good as Manning, if the real Manning cant do it then what makes everyone think Luck can? Aaron Rodgers, Drew Brees, Tom Brady, Big Ben all SB winning QBs... None of them where the next Manning.

[Restored]

I remember Eli (I think) saying the same thing. Sitting behind the starter and learning was nice, but it won't prepare you for the actual game when you are in there going at full speed

Of course you can never simulate gamespeed till you are actually in the game. I'd expect him to get plenty of playing in pre-season and in garbage time at the end of games as well. Who knows maybe we are in a position like 09 where we can rest starters and he really gets a chance to come in and play. Never know.

What about other QBs? I've heard there are lots of talented QBs in this draft. Luck is just considered the most pro-ready, but we don't necessarily need a guy who is pro-ready now to step in and play if Peyton is healthy. What about drafting a guy like Barkley and letting him learn from Peyton? For the record, I don't necessarily believe we should pass up on Luck, I am just playing Devil's advocate

Barkley is not even projected to come out this year. USC has a lot of talent around Barkley that is just now being developed and his position could be higher in the draft next year if he waits. I think you might have a little bit mis-understanding of the term "pro-ready". Pro-ready means he can make all or most of throws and all, if not most of the reads a NFL QB has to make. From that point, you would work on developing his mechanics in the pocket and on some of the intangibles that would come from a few off-seasons in league along with learning the immense playbook that nearly every player in this offense said it took 3 years to fully grasp.

You can practice, watch film and learn from the best all you want. But until you are on the field actually playing football then the only thing you are learning are the X's and O's. and for the record this is nothing like the favre to rodgers situation. The packers werent threatening to go 0-16 before drafting him. Regardless who is at QB this team wont be a contender until we have something that at least resembles a defense. Even Peyton Manning cant do it, so why risk it on the chance that Luck might be as good as Manning, if the real Manning cant do it then what makes everyone think Luck can? Aaron Rodgers, Drew Brees, Tom Brady, Big Ben all SB winning QBs... None of them where the next Manning.

How is it nothing like Favre and Rodgers situation? Myself and others see a LOT of similarities. Yes our records are different but that has nothing to do with the four players being compared. I agree we need to rebuild this team pretty much from the defense on up and hopefully this draft and off-season changes allows us to do that. We still would have about another 3-4 years before Luck would take over anyway so lets not jump to conclusions about how bad we are gonna be then. No one is saying he is the next Peyton, but the notion is that he is the QB most similar in skillset to come out of college since Peyton.

[Xfiles]

The valuable part of that Scenario is we get to keep Peyton for a few years then hand the Keys to Luck. It could also be argued that if they Give Luck snaps in practice, he could get used to NFL game speed before stepping on the field for a REAL game. Every NFL player says that is the toughest part, getting used to NFL game speed.

[FireJimCaldwell]

In my opinion the quarterback has what it takes to cut it in this league or he doesn't.

That isn't to say that someone who was immature like Ryan Leaf couldn't have benefited from some time behind a seasoned vet, but for the most part the sooner the guy can play, the sooner he can take some lumps and attempt to learn from it. Eli's first few starts at New York weren't the greatest, but I do believe that he and his team would have been much better off if he would have started from day 1 like his brother.

If I were Luck, I would want to play. Of course some guys are at the right place at the right time and gain from that. I doubt Tom Brady is anything near what he is today if he were drafted in the 4th round with Cincy or Cleveland.

For the record, Jim Sorgi and Curtis Painter do not deserve to be mentioned in the same breath. Sorgi wasn't an NFL starter by any stretch of the imagination but he was competent, and could run the offense, even the Peyton Manning offense more efficiently than Painter has. I'm not sure Sorgi was healthy at the start of the season, I've read mixed reports, but he was # 1 on my list with Collins at #2 when it was clear that we were going to have to bring someone. Sorgi's greatest asset was his knowledge of the offense and I think he was brighter than Painter. Painter has a better arm, more mobility, etc, but I feel that Sorgi could read a defense better than Painter, and personally I don't think we would be 0-10 with Sorgi running the show.

I do feel that Manning hogging all 1st team snaps has held Painter back some, and I put that on Caldwell & Clyde for not giving QB2 reps. You never know when a blow to the head will knock a qb out with a concussion. QB2 should get some reps on a daily basis, but that falls on the worst coaching staff in the NFL.

Andrew Luck is talented, there is no doubt in that. But to expect him to come in, with this same staff, with this same structure is asking too much of him. That would be asking him to be better than Peyton Manning and that simply isn't going to happen. Which is why I'm in favor of a complete overhaul schematically, and that is with or without Manning.

[Jason_]

Of course you can never simulate gamespeed till you are actually in the game. I'd expect him to get plenty of playing in pre-season and in garbage time at the end of games as well. Who knows maybe we are in a position like 09 where we can rest starters and he really gets a chance to come in and play. Never know.

I agree to some extent. However, even practices won't prepare the new QB for actually being in the game and we can't count on there being garbage time for the new QB to come in and be able to play. Until the defensive issues are corrected there may not be any garbage time.

Barkley is not even projected to come out this year. USC has a lot of talent around Barkley that is just now being developed and his position could be higher in the draft next year if he waits. I think you might have a little bit mis-understanding of the term "pro-ready". Pro-ready means he can make all or most of throws and all, if not most of the reads a NFL QB has to make. From that point, you would work on developing his mechanics in the pocket and on some of the intangibles that would come from a few off-seasons in league along with learning the immense playbook that nearly every player in this offense said it took 3 years to fully grasp.

There is no speculation as of now as to whether Barkley will or won't declare for the 2012 draft. However, I don't see him staying in school for the sole purpose of raising his draft position because he's already projected to be the #2 overall pick, or at least the 2nd QB taken in the draft. If he stays in school it would be to either finish his degree or to have a chance to compete for a national championship next year.

Also, I think that perhaps you might be misunderstanding what is meant by being pro-ready. The hype about Luck is because the pundits say there are no holes in his game. They say there are no issues with his mechanics nor with his intangibles and that's why he's the most pro-ready QB since Elway or Manning. According to the hype, there's no reason for Luck to not be starting from day 1 other than if he's drafted by a team who already has a starting QB. That's why many feel it would be a waste to draft him if Manning is ready to go because there are plenty of QBs in the coming draft class that can make all of the NFL throws but simply need some minor corrections to their mechanics or what not in order to be ready to start in the pros.

[Restored]

I agree to some extent. However, even practices won't prepare the new QB for actually being in the game and we can't count on there being garbage time for the new QB to come in and be able to play. Until the defensive issues are corrected there may not be any garbage time.

Ah this is where the fun begins again. I remember you from another thread. Let's make this one a little bit more fun shall we? So practices won't prepare a QB for being in the game, so why practice then right? Why take a shower if you are gonna get dirty anyway? Why brush your teeth if your just gonna get food in them anway? Same mantra here.

There is no speculation as of now as to whether Barkley will or won't declare for the 2012 draft. However, I don't see him staying in school for the sole purpose of raising his draft position because he's already projected to be the #2 overall pick, or at least the 2nd QB taken in the draft. If he stays in school it would be to either finish his degree or to have a chance to compete for a national championship next year.

Actually, outside of Miami taking him after the Colts in theory take Luck, he falls into the teens in a lot of draft boards. They can't compete for a national championship since they are still on probation but he could go #1 overall next year. And in the game of numbers #1 is higher than say even #2 this year.

Also, I think that perhaps you might be misunderstanding what is meant by being pro-ready. The hype about Luck is because the pundits say there are no holes in his game. They say there are no issues with his mechanics nor with his intangibles and that's why he's the most pro-ready QB since Elway or Manning. According to the hype, there's no reason for Luck to not be starting from day 1 other than if he's drafted by a team who already has a starting QB. That's why many feel it would be a waste to draft him if Manning is ready to go because there are plenty of QBs in the coming draft class that can make all of the NFL throws but simply need some minor corrections to their mechanics or what not in order to be ready to start in the pros.

I think you might be right in that sense but the problem is NO QB ever to come is fully prepared from day 1. We went over this in a few other threads already so I hate to repeat myself with you. Peyton Manning in year 2 and 3 was better than in year 1 was he not? Why would be a waste? If anything I'd consider drafting a QB whom you have to develop to be more risky and possibly more of a "waste" considering there are things there that need to be worked on. Don't bring up the trade for more picks because we've already gone over this. Basic arguement is that it could actually cost more money than just taking Luck and not get enough good players onto the field quick enough to make an impact in the Manning era. Don't bring your mock draft board with your "hand selected" players that we and everybody elses knows Polian won't draft either.

[Jason_]

I see. I can reply but I can't bring certain points to the conversation. So this is what it's like arguing with a 5 year old. :rolleyes:

Ah this is where the fun begins again. I remember you from another thread. Let's make this one a little bit more fun shall we? So practices won't prepare a QB for being in the game, so why practice then right? Why take a shower if you are gonna get dirty anyway? Why brush your teeth if your just gonna get food in them anway? Same mantra here.

So we take a valid point, that practicing does not prepare a player for the actual speed of an NFL game and we take it to its absurd extreme. Again, arguing with a 5 year old.

Actually, outside of Miami taking him after the Colts in theory take Luck, he falls into the teens in a lot of draft boards. They can't compete for a national championship since they are still on probation but he could go #1 overall next year. And in the game of numbers #1 is higher than say even #2 this year.

This all depends on draft order. However, no way Barkley slips past Miami, Seattle and Washington. I fully expect there to be at least 3-4 teams in the top 10 that need a QB so no way Barkley makes it out of the top 10, and it's highly unlikely he makes it out of the top 5...imo. And yes, #1 is higher than #2 but I don't see a player staying in school for the sole purpose of rising up one spot on the board. Now if Barkley were projected as a 2nd round pick or later then I could see him staying in school to improve draft position. I don't see him staying in just to rise up 1 draft spot. Again, just my opinion. And this is USC's last year of bowl ineligibility. As of next year they are again eligible for bowl games, including the national championship...hence the reason I said he could come back next year to compete for a national championship.

I think you might be right in that sense but the problem is NO QB ever to come is fully prepared from day 1. We went over this in a few other threads already so I hate to repeat myself with you. Peyton Manning in year 2 and 3 was better than in year 1 was he not? Why would be a waste? If anything I'd consider drafting a QB whom you have to develop to be more risky and possibly more of a "waste" considering there are things there that need to be worked on. Don't bring up the trade for more picks because we've already gone over this. Basic arguement is that it could actually cost more money than just taking Luck and not get enough good players onto the field quick enough to make an impact in the Manning era. Don't bring your mock draft board with your "hand selected" players that we and everybody elses knows Polian won't draft either.

Of course Manning was better in year 2 and 3 than in year 1. However, some players learn from doing and some learn from watching. I would say more learn by actually doing but this is merely conjecture. And it could be considered a waste to draft a QB who's primary selling point is he's ready to start from day 1 (this is what the "experts" say, not me) if we don't need a QB to start from day 1. We can bring in all of the top QB prospects and closely evaluate each one, determine what holes there are in each QBs game and determine which would be the easiest and quickest to correct. If done correctly, we could find the next Rodgers, Brees etc. In doing so, we trade the pick and acquire multiple additional that plug multiple holes and create a young core of talented players plus a great QB prospect that we can build the team around.

[Restored]

I see. I can reply but I can't bring certain points to the conversation. So this is what it's like arguing with a 5 year old. :rolleyes:

So we take a valid point, that practicing does not prepare a player for the actual speed of an NFL game and we take it to its absurd extreme. Again, arguing with a 5 year old.

You missed my entire point THAT IT DOES prepare you for the game. And yes you can never actually simulate gamespeed but its the best you can do ontop of a good 2-3 seasons of pre-season and garabage time play. Rodgers played sparingly during those years and look at how he turned out. He's probably the best QB in the game right now and has taken 4-5 years less worth of hits than some of the other QB's in the league. Geez its like arguing with a wall.

This all depends on draft order. However, no way Barkley slips past Miami, Seattle and Washington. I fully expect there to be at least 3-4 teams in the top 10 that need a QB so no way Barkley makes it out of the top 10, and it's highly unlikely he makes it out of the top 5...imo. And yes, #1 is higher than #2 but I don't see a player staying in school for the sole purpose of rising up one spot on the board. Now if Barkley were projected as a 2nd round pick or later then I could see him staying in school to improve draft position. I don't see him staying in just to rise up 1 draft spot. Again, just my opinion. And this is USC's last year of bowl ineligibility. As of next year they are again eligible for bowl games, including the national championship...hence the reason I said he could come back next year to compete for a national championship.

I didn't say that was the sole purpose. Him staying with USC for his senior year with the talent around that team along with the National Championship implications are the main reasons. I also meant that THIS YEAR they weren't bowl eligible meaning that with next year he'd be more inclinced to stay and play. lrn2read. If he waits and does come out after this year he will be #1 overall. Not the only reason but another reason.

Of course Manning was better in year 2 and 3 than in year 1. However, some players learn from doing and some learn from watching. I would say more learn by actually doing but this is merely conjecture. And it could be considered a waste to draft a QB who's primary selling point is he's ready to start from day 1 (this is what the "experts" say, not me) if we don't need a QB to start from day 1. We can bring in all of the top QB prospects and closely evaluate each one, determine what holes there are in each QBs game and determine which would be the easiest and quickest to correct. If done correctly, we could find the next Rodgers, Brees etc. In doing so, we trade the pick and acquire multiple additional that plug multiple holes and create a young core of talented players plus a great QB prospect that we can build the team around.

I still don't see how it could be a waste. Like I said it would be more of a waste in my mind to draft a QB whom you have to work on rather than a QB who is ready to go. I mean if you want to go ahead and give more picks to this organization whom over the past couple of seasons haven't had the best record with drafting. Especially with all the recent doubt surrounding Chris Polian and his ablity to draft for this team. You mention Rodgers but as this thread title states he actually is all for Luck sitting behind Peyton on the bench for a few seasons and learning the system.

[WSO]

Please dont compare Sorgi and Painter to Luck

Sorgi and Painter flat out sucked

[Jason_]

You missed my entire point THAT IT DOES prepare you for the game. And yes you can never actually simulate gamespeed but its the best you can do ontop of a good 2-3 seasons of pre-season and garabage time play. Rodgers played sparingly during those years and look at how he turned out. He's probably the best QB in the game right now and has taken 4-5 years less worth of hits than some of the other QB's in the league. Geez its like arguing with a wall.

The underlined part was my point. No matter how much you practice, you can't prepare a QB for being in an actual game without putting him in the actual game. Of course you still practice, to not do so would be stupid. But no QB is going to truly get a feel for NFL game speed without actually being in the game.

I didn't say that was the sole purpose. Him staying with USC for his senior year with the talent around that team along with the National Championship implications are the main reasons. I also meant that THIS YEAR they weren't bowl eligible meaning that with next year he'd be more inclinced to stay and play. lrn2read. If he waits and does come out after this year he will be #1 overall. Not the only reason but another reason.

To the underlined part, you did not clearly communicate that in your post. I'm not a mind reader. I can only respond to what you type. lrn2communicate. Your exact quote was

Actually, outside of Miami taking him after the Colts in theory take Luck, he falls into the teens in a lot of draft boards. They can't compete for a national championship since they are still on probation but he could go #1 overall next year. And in the game of numbers #1 is higher than say even #2 this year.

I addressed the part in blue when I said that I didn't see there not being 3 or more teams in the top 10, likely the top 5, so unless it just happens to wind up that the QB needy teams don't wind up picking early then I don't see any way Barkley falls into the teens.

The part in green was simply worded poorly imo. You said they can't compete for a championship and in the same sentence you reference him going #1 next year. I can only infer from that you were also referring to next year when you said they couldn't compete for a championship. Regardless, it was a miscommunication.

To the part in purple, since the previous sentence was a miscommunication, it sounded like you were saying that Barkley would wait another year to move from #2 to #1.

I still don't see how it could be a waste. Like I said it would be more of a waste in my mind to draft a QB whom you have to work on rather than a QB who is ready to go. I mean if you want to go ahead and give more picks to this organization whom over the past couple of seasons haven't had the best record with drafting. Especially with all the recent doubt surrounding Chris Polian and his ablity to draft for this team. You mention Rodgers but as this thread title states he actually is all for Luck sitting behind Peyton on the bench for a few seasons and learning the system.

Here, we simply disagree and also I don't think the drafts have been as bad as people make them out to be but that's another topic for another thread. In regards to Luck sitting....well Rodgers says he'd be better off sitting and Peyton says he'd be better off playing right away. As I said before, there are pro's and con's to each scenario so we'll just have to wait and see what Luck thinks is best for him. This is also all assuming that, by the end of the year and after the combine/interviews/private workouts, that the Colts grade Luck as the best QB in the draft. I wouldn't be surprised if that's not the case.

[Restored]

The underlined part was my point. No matter how much you practice, you can't prepare a QB for being in an actual game without putting him in the actual game. Of course you still practice, to not do so would be stupid. But no QB is going to truly get a feel for NFL game speed without actually being in the game.

I agree you can't simulate gamespeed but that doesn't make you any worse or more of a QB when it does come time for said player to step in and play. All you can hope for is that practice and preparation and conditioning has gotten you into a position to be able to succeed.

To the underlined part, you did not clearly communicate that in your post. I'm not a mind reader. I can only respond to what you type. lrn2communicate. Your exact quote was

Well you obviously knew they were bowl eligible next year as I did so I expected it to be common knowledge between the both of us.

I addressed the part in blue when I said that I didn't see there not being 3 or more teams in the top 10, likely the top 5, so unless it just happens to wind up that the QB needy teams don't wind up picking early then I don't see any way Barkley falls into the teens.

The part in green was simply worded poorly imo. You said they can't compete for a championship and in the same sentence you reference him going #1 next year. I can only infer from that you were also referring to next year when you said they couldn't compete for a championship. Regardless, it was a miscommunication.

To the part in purple, since the previous sentence was a miscommunication, it sounded like you were saying that Barkley would wait another year to move from #2 to #1.

Here, we simply disagree and also I don't think the drafts have been as bad as people make them out to be but that's another topic for another thread. In regards to Luck sitting....well Rodgers says he'd be better off sitting and Peyton says he'd be better off playing right away. As I said before, there are pro's and con's to each scenario so we'll just have to wait and see what Luck thinks is best for him. This is also all assuming that, by the end of the year and after the combine/interviews/private workouts, that the Colts grade Luck as the best QB in the draft. I wouldn't be surprised if that's not the case.

No need to really address your other points since they aren't really arguement points.

[doogansquest]

1. Aaron Rodgers is a football player, and has very little knowledge or sway as far as constructing a team goes.

2. Aaron Rodgers wasn't NFL ready. Luck (supposedly) is. That's why sitting made sense to him. Not to mention the fact that he was picked 23 spots lower, and didn't cost the team any money.

3. This is nothing more than a player stating his opinion, so all of those people who think we HAVE to take Luck can forget about it providing some measure of validation.

4. Notice he said, "if he will sit," not that he should. Luck may not want to sit. We shouldn't want to hold a guy ransom, while also hurting our team, just to hope that we don't see a drop-off after Manning in four years.

Finally, Rodgers isn't the best QB in the game today, he's just playing great with the best team in football today.

Peyton Manning has stated that Luck would be best suited playing right away. Whom do you trust? Aaron Rodgers, or Peyton Manning? Who's had the better career thus far? Who is the better all-time QB? Who is more intelligent on the field? Who does more with less? You are Colts fans, so choose your answer wisely.

[BmoreColt]

@Doogan +1... Why everyone compare Luck to Rodgers is baffling, it is not the same situation, with anywhere near the same team or front office!

[Restored]

1. Aaron Rodgers is a football player, and has very little knowledge or sway as far as constructing a team goes.

Well he's been in a similiar situation that Luck will more or likely will go through come draft time so its interesting to see his input. Don't overread it lol.

2. Aaron Rodgers wasn't NFL ready. Luck (supposedly) is. That's why sitting made sense to him. Not to mention the fact that he was picked 23 spots lower, and didn't cost the team any money.

While this is true in a sense, as I discussed with Jason, NO QB is ever fully-NFL ready. ie. Peyton progressing over years 2 and 3 compared to year 1. Also the notion with Rodgers was that he either would of gone #1 with Alex Smith falling off or vice-versa. It just so happen that Smith was taken and Rodgers was the one who fell off. It easily could of gone the other way.

3. This is nothing more than a player stating his opinion, so all of those people who think we HAVE to take Luck can forget about it providing some measure of validation.

I don't think its the all telling mantra but it does shed some light on the situation from a player who has gone through a similar situation because regardless of how you look at it, if we take Luck and Manning is still with the team, Luck will in all likelyhood sit. For how long though remains to be seen.

4. Notice he said, "if he will sit," not that he should. Luck may not want to sit. We shouldn't want to hold a guy ransom, while also hurting our team, just to hope that we don't see a drop-off after Manning in four years.

Okay and maybe he wouldn't mind sitting. It's not holding him ransom but you can view it how you want. Don't see how it hurts the team either in having your future franchise QB waiting in the wings. Afterall it does take about 2-3 years to fully grasph this offense which is about the amount of time people expect Peyton to have left.

Finally, Rodgers isn't the best QB in the game today, he's just playing great with the best team in football today.

Oh really? Yet he leads the league in pro bowl voting this year and is on a record setting pace with QB rating. He is playing lightsout. Tell me who is playing better right now please.

Peyton Manning has stated that Luck would be best suited playing right away. Whom do you trust? Aaron Rodgers, or Peyton Manning? Who's had the better career thus far? Who is the better all-time QB? Who is more intelligent on the field? Who does more with less? You are Colts fans, so choose your answer wisely.

..Because he has the ablitiy to play right away? It doesn't mean he thinks he should come in and start right away because it would be detrimental if he didn't. It just means he thinks he hast the ablity to come in and play right away.

Also since you like reading into things so deeply. What about Peyton saying to Luck he should wait another year and come out this coming year in the draft? Does that mean that the colts threw this year to get him? Does that mean Peyton wants the Colts to draft Luck so they can teach him? You seem like a well-knowledged fan so choose your answers wisely

[Coltsman1788]

Finally, Rodgers isn't the best QB in the game today, he's just playing great with the best team in football today.

Peyton Manning has stated that Luck would be best suited playing right away. Whom do you trust? Aaron Rodgers, or Peyton Manning? Who's had the better career thus far? Who is the better all-time QB? Who is more intelligent on the field? Who does more with less? You are Colts fans, so choose your answer wisely.

Some would beg to differ on your opinion of Rogers not being the best QB currently playing. If he is not the best he is certainly on the short list of those who could be considered to be.

Also why do we need to decide who to trust the most? Both Peyton & Rogers are equally credible and well respected sources who followed two different philosophies to develop into elite quarterbacks. One school of thought is not necessarily superior to the other. It is about what works best for that individual player. What worked best for Peyton (playing right away) or Rogers (observing a legend & replacing him later) may or may not necessarily work best for Luck. But both Peyton and Rogers show that a quarterback can potentially become successful following either developmental track.

[Jason_]

Some would beg to differ on your opinion of Rogers not being the best QB currently playing. If he is not the best he is certainly on the short list of those who could be considered to be.

Also why do we need to decide who to trust the most? Both Peyton & Rogers are equally credible and well respected sources who followed two different philosophies to develop into elite quarterbacks. One school of thought is not necessarily superior to the other. It is about what works best for that individual player. What worked best for Peyton (playing right away) or Rogers (observing a legend & replacing him later) may or may not necessarily work best for Luck. But both Peyton and Rogers show that a quarterback can potentially become successful following either developmental track.

I agree. In the end I don't think it will matter what Peyton, Eli, or Aaron have to say...in the end, Luck is going to have to make up his own mind and decide what he thinks is best for him and at this point, all we can do is guess as to what that might be.

While this is true in a sense, as I discussed with Jason, NO QB is ever fully-NFL ready. ie. Peyton progressing over years 2 and 3 compared to year 1. Also the notion with Rodgers was that he either would of gone #1 with Alex Smith falling off or vice-versa. It just so happen that Smith was taken and Rodgers was the one who fell off. It easily could of gone the other way.

You are right in that no QB is ever fully ready to play in the NFL, but that doesn't mean the QB isn't NFL-ready. I know that sounds like a contradiction but it all comes down to what the draft experts mean when they talk about being NFL-ready. My interpretation is that NFL-ready means the QB:

-can make all NFL type throws with accuracy, timing and velocity

-has no major issues with footwork or throwing motion...mechanics do not need work

-has excellent pocket awareness and ability to manipulate the pocket to extend plays

-shows ability to be a leader

-shows ability to make pre-snap reads and make adjustments/audibles to put the offense in the best play for success

I'm sure there's a lot more than that. However when you say no QB is ready to be an NFL QB from day one, and when i agree, I'm agreeing that no college QB is truly ready to come in and be prepared for the speed of the game and the complexity of NFL defenses compared to most college defenses. These, however, are things that imo can't be taught and can only be learned by in-game experience. So maybe it just comes down to us having different definitions of "NFL-ready". The best QBs in this class are ready to be on the field in the NFL based on what I've described as being NFL-ready...the things they have yet to learn are the things they're not going to learn until they actually are on the field.