Shaw Pumping Up Luck? Or For Real....

[cmgww]

This was taken from an ESPN article about Stanford's HC David Shaw and his complaints about the BCS (it's not fair, Stanford getting the shaft, biased towards the SEC, etc) but the end of the article caught my eye. He was asked if the recent losses have affected A. Luck's "status" as a Heisman contender....

Shaw's statements came just a couple of hours after he made an impassioned speech about why quarterback Andrew Luck should win the Heisman Trophy. Speaking on the Pac-12 coaches' conference call, Shaw said "it's an absolute joke" that Luck's national perception might be slipping.

"There is nobody in college football that is doing what Andrew Luck is doing," Shaw said. "Don't forget, I spent nine years in the NFL. I evaluated every single quarterback that came out in the NFL during that time and have seen all of the good ones since then. There is nobody that I've heard of that does as much at the line of scrimmage in college football. There are not that many guys in the NFL that are doing as much as Andrew is at the line of scrimmage.

"The guy is running the game at the line of scrimmage. He's controlling the protections. He's controlling the running game. We're calling three, four plays in the huddle, which most guys can't even think about handling and he does that."

Sound familiar?? I have heard the same things said about a certain injured future HOF QB that plays for the Colts. Is Shaw just pumping up his player, or is this the truth? I've only seen the USC game to evaluate Luck, so I don't have enough eyewitness data to make a conclusion on this. I do know he could have crumbled after the pick six and didn't. In fact it seemed to up his level of play. The jury is still out on him for me, just not enough time seeing him.

Thoughts??

[pacolts56]

Shaw is both campaigning for Luck to win the Heisman and he's telling the truth about Luck's QB responsibilities....which is why when the Stanford running game is given primary credit for Luck's success, it is largely an inaccurate "tale wags the dog" rationale.

The QB is calling or audibling his offense into run plays.....which is what NFL QBs have to be able to identify and do.

Andrew Luck successfully operates a very balanced Stanford offense....not an offense necessarily "run heavy" by design. And a QB doesn't accumulate 74 TD passes (and counting) in a "run heavy" offense either.

Not only that, but he does these things at a university that cuts absolutely NO corners academically....which, whether anyone wants to acknowledge or not, reduces Stanford's recruiting pool compared to most PAC-12 schools.

Luck may or may not win the Heisman Trophy....there are alot of worthy candidates.

But I for one hope that whoever succeeds Peyton Manning, whenever they succeed him, is able to operate a more balanced and physical Colts offense.

[Xfiles]

Sounds very familliar. Nice.

[doogansquest]

Whatever Luck is doing, it's not working right now. He's just pumping up his player because his team has become vulnerable, and lost their way out of the NC picture. Luck was a major part of those losses. Once defenses got the running game under control a little bit, and more went in Luck's shoulders to become a passer first, his success has diminished. People may be all homered for the SEC, but all eyes have been on Luck whenever he's been on tv. He has simply failed to impress on those nights, and recent analysis has observed as much.

[Flash7]

Whatever Luck is doing, it's not working right now. He's just pumping up his player because his team has become vulnerable, and lost their way out of the NC picture. Luck was a major part of those losses. Once defenses got the running game under control a little bit, and more went in Luck's shoulders to become a passer first, his success has diminished. People may be all homered for the SEC, but all eyes have been on Luck whenever he's been on tv. He has simply failed to impress on those nights, and recent analysis has observed as much.

Doogan, it could be exactly what you've mentioned. I would argue that it could also be that during the last two televised games, his O-line has maintained the same personnel, and his runningbacks have been the same, therefore, the running game hasn't changed. The defenses have done a better job focusing on the run. What has changed is that he has lost his deep threat receiver, Owusu, who has had multiple concussions this year. His tight ends have also been hurt and in and out of the line up. So in short, when Luck is forced into passing situations, he's passing to a freshman receiver and doesn't have his core of tight ends to assist with the passing game. To me, this would be a greater indication why the passing game has been in a slump. It's more logical to thing that due to injuries to his receiving corps, the passing game has suffered a little, (he still pout up good numbers) rather than thinking that his average completion percentage over the past two year is at 71% and now all of a sudden he doesn't have it anymore.

[pacolts56]

Whatever Luck is doing, it's not working right now. He's just pumping up his player because his team has become vulnerable, and lost their way out of the NC picture. Luck was a major part of those losses. Once defenses got the running game under control a little bit, and more went in Luck's shoulders to become a passer first, his success has diminished. People may be all homered for the SEC, but all eyes have been on Luck whenever he's been on tv. He has simply failed to impress on those nights, and recent analysis has observed as much.

Well....they've lost one game....which yes, is enough to bounce a team out of the NC picture if you're not an SEC team. Personally....I'm hoping Arkansas beats LSU this week and fries the BCS computer.

But Oregon vs Stanford vs USC vs Oregon has been a month-long track meet and its been alot fun to watch. It has also disspelled Forum assumptions that the Stanford defense and rushing attack are unstoppable juggernauts. No they are not....and no matter how good their TEs are, Stanford'd WRs are average at best.

Look......if Peyton is either done or his medical outcome is uncertain, we have a decision to make. Andrew Luck was going to be under serious scrutiny and his game gone over with a finetooth comb this year....and he should if he is going to be the NFL's #1 overall pick.

Alot of factors come into play that were missed with previous highly drafted QBs. Ryan Leaf's leadership and ability to be in the spotlight....Jamarcus Russell's work ethic....David Klingler's ability to run a pro-set offense....Vince Young's defensive reads....and I don't see any major shortfall that discounts Andrew Luck as our pick if Peyton cannot continue or sharply reduces his career to 1-2 seasons.

As I've said all along....if Peyton is deemed 100% healthy and intends to finish his 4 years out.....we should by all means trade the pick and insist on a Pro Bowl DT, OG or CB as part of any trade package. Milk the heck out of Luck's trade value.

But I haven't seen any major red flags that tell me we shouldn't draft Luck if Manning's medical outcome is bad news. And Peyton himself, after all, never beat Florida....so we gotta be consistent with all of these comparisons.

While we are rightly putting Luck under the microscope....lets look at Manning, Elway and Marino's college careers, but more than just stats...which Luck wins anyway....keep in mind Luck's responsibilities in the Stanford offense and factor in the growth he will gain as an NFL QB. Luck comes into whatever NFL team drafts him with a huge head start because he has already incorporated every element of QB play that an NFL QB incorporates....not at the NFL level yet, but at a pretty high college level of competition. And his body of work shows he's done an excellent job of it.....I believe the man is THAT good whether we pick him or trade him.

http://peytonmanning...llegestats.html

http://www.sports-re...hn-elway-1.html

http://www.sports-re...n-marino-1.html

[Jason_]

But Oregon vs Stanford vs USC vs Oregon has been a month-long track meet and its been alot fun to watch. It has also disspelled Forum assumptions that the Stanford defense and rushing attack are unstoppable juggernauts. No they are not....and no matter how good their TEs are, Stanford'd WRs are average at best.

I don't think anyone ever said the Stanford running game and defense were unstoppable juggernauts....but rather that the running game is one of the best in the FBS (which is still true) and that the Stanford defense is one of the best in the Pac-12 (which is also still true as they're rated #2 in total defense behind CAL in the Pac-12). And throughout the season, the Stanford team has relied heavily on these 2 facets and they have contributed highly to the team's success....and in the games where they have struggled, Luck has also struggled.

GMs, scouts etc are also going to look at what kind of adversity each QB has faced and how he's handled that adversity. Because of the efficiency of the Stanford running game and defense throughout the course of the year, Luck has been very successful. But in the games where those facets aren't clicking, Luck has struggled. Now the only thing that means is that, like other QBs, Luck is human but I do think it's starting to show more and more that Luck isn't the "head and shoulders above everyone else, once in a lifetime talent" that many have billed him to be. He is a very good QB but the talent gap between him and the other top prospects is not by as wide a margin as many have tried to make it out to be.

[supremecoltsfan300]

I think shaw is trying to praise luck so he doesnt fall out of the first overall draft pick. Shaw is sticking up for his guy, as he should, but the way luck has been playing lately n the way rg3 and barkley have performed is starting to raise the question if luck is the best qb in the draft.

[pacolts56]

I don't think anyone ever said the Stanford running game and defense were unstoppable juggernauts....but rather that the running game is one of the best in the FBS (which is still true) and that the Stanford defense is one of the best in the Pac-12 (which is also still true as they're rated #2 in total defense behind CAL in the Pac-12). And throughout the season, the Stanford team has relied heavily on these 2 facets and they have contributed highly to the team's success....and in the games where they have struggled, Luck has also struggled.

GMs, scouts etc are also going to look at what kind of adversity each QB has faced and how he's handled that adversity. Because of the efficiency of the Stanford running game and defense throughout the course of the year, Luck has been very successful. But in the games where those facets aren't clicking, Luck has struggled. Now the only thing that means is that, like other QBs, Luck is human but I do think it's starting to show more and more that Luck isn't the "head and shoulders above everyone else, once in a lifetime talent" that many have billed him to be. He is a very good QB but the talent gap between him and the other top prospects is not by as wide a margin as many have tried to make it out to be.

There are definitely some promising QBs coming out other than Luck....I just think he's shown a high talent level in all aspects of QB play including those aspects that NFL QBs are required to handle. We rarely, if ever, get a glimpse of that with QB prospects. They just don't give college QBs those tasks....they did with Luck.

He is human and his execution isn't perfect....and neither is Peyton Manning's or Tom Brady's or anyone else's. But the "above the neck" part of the game is usually where teams that draft QBs Top 10 foul it up....and they really can't be totally faulted for that because of the fact that QB prospects were rarely ever required to do all of those things, real-time....in game conditions. They might get a snapshot of it in predraft evaluations....but not an entire season of the kid's college career.

Luck has been given high responsibility for Stanford's offense, and the evidence of his body of work is that he does it well with whatever tools he has.

If NFL scouts and personnel folks agree.....then we should wind up with either an excellent franchise QB or a TON of compensation if Peyton is healthy and we trade the pick.

[cmgww]

Just heard a really interesting interview on the Dan Dakich show on 1070 here in Indy....It was with a Stanford tv/radio color analyst (can't remember exact name or title, but someone close to the organization). DD told the guy to remove his Stanford bias and really tell him what he thought of Luck. The guy said basically that Luck is really that good. He talked more about how Luck calls plays at the line of scrimmage, and that the OC and Shaw really just relay in 3-4 possible plays...When DD brought up the past few games and how Luck has struggled relatively speaking, the guy (sorry I can't remember the name!) said that it's important to remember that their top WR, Owusu is out for the year, and their top TE has/will be out, and that has forced them away from 3 TE sets they like to run. He said Luck is pressing a bit without his top weapons (Manning last year?), and forcing throws to average WRs expecting them to make plays. He also said that Luck has never had the type of talented skill guys that other schools have, and mentioned how few Stanford players were drafted last year to the NFL. He said that in his years of covering Stanford as a student and now broadcaster, he's never seen anyone like Luck. Especially with the talent around him, good but not USC good or LSU good...Also said Luck is doing things in college (calling coverages, changing plays) that a lot of NFL QBs don't do. DD went on to say that would make him a good fit here, and the guy said whoever gets him is going to be really lucky (no pun intended) to have such a talent.

More pumping up? This guy came off as pretty sincere and had good points to back up his arguments.....Thoughts?

[pacolts56]

Just heard a really interesting interview on the Dan Dakich show on 1070 here in Indy....It was with a Stanford tv/radio color analyst (can't remember exact name or title, but someone close to the organization). DD told the guy to remove his Stanford bias and really tell him what he thought of Luck. The guy said basically that Luck is really that good. He talked more about how Luck calls plays at the line of scrimmage, and that the OC and Shaw really just relay in 3-4 possible plays...When DD brought up the past few games and how Luck has struggled relatively speaking, the guy (sorry I can't remember the name!) said that it's important to remember that their top WR, Owusu is out for the year, and their top TE has/will be out, and that has forced them away from 3 TE sets they like to run. He said Luck is pressing a bit without his top weapons (Manning last year?), and forcing throws to average WRs expecting them to make plays. He also said that Luck has never had the type of talented skill guys that other schools have, and mentioned how few Stanford players were drafted last year to the NFL. He said that in his years of covering Stanford as a student and now broadcaster, he's never seen anyone like Luck. Especially with the talent around him, good but not USC good or LSU good...Also said Luck is doing things in college (calling coverages, changing plays) that a lot of NFL QBs don't do. DD went on to say that would make him a good fit here, and the guy said whoever gets him is going to be really lucky (no pun intended) to have such a talent.

More pumping up? This guy came off as pretty sincere and had good points to back up his arguments.....Thoughts?

It is precisely the responsibilities that Luck operates under that elevate him above the other QBs coming out this year.

Might those other QBs develop that ability in the NFL? Absolutely!

Have they shown the ability to call plays and audible at the line of scrimmage....and excel in doing so over most of their season, if at all?

No they have not....and whether one loves or hates Stanford football....those are the facts. The guy is right.

[Coltsagent]

All I know is in the past 10 years I dont think I have missed a Colts game and never watch a college game, even bowls, but in the past month I have watch 2 college games that happen to be Standford. He's coming.