Jump to content
Indianapolis Colts
Indianapolis Colts Fan Forum

Bucky Brooks And Fellow Nfl.com Analysts Are Sold On Luck


Recommended Posts

I am on of the people thats not all sold on luck.

Now, this article is interesting and sure the kid will more than likely be successful in the NFL...but He is only a junior, what if he decides not to go to the nfl....then what will we do?

It appears this is the year we need to take a qb So if Luck decides not to go to the nfl...who is the second best qb prospect?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I am on of the people thats not all sold on luck.

Now, this article is interesting and sure the kid will more than likely be successful in the NFL...but He is only a junior, what if he decides not to go to the nfl....then what will we do?

It appears this is the year we need to take a qb So if Luck decides not to go to the nfl...who is the second best qb prospect?

The way he's been playing lately, Matt Barkley would be no.2 on the rankings, then Robert Griffin III, then Landry Jones.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I respect the opinions of a pro scout, but I'm just not completely sold based on what I've seen. They talk about squeezing passes to receivers against Notre Dames tight coverage and that first TD pass was a beauty, but what I remember most from the game is a running game that ground the Irish front 7 (8?) into mushy red paste and giant athletic TEs causing matchup nightmares in the seams.

It's hard to watch him and be blown away. He doesn't have the laser rocket arm, he's not especially big or fast. As fans the only information we have about his real standout qualities are through second hand scouting reports. That will worry me until I see him making his first (and hopefully only) start next year in week 4 of the preseason.

http://www.nfl.com/news/story/09000d5d8245f149/article/tough-luck-fulfilling-expectations-will-be-hard-for-stanford-qb

This article was linked from the OPs article. It highlights some of the concerns the minority of us have about Luck.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Luck looks like he will play in the league for ten years but i just dont see greatness in him. He doesnt wow me with anything he does. If he loses that running game in the nfl then he will suffer greatly imo. I know people say that he carries his team but they have quite a few nfl starters on that team. And the competition luck faces is really not that good. Jmo.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Luck would always get better, especially learning behind Manning for a ear or two. He definitely has wowed me, the USC triple OT game was the wow factor for me, he also tore up ND. I've only seen him in 4-5 games and he's impressed me more often than not. The kid can get better, learn and even build some more strength.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Luck looks like he will play in the league for ten years but i just dont see greatness in him. He doesnt wow me with anything he does.

That's only because you've become accustomed to watching Peyton Manning every Sunday, and those are mighty big shoes to fill. But Luck's got a lot of attributes, and I'd say the number one being that he's smart/coachable. Now Indy just needs a coach to take care of that coaching part.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If I were to scout Andrew Luck this year, I wouldn't be too impressed. I know that a lot of the hype from last year has carried onto this year, which got me to thinking...

What has changed from last year to this year? The obvious answer to me is the personnel. He had more deep threat receivers to throw to last year. This year, his main targets are his tight ends. This has caused for the offense to focus more on the running game (I am aware that they ran a lot last year). The focus is now more on the running game because of the personnel and having giant tight ends that can both catch and block.

I think that shows Lucks ability to adjust to a different type of offense. And although his numbers aren't amazing this year, he is still averaging 70% completion and an 8.6 yards per attempt, which amongst the highest in the Pac-12. This shows that he does take shots down the field and is not a dink and dunk passer.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I respect the opinions of a pro scout, but I'm just not completely sold based on what I've seen. They talk about squeezing passes to receivers against Notre Dames tight coverage and that first TD pass was a beauty, but what I remember most from the game is a running game that ground the Irish front 7 (8?) into mushy red paste and giant athletic TEs causing matchup nightmares in the seams. It's hard to watch him and be blown away. He doesn't have the laser rocket arm, he's not especially big or fast. As fans the only information we have about his real standout qualities are through second hand scouting reports. That will worry me until I see him making his first (and hopefully only) start next year in week 4 of the preseason. http://www.nfl.com/news/story/09000d5d8245f149/article/tough-luck-fulfilling-expectations-will-be-hard-for-stanford-qb This article was linked from the OPs article. It highlights some of the concerns the minority of us have about Luck.

nice post. i dont hate Luck, i like him and i think he might become a terrific QB. is just the hype he is getting is unreal, and if 18 is healthy (of course thats the big if) I dont see the point of having him sit for 3 seasons while we could trade him for multiple picks.

Of course that all goes the drain if pm is not healthy.

I pretty much agree with gonzo, im not blown away with Luck either, he has a lot of help with those massive TE and running game...but not been blown away doesnt mean he is bad :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I am on of the people thats not all sold on luck.

Now, this article is interesting and sure the kid will more than likely be successful in the NFL...but He is only a junior, what if he decides not to go to the nfl....then what will we do?

It appears this is the year we need to take a qb So if Luck decides not to go to the nfl...who is the second best qb prospect?

he has already laughed at the idea of returning to stanford.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Was Montanna impressive at Notre Dame? Was Brady impressive at Michigan? Aaron Rodgers was so good, that virtually every single team passed on him except the Packers. I am an SEC person so I saw Manning and he didn't zip that many passes either. Luck is as smart as Manning. I really believe he is. He is so much like him, I think he could run the same offense that we have now. I think reading defenses and making smart plays will be his calling card.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Was Montanna impressive at Notre Dame? Was Brady impressive at Michigan? Aaron Rodgers was so good, that virtually every single team passed on him except the Packers. I am an SEC person so I saw Manning and he didn't zip that many passes either. Luck is as smart as Manning. I really believe he is. He is so much like him, I think he could run the same offense that we have now. I think reading defenses and making smart plays will be his calling card.

Montanna was impressive. Brady never got a real shot as he was the back-up qb. A-Rod was thought to be the first pick by many but SF went with Smith. I think luck can be good but i really just see him rolling out to the right and doing play action to his tight ends. If luck didn't have that running game, that o-line, or those tight ends i dont think anyone would be talking about him as the next elway.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Montanna was impressive. Brady never got a real shot as he was the back-up qb. A-Rod was thought to be the first pick by many but SF went with Smith. I think luck can be good but i really just see him rolling out to the right and doing play action to his tight ends. If luck didn't have that running game, that o-line, or those tight ends i dont think anyone would be talking about him as the next elway.

Luck started to impress people as a redshirt freshman. Last year his second year as a starter, he would've been the first overall pick if he came out in the draft. At that time he didn't have his huge tight ends, he mainly targeted his receivers. That's when a lot of they hype surrounding luck began. Because of the change in personnel, and lack of a solid receiving coprs this year, the offensive strategy has changed. Stanford is more run heavy and are now utilizing their tight ends more in the passing game. This should not be a knock on Luck. Instead it shows how he is able to adapt, change his style of play to suit his personnel, and continue winning. He's still completing 70% of his passes, just like he did last year.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Montanna was impressive. Brady never got a real shot as he was the back-up qb. A-Rod was thought to be the first pick by many but SF went with Smith. I think luck can be good but i really just see him rolling out to the right and doing play action to his tight ends. If luck didn't have that running game, that o-line, or those tight ends i dont think anyone would be talking about him as the next elway.

Last year Andrew Luck threw the ball MUCH more to WRs Ryan Whalen and Doug Baldwin.... who were drafted last April.... than his TEs.

Luck's passing numbers are skewed by the lesser talent level at WR this season vs last season. The production he gets out of his use of TEs this season with the departure of talent at WR.... and Chris Owusu missing alot of time to injury..... should be a positive not the negative it is portrayed as.

http://www.totalfoot...132&Season=2010

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I respect the opinions of a pro scout, but I'm just not completely sold based on what I've seen. They talk about squeezing passes to receivers against Notre Dames tight coverage and that first TD pass was a beauty, but what I remember most from the game is a running game that ground the Irish front 7 (8?) into mushy red paste and giant athletic TEs causing matchup nightmares in the seams.

It's hard to watch him and be blown away. He doesn't have the laser rocket arm, he's not especially big or fast. As fans the only information we have about his real standout qualities are through second hand scouting reports. That will worry me until I see him making his first (and hopefully only) start next year in week 4 of the preseason.

http://www.nfl.com/n...for-stanford-qb

This article was linked from the OPs article. It highlights some of the concerns the minority of us have about Luck.

Well I for one agree with you and no the article didn't change my opinion. Luck is a very good QB but I don't even think he's the best in this draft class. I don't see how he "tore up" Notre Dame either. In the first half, Stanford rushed for 150 and Luck threw for 150 yards. However, for the majority of the second half, ND contained the Stanford rushing attack and during that time...Luck threw for 39 yards. Once the running game was held in check, so was Luck and the way his TEs were winning their one-on-one matchups I don't buy the "he has no one to throw to" theory.

IMO the ND game was a perfect example that shows that Luck's success has been predicated on the success of their running game. In the first half, the running game was clicking for 150 yards and thus Luck was able to also throw for 150 yards. However in the 2nd half, ND was able to contain the Stanford running game for the 3rd quarter and the majority of the 4th quarter and during that time, Luck threw for 39 yards. When the running game was down, Luck threw for 39 yards, put no additional points on the board (until I believe their final drive when the running game coincidentally got back on track) and allowed ND back into the game.

There are several QBs in this draft class who are versatile, intelligent, great leaders and can help move their team up and down the field...some of them can even do it even when their running game is in a slump. So no, my opinion hasn't changed and I don't believe Luck is lightyears ahead of the other QBs in this class and I don't even think he's the best QB in this class.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So no, my opinion hasn't changed and I don't believe Luck is lightyears ahead of the other QBs in this class and I don't even think he's the best QB in this class.

Surprise, surprise...Of course you have an opinion, but its always off. No one said lightyears, just that after all the dust settles, Luck is the franchise QB of this class hands down. Let's see if you still talk trash about him once the Colts draft him next year.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Surprise, surprise...Of course you have an opinion, but its always off.

thanks for another intelligent and mature contribution to the discussion :facepalm: :rolleyes:

No one said lightyears, just that after all the dust settles, Luck is the franchise QB of this class hands down. Let's see if you still talk trash about him once the Colts draft him next year.

How am I talking trash about him? I'm stating an opinion that I don't think he's as good as many try to make him out to be and that's talking trash? lol Well actually, coming from you I'm not surprised.

And yes, people (yourself included) have said lightyears. He's the best prospect since Elway. He's Peyton Manning 2.0. He's the only QB in the next 3 years that won't be a bust. Those sound familiar?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

thanks for another intelligent and mature contribution to the discussion :facepalm: :rolleyes:

And yet I haven't seen any intelligent insight from your contributions to deal with the future of our franchise. :applause:

And yes, people (yourself included) have said lightyears. He's the best prospect since Elway. He's Peyton Manning 2.0. He's the only QB in the next 3 years that won't be a bust. Those sound familiar?

And your point is what? He is the next Manning. Although i never said he's the only QB that won't be a bust in the next 3 years. sure some good QB's come and go, but only the few are legend. And with that Irsay is proud to select Luck with the 2012 1st round pick.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 qb's went out of the 2005 draft, a few of those qbs are starters now like:

Rd1, #1 pick was Alex Smith

Rd1, #24 Aaron Rogers

Rd1, #25 Jason Campbell(which I dont think he is a starter anymore)

Rd5, #145 Dan Orlovsky(which will start this week for Indy)

Rd 7, #230 Matt Cassel

Rd 7, #250 Ryan Fitzpatrick

Out of all them Rogers is the best hands down with 120 Td, 36 int, 16,198 yrd and qb rating of 103.8

Alex smith being the overall number one pick that year has a stat sheet that looks like 64 td, 55 int, 11,375 yrd and a qb rating of 75.5

Then you got those two 7th rd picks...The best of those two has been Matt Cassel with 74 td, 43 int and 11,092 yds with a qb rating of 83.3....and Fitzpatrick is 63 td, 56in, with only 9,653 yrd with a 76.0

Point being..Mr. Cassels stats are better than the 2005 number 1 over all pick Mr. Alex smith in every aspect but yrds and then the other 7th rd pick Fitzpatrick isnt too far off Smiths career stats...So we dont even know how Luck will be..I just think we should weight out all options before being sold on one guy...

Maybe take a late first rd or early second round projected guy if available in the second round, that will come with less cost and have him learn behind manning instead of a high dollar number 1 draft pick like Luck

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Luck would always get better, especially learning behind Manning for a ear or two. He definitely has wowed me, the USC triple OT game was the wow factor for me, he also tore up ND. I've only seen him in 4-5 games and he's impressed me more often than not. The kid can get better, learn and even build some more strength.

Learning behind Manning doesn't mean anything, especially if it's not a style Luck is accustomed to. Rodgers received no help from Favre, for example, but had a great team in place when he stepped in. If learning behind Manning were relevant, Painter would be solid.

Also, why would he always get better? People frequently say this about athletes, but 99% of the time, it doesn't happen. They actually tend to drop off after a good rookie campaign as opponents have more film and experience to work with. More often than not, a player will plateau.

The USC triple-OT game had the opposite effect on me. He almost blew that game, and was literally saved by USC fumbles. Beating Notre Dame is also commonplace anymore. Had his team not rushed for 200 yards, he wouldn't have done anything. Luck was also relatively awful against Oregon and Cal, two TERRIBLE defenses.

He has 2, 1st round NFL linemen, at least 2 NFL TE's, and a ridiculous ground game. He plays against the softest defenses among the BCS conferences. Yet he still doesn't display NFL qualities, outside of calling plays at the line. The more I watch him, the more "ehh..." I feel, and I've seen more than 20 of his performances.

You went into your 4-5 viewings hoping to see greatness, so you saw what you wanted to see. The facts show something else: he's a solid college QB.

Everybody was sold on Detroit's Su..

...its not an exact science..

Nobody was sold on Rodgers.

Everybody was sold on Leaf (except Indianapolis, and even they had doubts about Manning).

No one was sold on Newton.

Everyone expected Reggie Bush to light up the league.

Suh also turned out to be a dirty * on the field who will likely spend half of his games paying fines instead of contributing.

In other words, what the people expect virtually never pans out. It's impossible to predict how a college player will fare at the next level.

Luck is the future. I'm a huge peyton fan but a bigger colts fan. Peyton has 3 years left if healthy luck has his whole career ahead of him. Sorry I vote luck.

Peyton has proven he can take a junk yard to the Super Bowl. Luck hasn't won anything relevant in college. He's not the future. He's a college QB who may be an NFL QB some day.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Learning behind Manning doesn't mean anything, especially if it's not a style Luck is accustomed to. Rodgers received no help from Favre, for example, but had a great team in place when he stepped in. If learning behind Manning were relevant, Painter would be solid.

As stated by a previous poster, Luck has displayed the ablity to adapt to different systems over past few seasons. Last year he had bigger and more talented WR's to throw to which is when people really started to see his talent. This year due to WR's getting hurted and drafted last year, he has had to adapt to using more TE's in the passing game such as what New England is doing this year. His completetion percentage has stayed relatively the same along with his TD:INT ratio increasing. You also are trying to compare Curtis Painter who was drafted in the later rounds to a possible #1 overall pick. It's like trying to compare chocolate and sour gummy worms and asking which one tastes sweeter.

Also, why would he always get better? People frequently say this about athletes, but 99% of the time, it doesn't happen. They actually tend to drop off after a good rookie campaign as opponents have more film and experience to work with. More often than not, a player will plateau.

So 99% of the time, athletes don't get better? lol please stop.

The USC triple-OT game had the opposite effect on me. He almost blew that game, and was literally saved by USC fumbles. Beating Notre Dame is also commonplace anymore. Had his team not rushed for 200 yards, he wouldn't have done anything. Luck was also relatively awful against Oregon and Cal, two TERRIBLE defenses.

Almost blew that game? He did throw that pick 6 but did you see the following drive and the drives in OT? Quit making excuses for USC losing. You do realize that USC team beat Oregon yet Standford beat USC. Divisional games are schewed in college FB. Playing college divisonal opponents can scew stats. Look at the NFL for instance. Rodgers can play Detriot one week and not have a statstically good game yet play the Seahawks the next and have an amazing game. The same idea applies to college football.

He has 2, 1st round NFL linemen, at least 2 NFL TE's, and a ridiculous ground game. He plays against the softest defenses among the BCS conferences. Yet he still doesn't display NFL qualities, outside of calling plays at the line. The more I watch him, the more "ehh..." I feel, and I've seen more than 20 of his performances.

I agree about the lineman being good. but those TE's are big but only one of them is of NFL caliaber, not to mention one of them was out of the lineup for awhile (not sure on his name). Also that TE's are not meant to be the main staple in a verticle passing attacks. Theres these players called Wide Recievers that run down the field and catch the ball. Not sure if you've heard of them. I've followed him since his redshirt freshman year and I have seen ample NFL quality work from him.

You went into your 4-5 viewings hoping to see greatness, so you saw what you wanted to see. The facts show something else: he's a solid college QB.

Same can be applied to you. You expected to see elite greatness on every throw and sub sequentially didn't see it so you don't think he is elite.

Nobody was sold on Rodgers.

Everybody was sold on Leaf (except Indianapolis, and even they had doubts about Manning).

No one was sold on Newton.

Everyone expected Reggie Bush to light up the league.

^These 4 statements are highly opinionated and don't present objective thinking because I can assure you people WERE sold on Rodgers, Manning, and Newton. People also said that Reggie Bush wouldn't have success in the league because he bounces out to the outside too much and doesn't run between the tackles. Which ironically has been his biggest issue.

Suh also turned out to be a dirty * on the field who will likely spend half of his games paying fines instead of contributing.

In other words, what the people expect virtually never pans out. It's impossible to predict how a college player will fare at the next level.

Peyton has proven he can take a junk yard to the Super Bowl. Luck hasn't won anything relevant in college. He's not the future. He's a college QB who may be an NFL QB some day.

Okay and did Peyton ever win anything relevant in college? Don't comeback with the "Well he played in the SEC" arguement. Answer the question as stated and get back to me.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

why cant people see that when someone says "I dont think Luck is the best thing ever" is not an attack to him or saying he sucks, its jsut an opinion that those people are not completely sold on him and maybe they want the extra picks? why is it that they immediately convert taht into "luck sucks" and go to "you are dumb,wrong and luck is the best thing ever and you will eat "#$"# when he comes to the colts"? not believing he is god taking snaps under center does nto mean that people, like Jason for example, is saying he sucks. He is just saying that maybe he is pretty good, but not as good as what the hype is around here.

We all colts fan, and at the end of the day, if Luck is taken we will ALL support him. this is pre-Luck stuff and people have a right to say they dont think he is the right choice, and if they bring facts its a much more valid opinion. Just like luck -fans have a right to say he is good and they want him and if they bring facts is a much more valid opinion not just say "he rocks you suck".

JMO

Link to comment
Share on other sites

why cant people see that when someone says "I dont think Luck is the best thing ever" is not an attack to him or saying he sucks, its jsut an opinion that those people are not completely sold on him and maybe they want the extra picks? why is it that they immediately convert taht into "luck sucks" and go to "you are dumb,wrong and luck is the best thing ever and you will eat "#$"# when he comes to the colts"? not believing he is god taking snaps under center does nto mean that people, like Jason for example, is saying he sucks. He is just saying that maybe he is pretty good, but not as good as what the hype is around here.

We all colts fan, and at the end of the day, if Luck is taken we will ALL support him. this is pre-Luck stuff and people have a right to say they dont think he is the right choice, and if they bring facts its a much more valid opinion. Just like luck -fans have a right to say he is good and they want him and if they bring facts is a much more valid opinion not just say "he rocks you suck".

JMO

Yeah....opinions are fine but its probably best to stay away from some of the absolutes and dogmatic comments that get tossed around on both sides of these Luck debates since we all know....if we're honest....that we could be dead wrong on our opinion. I've been guilty of it a few times.

In the end, the Colts winning on the field with whoever is at QB....and not us winning our Forum squabbles....is more important.

I think? :scratch:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yeah....opinions are fine but its probably best to stay away from some of the absolutes and dogmatic comments that get tossed around on both sides of these Luck debates since we all know....if we're honest....that we could be dead wrong on our opinion. I've been guilty of it a few times.

In the end, the Colts winning on the field with whoever is at QB....and not us winning our Forum squabbles....is more important.

I think? :scratch:

I hope winning is more important than being right.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

why cant people see that when someone says "I dont think Luck is the best thing ever" is not an attack to him or saying he sucks, its jsut an opinion that those people are not completely sold on him and maybe they want the extra picks? why is it that they immediately convert taht into "luck sucks" and go to "you are dumb,wrong and luck is the best thing ever and you will eat "#$"# when he comes to the colts"? not believing he is god taking snaps under center does nto mean that people, like Jason for example, is saying he sucks. He is just saying that maybe he is pretty good, but not as good as what the hype is around here.

We all colts fan, and at the end of the day, if Luck is taken we will ALL support him. this is pre-Luck stuff and people have a right to say they dont think he is the right choice, and if they bring facts its a much more valid opinion. Just like luck -fans have a right to say he is good and they want him and if they bring facts is a much more valid opinion not just say "he rocks you suck".

JMO

why cant people see that when someone says "I dont think Luck is the best thing ever" is not an attack to him or saying he sucks, its jsut an opinion that those people are not completely sold on him and maybe they want the extra picks? why is it that they immediately convert taht into "luck sucks" and go to "you are dumb,wrong and luck is the best thing ever and you will eat "#$"# when he comes to the colts"? not believing he is god taking snaps under center does nto mean that people, like Jason for example, is saying he sucks. He is just saying that maybe he is pretty good, but not as good as what the hype is around here.

We all colts fan, and at the end of the day, if Luck is taken we will ALL support him. this is pre-Luck stuff and people have a right to say they dont think he is the right choice, and if they bring facts its a much more valid opinion. Just like luck -fans have a right to say he is good and they want him and if they bring facts is a much more valid opinion not just say "he rocks you suck".

JMO

They are immature I guess? To emotional about a game called football?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If I were to scout Andrew Luck this year, I wouldn't be too impressed. I know that a lot of the hype from last year has carried onto this year, which got me to thinking...

What has changed from last year to this year? The obvious answer to me is the personnel. He had more deep threat receivers to throw to last year. This year, his main targets are his tight ends. This has caused for the offense to focus more on the running game (I am aware that they ran a lot last year). The focus is now more on the running game because of the personnel and having giant tight ends that can both catch and block.

I think that shows Lucks ability to adjust to a different type of offense. And although his numbers aren't amazing this year, he is still averaging 70% completion and an 8.6 yards per attempt, which amongst the highest in the Pac-12. This shows that he does take shots down the field and is not a dink and dunk passer.

I completely agree with this... you're right. And the thing that people tend to overlook are that he's actually putting good numbers, as good as last year. He's had some tough games.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

We are asking the wrong questions here. The question should not be whether or not Luck is the great NFL QB because he likely will be. He has got the physical ability to go along with the work ethic. What we should be asking ourselves as fans as well as the organization is: Are we happy with the single SB win with 2 appearances under the Manning era? If you are then Luck is the logical pick. However if you are not then we should question whether or not we want the next Manning or the next NE Patriots/ Steelers. Who have 3 wins with 4 appearances and 2 wins with 3 appearances respectfully. If you want the next great team then trading the pick is now the logical choice. Arguing whether Luck will be great is a waste of time because no matter what anyone says its opinionated. But you cannot argue history, and history tells us that a great team will win more championships then a great QB will.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Learning behind Manning doesn't mean anything, especially if it's not a style Luck is accustomed to. Rodgers received no help from Favre, for example, but had a great team in place when he stepped in. If learning behind Manning were relevant, Painter would be solid.

You never know.

If he hadn't sat behind Manning, maybe he would be 10x's worse.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...