Were Luck's Picks......... Good?

[SouthernCal]

No, but they weren't costly.

[Draztik]

I didn't like it I know we are up and the D was on but if there's a pick six or the turnovers led to 14....

The one where he could have scrambled and slid keeping the clock going, forcing them to use another time out and then punting really was a bad decision.

[HungarianColtsFan]

I think there's no such as 'good INT'. They've happened at favorable (from Colts point of view) time and field position, and they carved only 6 points out of them. FYI: we gained 7 points on our single TO. 

Anyway the first INT was under-thrown, with better placement that one could be a FD, and we could have ended the half with more points (at least 3). The second was a terrible decision, Moncrief (if I recall the situation right he was targeted) had no chance to catch it. 

 

Andrew took some risk when the time was right, IMHO the first could easily end up as a big play, the second was...well a bad idea.

[Valpo2004]

A punt probably would have been better given us 10 to 20 more yards, but as others have said, it was the least costly type of interception to throw.  

 

This is why stats don't tell the whole story.  On 3rd and long like that with poor field position, why not take a shot?  There is always a chance you could create something.

[rittdk01]

Moncrief didnt do much to stop the int's.  I think Luck probably told them to go up and get the ball and they let the Broncos get it instead.  The announcer said as much after the second one that Moncrief looked like he had no intentions of going for the ball.

 

The first one stunk they got a field goal and really could have got going off of that one.

[ProblChld32]

Sure, they don't look pretty on the stat sheet, and that second one he literally threw into the entire broncos defense.

 

But BOTH of them equated to the subsequent punts that would have come on 4th down. If one of our receivers had been able to catch it, or a defensive penalty had been committed they would have been genius throws. 

 

Do we have the first QB in the history of the game who knows when its ok to turn the ball over? 

 

I missed the first int, but the second one i didn't have a problem with. it was 3rd and long he through it up hoping to have the two receivers in the area be able to make a play on it. unfortunately Moore intercepted it. given the situation it essentially was like a punt in a sense

[Bobbycovert]

I wouldn't call them good but I think they were the result of acceptable risks.  The first one, IMO, was the worst of the two.  I would've preferred a safer play and punt for field position.  Overall, he player really well and his decision making has looked good this playoffs.

 

Also, with a bit more experience, Moncrief might've played those balls a bit more aggressively.  Certainly not his fault, but a better approach might've changed things.

[Defjamz26]

Both of them lead to 3 points, that could have been 14 if not for the defense. The first one was a really bad decision, but Moncrief is also to blame. The second one wasn't a killer and was better than a punt probably.

[ZAZA418]

wouldnt you rather convert and get a 1st down? you have 4th down to use on a punt

[RockThatBlue]

without a doubt. the second one was on purpose. Luck was all smiling in the sideline after that play.

I highly doubt that.

[ZAZA418]

wow, I've seen it all on here now. interceptions are now good.

[t-rex]

These were great moves by Luck. They were "arm punts." ESPN had a quick summary showing that the Colts average net on Luck's arm punts were just as good as true kicks.

The INTs are good gambles to take. This is why there is more to the game than ridiculous stats.

[18Manning]

Sure, they don't look pretty on the stat sheet, and that second one he literally threw into the entire broncos defense.

 

But BOTH of them equated to the subsequent punts that would have come on 4th down. If one of our receivers had been able to catch it, or a defensive penalty had been committed they would have been genius throws. 

 

Do we have the first QB in the history of the game who knows when its ok to turn the ball over? 

 

I thought they were a good idea. Colts would have to punt anyway. I don't know that a punt would have been considerably better. Like you said, gives opportunity to make a ridiculously long play or get a flag on Defense. Just have to be sure to tackle if a defender intercepts.

[colts_100nascar17fan]

Atleast one was like a punt but moncrief needed to make a play on the ball with more effort, he kind of came to grips that the dB was going to pick it off and made no effort to catch it or break it up, kinda like tori smith at end of Baltimore game,they both could have caught those balls or atleast break it up especially smith,I would cut that guy if I was the Ravens as I can't for the life of me see what he was thinking on that play,he could of caught it if he went for the ball. Anyway,moncrief in this next game needs to make better decisions in those situations cuz new england is alot better than denver.

[ViriLudant]

Only here is Luck throwing an INT better than converting a 3rd down.

[Superman]

Only here is Luck throwing an INT better than converting a 3rd down.

 

Why misrepresent the argument?

[cbear]

Good INT?  I think we would have felt differently had the guy somehow kept his balance and returned it for a TD.  Some INTs are worse than others, but none of them can be called "good."

[masterlock]

No, they weren't good, because you never want to squander an opportunity to move the chains on 3rd down in the playoffs.