Jump to content
Indianapolis Colts
Indianapolis Colts Fan Forum

Andrew Luck Is Just Like Peyton...


Recommended Posts

I do not understand the hype around Luck. If he had won against good Defenses and took Stanford to the National Championship, I would have no problem with him, but he has not and did not. The College scouts do not have him rank above average for football IQ. There are other QBs that are going to be lower in the draft that will just as good as Luck.

Wining a national championship in college means nothing coming to the nfl. Name a great qb in the league that won the national championship.

What scouts are you referring to? All the scouts I've seen say he has excellent football iq. Your making stuff up to try and justify your opinions.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 141
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

The kicker who missed three FGs, including one which would have one the game and one in OT? Okay, I'll blame the kicker thanks :)

Yeah since redshirt freshman college kickers are solely blame when they miss long field goals... how about the "Legendary" Andrew Luck get a touchdown instead? Maybe he should learn to get 10 more yards to make it easier on the kicker? The blame goes both ways but you don't want to admit that now, do you?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yeah since redshirt freshman college kickers are solely blame when they miss long field goals... how about the "Legendary" Andrew Luck get a touchdown instead? Maybe he should learn to get 10 more yards to make it easier on the kicker? The blame goes both ways but you don't want to admit that now, do you?

Sure there was more he could do but you could say the same for any game. Why couldn't the "legendary" Peyton throw a couple more TDs in SB44? Or throw that extra few yards to get Vinatieri in field goal range against the Jets last year? Or maybe he should learn to get 10 more yards to make it easier on Vanderjagt in 2005?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yeah since redshirt freshman college kickers are solely blame when they miss long field goals... how about the "Legendary" Andrew Luck get a touchdown instead? Maybe he should learn to get 10 more yards to make it easier on the kicker? The blame goes both ways but you don't want to admit that now, do you?

With the lady possession of the game and all u need is 3 to win most teams are just going to okay for the 3 and luck put the kicked in a position to easily win the game. Luck did his job. Peyton choked in bowl games then the year he left I believe the vols won the bcs. Just because your team loses a college game doesn't mean u can't be good in the nfl

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sure there was more he could do but you could say the same for any game. Why couldn't the "legendary" Peyton throw a couple more TDs in SB44? Or throw that extra few yards to get Vinatieri in field goal range against the Jets last year? Or maybe he should learn to get 10 more yards to make it easier on Vanderjagt in 2005?

I'm not the one calling a college quarterback the best thing ever now am I? Most of you Luck supporters act like he will guarantee the colts success for 10-15 years? Like... what?

And Adam Vinatieri did make a field goal against the Jets..............................

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Actually it's Jim Irsays team. Peyton is a qb in the TEAM

Without Peyton, what are the colts? Maybe one of the worst teams in NFL history during there time in the league. Who cares about the owner? People don't buy tickets to watch Irsay tweet something now do they? It's still Peyton's team.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm not the one calling a college quarterback the best thing ever now am I? Most of you Luck supporters act like he will guarantee the colts success for 10-15 years? Like... what?

And Adam Vinatieri did make a field goal against the Jets..............................

Could have made another field goal against Jets if Peyton got him more yards rather than failing to make first down a few times that game. If you're going to attack Luck by saying he could have done better (than 29/31..?) then don't run away as soon as you're presented with counterarguments that show Peyton Manning in a bad light. You cannot blame a quarterback for his kicker missing a game winning kick. If Luck decided to go for it rather than let his kicker take the kick and messed it up then he'd be entirely to blame.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Could have made another field goal against Jets if Peyton got him more yards rather than failing to make first down a few times that game. If you're going to attack Luck by saying he could have done better (than 29/31..?) then don't run away as soon as you're presented with counterarguments that show Peyton Manning in a bad light. You cannot blame a quarterback for his kicker missing a game winning kick. If Luck decided to go for it rather than let his kicker take the kick and messed it up then he'd be entirely to blame.

Your comparing Peyton Manning going up against the Jets defense... and Andrew Luck going up against Oklahoma States defense. And a redshirt freshman kicker to Adam Vinateri. You call that a counter argument? That doesn't even make since at all, your point is flawed.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Without Peyton, what are the colts? Maybe one of the worst teams in NFL history during there time in the league. Who cares about the owner? People don't buy tickets to watch Irsay tweet something now do they? It's still Peyton's team.

Colts were the colts before pm and will be after. He has done a lot for the colts but it's not his team. It's a team

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Your comparing Peyton Manning going up against the Jets defense... and Andrew Luck going up against Oklahoma States defense. And a redshirt freshman kicker to Adam Vinateri. You call that a counter argument? That doesn't even make since at all, your point is flawed.

Exactly. Vinateri should make the kick where u think the redshirt freshmen wouldnt. Your point is flawed

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Your comparing Peyton Manning going up against the Jets defense... and Andrew Luck going up against Oklahoma States defense. And a redshirt freshman kicker to Adam Vinateri. You call that a counter argument? That doesn't even make since at all, your point is flawed.

Stop bringing up that he's a redshirt freshman. It was a 35 yard kick, if anybody misses a 35 yard kick they are entirely to blame. I could get it in from 35 yards!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Stop bringing up that he's a redshirt freshman. It was a 35 yard kick, if anybody misses a 35 yard kick they are entirely to blame. I could get it in from 35 yards!

Edited*

This. College kickers are notoriously inconsistent but the fact the kid was a redshirt freshman just compounded it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

His point is valid though. College kickers are notoriously inconsistent but the fact the kid was a redshirt freshman just compounded it.

His point that Luck going 29/31 is more at fault than someone who missed three FGs for losing the game? Doesn't seem very valid to me.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

His point that Luck going 29/31 is more at fault than someone who missed three FGs for losing the game? Doesn't seem very valid to me.

Yeah I agree with you. Sorry was kinda doing 2 things at once when posting and mistyped.

Fixed.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

the way he stutters during interviews, he always focuses on football and never really gets out of topic, and even the way he plays is similar to Peyton!

often times when one stutters like that it means they are trying to take that extra second to think of what they are going to say. I know you weren't trying to say it was bad thing I just wanted to confirm that because it means the person is thinking before they talk. Several pro-athletes could use that leason.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

His point that Luck going 29/31 is more at fault than someone who missed three FGs for losing the game? Doesn't seem very valid to me.

If your talking about completions, it should be 27-31. And Brandon Weeden had an equally good day as Luck against a better Stanford defense. He's a young college kicker in a pressure situation, he's probably going to struggle.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If your talking about completions, it should be 27-31. And Brandon Weeden had an equally good day as Luck against a better Stanford defense. He's a young college kicker in a pressure situation, he's probably going to struggle.

Your screen name is starting to make a lot of sense now

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If your talking about completions, it should be 27-31. And Brandon Weeden had an equally good day as Luck against a better Stanford defense. He's a young college kicker in a pressure situation, he's probably going to struggle.

I wonder if a certain top five pick eight catch 186 yard receiver had anything to do with Weeden's numbers? And yeah 27, sorry, I was going off memory which was slightly off

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I wonder if a certain top five pick eight catch 186 yard receiver had anything to do with Weeden's numbers? And yeah 27, sorry, I was going off memory which was slightly off

But what about Stanford? There running game was good, the play action opened up the wide open deep ball to the Stanford WR. Both teams are good, they have there advantages in different areas though like O-line, WR, and defense.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

But what about Stanford? There running game was good, the play action opened up the wide open deep ball to the Stanford WR. Both teams are good, they have there advantages in different areas though like O-line, WR, and defense.

Yeah for sure but the fact is, undeniably, it is much easier to get yards throwing to Blackmon than any of the scrubs Luck has to contend with. Colts have always been good on play action so Luck will be able to exploit that there.

And I'm not even denying Weeden is good - if he was younger he'd be a great pick, but he's 28.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yeah for sure but the fact is, undeniably, it is much easier to get yards throwing to Blackmon than any of the scrubs Luck has to contend with. Colts have always been good on play action so Luck will be able to exploit that there.

And I'm not even denying Weeden is good - if he was younger he'd be a great pick, but he's 28.

I know what you mean with Brandon Weeden and Justin Blackmon, but isn't it is easier when you can throw to a wide open guy off of playaction like Stanfords 1st touchdown pass?

And it's been a while since the colts have been good in playaction, they haven't had a good running game in a while, it was pretty good this year though.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I know what you mean with Brandon Weeden and Justin Blackmon, but isn't it is easier when you can throw to a wide open guy off of playaction like Stanfords 1st touchdown pass?

And it's been a while since the colts have been good in playaction, they haven't had a good running game in a while, it was pretty good this year though.

It was mainly good this year because nobody expected us to let our QBs pass the ball :D

It is easier but not all his passes are like that, several are clever short ones to set a receiver into space for yards after etc. A lot about the short passing game is underrated

Link to comment
Share on other sites

But what about Stanford? There running game was good, the play action opened up the wide open deep ball to the Stanford WR. Both teams are good, they have there advantages in different areas though like O-line, WR, and defense.

Dude...the slowest receiver on Oklahoma's squad would easily be the fastest receiver on Stanford's receiving squad. It's not even close. Luck was hitting receivers in stride in windows about 1 yard wide. Weeden had windows big enough to fit a Lincoln town car through. Sideways! And the yards comparison is ridiculous. Blackmon did all that himself against an outmatched secondary.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

In the Bowl game against Oklahoma State, Luck made all of the types of throws that you would look for in a highly skilled QB. You cannot deny that he threw the ball deep, mid range and short range, all with accuracy. You also cannot deny that he made a lot of calls at the line to set up the best possible run against the defense that he saw. If you argue that Stanford has a great running game, you're also making a point that Luck can call a heck of a game at the line.

Luck does not have the "wow" factor that RGIII has because he's mostly a pocket passer. He's very accurate and gets rid of the ball fast. There's nothing flashy about that. The thing with Luck is that there isn't anything that he doesn't do well. We saw him change plays at the line of scrimmage, look off safeties to make passes in tight windows down the sideline, let the defensive pressure come within a few feet of him before throwing the ball to free up and set-up the screen play, and scramble to gain first downs when necessary. He has great fundamentals and a solid throwing motion. His arm is not weak and is actually above average. This will be proven at the combine, if he participates.

I've made this comparison before, but Andrew Luck reminds me of the football version of Tim Duncan, AKA "The Big Fundamental." He's not flashy but does everything extremely well.

Now, I'm not saying that we have to draft Luck, but if we do, I can definitely see why.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

In the Bowl game against Oklahoma State, Luck made all of the types of throws that you would look for in a highly skilled QB. You cannot deny that he threw the ball deep, mid range and short range, all with accuracy. You also cannot deny that he made a lot of calls at the line to set up the best possible run against the defense that he saw. If you argue that Stanford has a great running game, you're also making a point that Luck can call a heck of a game at the line.

Luck does not have the "wow" factor that RGIII has because he's mostly a pocket passer. He's very accurate and gets rid of the ball fast. There's nothing flashy about that. The thing with Luck is that there isn't anything that he doesn't do well. We saw him change plays at the line of scrimmage, look off safeties to make passes in tight windows down the sideline, let the defensive pressure come within a few feet of him before throwing the ball to free up and set-up the screen play, and scramble to gain first downs when necessary. He has great fundamentals and a solid throwing motion. His arm is not weak and is actually above average. This will be proven at the combine, if he participates.

I've made this comparison before, but Andrew Luck reminds me of the football version of Tim Duncan, AKA "The Big Fundamental." He's not flashy but does everything extremely well.

Now, I'm not saying that we have to draft Luck, but if we do, I can definitely see why.

I would attribute Stanford's great running game to their excellent O-line, 1st round prospects like LT Jonathan Martin and G David Decastro, and great performance by running back Stephan Taylor, not to Andrew Luck's supposable play calling. I thought that was obvious though...

And no one is disputing that Andrew Luck looked very good in the bowl game against Oklahoma State.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

In the Bowl game against Oklahoma State, Luck made all of the types of throws that you would look for in a highly skilled QB. You cannot deny that he threw the ball deep, mid range and short range, all with accuracy. You also cannot deny that he made a lot of calls at the line to set up the best possible run against the defense that he saw. If you argue that Stanford has a great running game, you're also making a point that Luck can call a heck of a game at the line.

Luck does not have the "wow" factor that RGIII has because he's mostly a pocket passer. He's very accurate and gets rid of the ball fast. There's nothing flashy about that. The thing with Luck is that there isn't anything that he doesn't do well. We saw him change plays at the line of scrimmage, look off safeties to make passes in tight windows down the sideline, let the defensive pressure come within a few feet of him before throwing the ball to free up and set-up the screen play, and scramble to gain first downs when necessary. He has great fundamentals and a solid throwing motion. His arm is not weak and is actually above average. This will be proven at the combine, if he participates.

I've made this comparison before, but Andrew Luck reminds me of the football version of Tim Duncan, AKA "The Big Fundamental." He's not flashy but does everything extremely well.

Now, I'm not saying that we have to draft Luck, but if we do, I can definitely see why.

Fundamentals are often what seperate good players from great players in their ablity to implement and use them consistently. Luck is fundamental.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I would attribute Stanford's great running game to their excellent O-line, 1st round prospects like LT Jonathan Martin and G David Decastro, and great performance by running back Stephan Taylor, not to Andrew Luck's supposable play calling. I thought that was obvious though...

And no one is disputing that Andrew Luck looked very good in the bowl game against Oklahoma State.

I am not arguing that Stanford doesn't have a great O-line, or a very good running back in Stephan Taylor. My argument was in addition to this, he also makes calls at the line to the best possible run play.

Your argument negates that Luck can read a defense and call a run play designed to attack that defense's weakness. Instead, it has nothing at all to do with him and only Stanford's O-line and runninbacks. My argument states that they all play a factor, including Luck's ability to call plays against the defense.

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.

  • Thread of the Week

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • Don't forget this Sunday's game on Fox 59 at 7:30 pm I think!
    • Im sorry I’m responding a little late….   But I took the time to re-view the 25 minute Luck press conference, and the 25 minute conference from Irsay, Ballard and Reich.    Luck says his final decision was made roughly 10-14 days before the announcement, and the execs say they knew 7-10 days ahead and the week leading up to the game was filled with almost daily conversations.  I don’t know where you got that the front office found out “that day.”    I’ve never seen that claim made by anyone else here, and there’s been plenty of mis-information put out there about Luck.    Also….  Luck didn’t participate in any team activities the entire off-season.   Zero in the Spring.   Zero in training camp.  At the presser Ballard talked about the strange off-season saying Luck ended the 2018 season feeling pretty good, then something happened at the Pro Bowl that no one could pin down.  Ankle sprain?   High ankle sprain? Shin?    No one knew.   So the team knew something was up.     Ultimately, Luck did a bad job at his press conference explaining things, and the media did a poor job of getting enough details to write a good story so people could understand.    But I’d add, that no one in the Colts seems angry with Luck.   Not Irsay, or Ballard, or Reich, or players.   No one.    Yet people here think Luck screwed the team.   A guy driven to do the right thing all his life, and yet fans here are convinced he did the wrong thing.   I confess that disappoints me.   It’s as if people never learned anything about Andrew Luck beyond his wins and losses.  I find that sad….  
    • Like most surface fans? Not sure what kind of shot ur trying to take here but okay. As for the points, there aren't really any intelligble ones to respond to. In both instances Wentz gives the ball to the other team at the very end of the game. In both TEN matchups. Also, in those specific plays there were checkdowns available.    Reich kind of took blame for one, saying he shouldn't of called a TE screen so close to the end zone. But I guess i'm just a surface fan, even though I consistently talk on a colts fan forum, frequent multiple other sites where many people post a plethora of uncensored opinions about the colts, attend games frequently, and I understand football more than most casual people.    I don't sit on the board and pretend to speak some scheme specific terminology, but I know what football looks like. And with that being said, it is easy for anyone to see that Wentz consistently put our defense in bad positions, and tried to play hero ball despite not being very good at it.  As for how that applies to this specific thread; I think having a more sensible QB on the roster will make our Oline look a lot better.    Also, as i've stated multiple times, I do recognize our offensive line had issues. However, that doesn't takeaway the reality of 2sprainz and the type of game he wanted to play, even at the cost of his own team. 
    • She can talk some smack on analytics. Smarter than most of the hot take reporters / personalities out there. And she's super hot.  Highly doubt it happens, but we have a lot of things that could realistically fall our way. 
  • Members

    • CR91

      CR91 9,683

      Senior Member
      Joined:
      Last active:
    • Robert Johnson

      Robert Johnson 101

      Member
      Joined:
      Last active:
    • Narcosys

      Narcosys 587

      Senior Member
      Joined:
      Last active:
×
×
  • Create New...