Colts' future not as bright as it seems

[Lucky Colts Fan]

Garbage.  Offseason fodder...

 

This same article could be written for EVERY team in the NFL with a few points substituted... "The window is closing on Seattles' ability to field an elite defense"  "The window is closing on Denver/NE surrounding Peyton/Brady with a Super Bowl team"

 

And Andrew Luck is ELITE.  He has some turnover issues, but finds a way to make up for it and WIN THE GAME.  We can focus on the losses and blame it on Lucks' turnovers, but lets remember the wins where he turned the ball over, but ended up bringing the team back in the 4th quarter and WON THE GAME.  (Texans, Browns, etc.)

 

Other QBs might have had less turnovers, but they lack the ELITE ability to WIN THE GAME when it's crunchtime.

[C0LT5]

Who are these five other teams who have 'quality quarterbacks' but have declined? 

 

Saints, Panthers, Giants, Bears, and Falcons.

[Superman]

Proved me wrong?   yeah right.  You conveniently just throw all of Luck's fumbles to the side.

 

I'll go back to my original point at the beginning of the thread that you two turned into some kind of Manning vs Luck debate.  I still don't understand what Manning's stats have to do with the idea that Luck cannot be considered elite until he stops turning the ball over like Mark Sanchez and Jay Cutler.   

 

You do realize how silly it is to mention Andrew Luck in the same sentence with Sanchez and Cutler, right? Either you're being sensational, or you really think there's a causal link between him and them. Either way, it's bad.

[horseshoeblue22]

Colts had Trent who gained 519 yards gaining 3.3 YPC. Herron averaged 4.5 YPC. Bradshaw 4.7.

This is why I always shake my head when people label the o-line as terrible. Donald Brown had a high YPC average his last year here. Vick Ballard was doing pretty well before his first injury.

Trent has held our run game hostage the last two years, not the play of our offensive lineman. You put a back, any back not named Trent, into our system and they have produced. With Gore, Herron and Robinson, this year our run game will be much more effective.

[Larry Horseman]

He isn't as bad as Cutler or Sanchez, but I get your point.  People don't want to believe it, but Andrew was still making foolish throws/holding onto the ball too long which caused many turnovers.  He most definitely will need to get better if the Colts want to make it to the SB.  I do believe he will become a smarter player these next few years.  He is maturing and entering his prime.  If you look at Peyton's first couple of years he did the same, so I'm not too worried about it, although there are alot of people on here ignoring that fact!

 

Luck won't be elite until he stops turning the ball over at a Mark Sanchez/ Jay Cutler like rate

 

I have no issue with saying Luck should cut down his turnovers. That said, statistics say he actually is doing very well: http://www.pro-football-reference.com/leaders/pass_int_perc_career.htm. But hey, don't let the truth get in the way of your agenda or perception. 

[Larry Horseman]

This is exactly right.  I didn't say Luck was as bad as Cutler and Sanchez, but he does turn the ball over at a rate that is comparable to those guys.  It's like there is no middle ground with Luck.  If you don't consider him elite, you just hate him.  Andrew Luck is a stud but he is not elite at this point.  Stop turning the ball over and then we can discuss it.  

 

Just because you may ignore the link. Luck has a career Attempt to INT Ration of 2.4%. Sanchez's is 3.7% and Cutler's is 3.4%. Luck is hardly throwing INTs at a comparable rate to those two. However, he is throwing INTs at a comparable rate to Manning, Brees, Rivers, etc. He is not as efficient as Brady or Rodgers, but part of what makes Luck himself is being more of a risk taker, holding on to the ball longer, etc. than those two. 

[CanuckColt]

In spite of this 'expert' article, I think the Colts future is VERY bright.

Geez, how far and how fast does a team need to improve to please these guys?

[peytonmanning18]

You do realize how silly it is to mention Andrew Luck in the same sentence with Sanchez and Cutler, right? Either you're being sensational, or you really think there's a causal link between him and them. Either way, it's bad.

It's not "silly" when you're comparing turnovers

[peytonmanning18]

I have no issue with saying Luck should cut down his turnovers. That said, statistics say he actually is doing very well: http://www.pro-football-reference.com/leaders/pass_int_perc_career.htm. But hey, don't let the truth get in the way of your agenda or perception.

That's doesn't account for his 13 fumbles (6 lost) last year

[peytonmanning18]

Just because you may ignore the link. Luck has a career Attempt to INT Ration of 2.4%. Sanchez's is 3.7% and Cutler's is 3.4%. Luck is hardly throwing INTs at a comparable rate to those two. However, he is throwing INTs at a comparable rate to Manning, Brees, Rivers, etc. He is not as efficient as Brady or Rodgers, but part of what makes Luck himself is being more of a risk taker, holding on to the ball longer, etc. than those two.

A lost fumble is just as bad as an interception

Luck fumbled 13 TIMES last season. That's ridiculous

[Superman]

It's not "silly" when you're comparing turnovers

 

Yes it is. 

[Superman]

A lost fumble is just as bad as an interception

 

The majority of QB fumbles aren't the QB's fault.

[peytonmanning18]

Yes it is.

Why?

[peytonmanning18]

The majority of QB fumbles aren't the QB's fault.

Ha yeah ok

He can be extremely careless in the pocket with the football

[Superman]

Why?

 

Because he's many times better than both of them, despite the turnovers.

[peytonmanning18]

Because he's many times better than both of them, despite the turnovers.

Did I say he was as bad as those two?

I said his turnovers are on par with those guys.

Reading comprehension

[Superman]

Ha yeah ok

He can be extremely careless in the pocket with the football

 

Quantify that. How many of his fumbles, particularly the ones that were recovered by the defense, were because of him being careless in the pocket?

[peytonmanning18]

The majority of QB fumbles aren't the QB's fault.

Quantify that. How many of his fumbles, particularly the ones that were recovered by the defense, were someone else's fault?

[Superman]

Did I say he was as bad as those two?

I said his turnovers are on par with those guys.

Reading comprehension

 

Awesome. He's many times better than them. He takes care of the ball better than they do, given his TO rate (plays / turnover), and he makes far more plays than the two of them combined.

 

As I said, either you're being sensational, or you think that because their TO numbers are similar, that it makes them relatable. Both of those angles are silly, as is bringing up either Cutler or Sanchez when discussing Andrew Luck. 

[The Fish]

Quantify that. How many of his fumbles, particularly the ones that were recovered by the defense, were someone else's fault?

 

 

You chose to ignore a lot of the content of this thread. Your point is also wrong.

[peytonmanning18]

Awesome. He's many times better than them. He takes care of the ball better than they do, given his TO rate (plays / turnover), and he makes far more plays than the two of them combined.

As I said, either you're being sensational, or you think that because their TO numbers are similar, that it makes them relatable. Both of those angles are silly, as is bringing up either Cutler or Sanchez when discussing Andrew Luck.

If you could actually read, you would know that I have said time and time again that Luck cannot be considered an elite quarterback in the NFL until he stops turning the ball over at a rate that's comparable to Mark Sanchez

[peytonmanning18]

You chose to ignore a lot of the content of this thread. Your point is also wrong.

You don't even know what my point is because you don't know how to read

[Superman]

Quantify that. How many of his fumbles, particularly the ones that were recovered by the defense, were someone else's fault?

 

You're the one bringing up fumbles. I'd just as soon not even mention them, as they aren't really relevant to a discussion about how good of a QB he is. If you want to keep bringing up fumbles and assuming that they're all his fault, I'm going to assume that you don't know how QB fumbles work.

[peytonmanning18]

You guys are right, Andrew Luck is the greatest quarterback in NFL history and anyone that says otherwise should be taken to Monument Circle and stoned to death

[Superman]

If you could actually read, you would know that I have said time and time again that Luck cannot be considered an elite quarterback in the NFL until he stops turning the ball over at a rate that's comparable to Mark Sanchez

 

And that's sensationalist nonsense.

 

Also, good job with the "if you could actually read" garbage. Continue undermining your own argument with childishness. 

[peytonmanning18]

You're the one bringing up fumbles. I'd just as soon not even mention them, as they aren't really relevant to a discussion about how good of a QB he is. If you want to keep bringing up fumbles and assuming that they're all his fault, I'm going to assume that you don't know how QB fumbles work.

So you are saying that a lost fumble should not count as a turnover? Gotcha

[Superman]

You guys are right, Andrew Luck is the greatest quarterback in NFL history and anyone that says otherwise should be taken to Monument Circle and stoned to death

 

But I can't read...

[Superman]

So you are saying that a lost fumble should not count as a turnover? Gotcha

 

But I can't read...

[peytonmanning18]

But I can't read...

This is possibly the dumbest argument I have ever been involved in and will be ending my participation in this thread because anyone that says a lost fumble is not a turnover cannot be taken seriously.

[Superman]

This is possibly the dumbest argument I have ever been involved in and will be ending my participation in this thread because anyone that says a lost fumble is not a turnover cannot be taken seriously.

 

Please show me where anyone said that a lost fumble isn't a turnover, Mr. Reading Comprehension.

[Steamboat_Shaun]

What's your take on John Claytons article?

http://espn.go.com/nfl/story/_/id/13013357/why-indianapolis-colts-future-bright-seems-nfl

 

"What's clear is the biological clock is ticking on the Colts, even though Luck is only 25 years old. It might not be now or never for Luck to get to his first Super Bowl, but the Colts could be heading down the path of five other franchises that have quality quarterbacks. Teams that don't hit on two or three starters in each draft class eventually suffer roster decay -- and that's the position in which the Colts currently find themselves"

 

I haven't been able to take Jon Clayton seriously since I saw his ponytail.

[BOTT]

Unless it's insider information I don't pay Clayton much mind. He has many eye rolling opinions.

[Superman]

Unless it's insider information I don't pay Clayton much mind. He has many eye rolling opinions.

 

Yeah, certain guys always get good info. But that doesn't mean they know what they're talking about.

[The Fish]

You don't even know what my point is because you don't know how to read

Good point. What was I thinking..

[Larry Horseman]

A lost fumble is just as bad as an interception

Luck fumbled 13 TIMES last season. That's ridiculous

 

It also doesn't account for fumbles lost by Sanchez or Cutler. For the record, Luck has lost 13, Cutler has lost 31, and Sanchez has lost 23. Even if you do this on a per year average, Luck averages 4.3 fumbles lost/year, Sanchez 3.8, and Cutler 3.4. Luck's less than 1 fumble lost per year still doesn't come close to putting him in the same turnover category as Sanchez or Cutler, especially when # of drop backs is taken into consideration: Cutler's fumble to attempts ratio is 0.8%, Sanchez's is 1.0%, and Luck's is 0.7%. So, you could argue that Luck has a similar fumbling problem as Cutler and Sanchez, but isn't even close when it comes to INTs...

[Buck Showalter]

This thread is awesome...

Sometimes this forum proves that "Colts' fanbase not as bright as it seems"...

[braveheartcolt]

I think we have a little sob sob man who can't get over the fact that the Legend had a poorly neck and was let go. Just get over it.

[Coffeedrinker]

Manning's third year stats have nothing to do with this argument but since you want to know.  

 

Manning had 15 interceptions and 1 fumble in his 3rd year.  7 less turnovers than Luck.

 

My initial post said that in order for Luck to become elite he needs to stop turning the ball over at a rate comparable to Mark Sanchez and Jay Cutler, I have no idea what that has to do with Manning.

But he doesn't turn it over at the same rate as Cutler or Sanchez.

 

In 2014 Cutler had 18 INTs and 6 Fumbles in 561 pass attempts, so he turned it over 4.45% of the his pass attempts (lumping all fumbles with pass attempts, if someone wants to figure out his fumble when he was scrambling be my guest.)

 

Luck had 22 TOs (16 INTs, 6 fumbles) in 616 pass attempts, so he turned it over 3.57% of his pass attempts.

 

That means that Cutler turns the ball over 25% more than Luck... that is a huge difference.

 

Sanchez is even worse he had 17 TOs (14/3) in 309 pass attempts, so he turned it over 5.5% of his pass attempts, 54% more than Luck.

 

So your premise that Luck is not elite because he turns it over at the same rate as Cutler and Sanchez is false.  It's ok if you don't think Luck is elite but if you're going to justify it, try to justify it with something within the realm of reality.

[James]

You guys are right, Andrew Luck is the greatest quarterback in NFL history and anyone that says otherwise should be taken to Monument Circle and stoned to death

So, you're a proper *, aren't you?

[Jdubu]

If you assume that the team won't draft well, then sure, but history hasn't shown us that.

Everyone is hard on Grigs' drafts because of Trent and Werner. Outside of that, he's been very solid.

I think a lot falls on the trade of a first round pick for Trich and Werner not really being very much above an average player to this point but you can also point out the missteps on building Luck a good online so far and then you have the defense that hasn't lived up to "building the monster" yet.

The 2012 draft was as easy of pickings I hope we shall see for years to come. Picking 1-2 at the top of the draft affords you higher probabilities of a starter. That 2013 draft was just short of awful and every GM has them. 2014 looks to be very solid and on paper, 2015 draft looks every bit as solid across the board as did the 2012 draft and we selected deep in this draft as opposed to the 2012 draft. Time will tell though on 2014-2015 though.

One thing is clear, after paying Luck topQB money, constazo top 3-5 LT money, perhaps TY top 5-10 WR money, Vonte his CB money, we are going to have to have more drafts like 2012 than the 2013 drafts no question about it.