Why isn't Luck in MVP discussion?

[chad72]

Luck still has left enough plays on the field early on in the season that we are still playing catch up, IMO. 

 

We can't blame it all on the D while we should blame it mostly on the D.

 

The problem is he has to be so close to mistake free in order for us to overcome our issues on the other fronts. We all know that is practically impossible to do even when you are having a good season.

[rockywoj]

He's not currently in the discussion because, as many have said, the Colts have a losing record ... AND, by my eyes, despite his nice on the surface numbers, he's been pretty darn inconsistent too many times.   He's made too many bad throws off the mark with some poor throwing decisions.   To me he needs to clean-up his game and the Colts would need to go on a 6-1 or better run over their next 7 games for Luck to enter the discussion.

[Luck2Hilton4TD]

It's our record. If we were better, he'd definitely be in the discussion. 

[BProland85]

It's pretty much the same reason why Aaron Rodgers isn't in the conversation this year either. Both are superstars, but both are playing on average or below average teams this year.

 

Luck may be playing a little better than Rodgers this season, but the teams around them each have their flaws, and unfortunately players on winning teams get more consideration for MVP voting.

 

But in all reality, Luck is the definition of an MVP. Without Luck, this team would be 3-13 this year or worse.

[AZColt11]

1 hour ago, BProland85 said:

It's pretty much the same reason why Aaron Rodgers isn't in the conversation this year either. Both are superstars, but both are playing on average or below average teams this year.

 

Luck may be playing a little better than Rodgers this season, but the teams around them each have their flaws, and unfortunately players on winning teams get more consideration for MVP voting.

 

But in all reality, Luck is the definition of an MVP. Without Luck, this team would be 3-13 this year or worse.

I'll take it another step further.  Without Luck, they would look a lot like the year before he got here, only worse because I think we had more talent back then.  They win maybe 2 games.

[2006Coltsbestever]

Without Luck we would flat out stink and would be irrelevant media wise. Last season was fools gold because we had Hasselbeck who was still Good so he gave us a chance. With Tolzien we would probably be 0-9. Maybe 1-8?

[bleevit]

There are few quarterbacks that I'd rather hand the ball to with 2 minutes left needing a touchdown. That said, he is not the MVP right now. Its kind of obvious really.

[AZColt11]

I'm a Colts fan, and I love Luck and actually embraced the whole "Luck for Peyton" thing.  I told my wife when he was a senior at Stanford "That's our next QB" and we started tuning into watch Stanford games, LOL.  But I can look at things impartially too.  Luck is having a very good season, a few more wins and he will enter the convo.  But he is NOT currently the MVP.  There are guys on winning teams playing as well or better right now.  They just are.

[southwest1]

19 hours ago, Luck2Hilton4TD said:

It's our record. If we were better, he'd definitely be in the discussion. 

This is always a pet peeve of mine MVP awards are individual milestones honoring usually the best QB, RB, or pass rusher. Team records mean absolutely nothing to me when weighting my MVP options across the league. Zero. 

 

Essentially, what you're asking is what 1 player elevates your squad to a level that they could not reach without him on the field? It's a stat stuffer accolade not a Lombardi trophy symbolizing one's NFL legacy for future generations of fans, reporters, authors, & online website contributors. 

[Steamboat_Shaun]

As well as Luck has played the majority of the time this season, the 2 picks he threw against Green Bay are classic examples of how remove yourself from the MVP conversation. He made a lot of great plays in that game as well, and finished the game in maybe the gutsiest fashion imaginable with those 2 huge 3rd down conversions, but as long as he continues to make those types of really bad decisions, winning the MVP will be a pipe dream.

 

Comeback player of the year is a different story though. He has to be in the running for that.

[2006Coltsbestever]

I think most of us realize that Andrew isn't the MVP but he should be mentioned in the discussion is the main point of this Thread. Without him and no solid backup the Colts would be really bad. Really other than Matt Ryan, Derek Carr, and Tom Brady who has outplayed Luck at the QB position this season? Luck has put up better stats than Dak Prescott and his team is 8-1.

[southwest1]

14 minutes ago, 2006Coltsbestever said:

I think most of us realize that Andrew isn't the MVP but he should be mentioned in the discussion is the main point of this Thread. Without him and no solid backup the Colts would be really bad. Really other than Matt Ryan, Derek Carr, and Tom Brady who has outplayed Luck at the QB position this season? Luck has put up better stats than Dak Prescott and his team is 8-1.

Your post is a very compelling one CBE because I always wonder if MVP voters take into account lousy OLs & DL's when weighing their selections. 

 

It reminds me of when J. J. Watt's name was thrown around briefly in previous seasons for this honor when he was accumulating sacks left & right & became their de facto TE in the end zone for awhile. Here's my point: Achieving success with less matters more to me than winning with a tremendous line in front of a QB because the thresh hold for failure on any given down is much higher on every single down vs a well oiled machine. 

 

So yeah, I agree with your point that Luck working with less & still winning games means more than a team that firing on all cylinders. 

[2006Coltsbestever]

14 minutes ago, southwest1 said:

Your post is a very compelling one CBE because I always wonder if MVP voters take into account lousy OLs & DL's when weighing their selections. 

 

It reminds me of when J. J. Watt's name was thrown around briefly in previous seasons for this honor when he was accumulating sacks left & right & became their de facto TE in the end zone for awhile. Here's my point: Achieving success with less matters more to me than winning with a tremendous line in front of a QB because the thresh hold for failure on any given down is much higher on every single down vs a well oiled machine. 

 

So yeah, I agree with your point that Luck working with less & still winning games means more than a team that firing on all cylinders. 

I think if we were 7-2 instead of 4-5 almost everyone in the media and a lot of fans would have Andrew in the Top 3 for MVP. We could easily be 7-2 actually as the losses to the Lions, Jags, and Texans were fluky but don't get me started on that because I will start sounding like Irsay. To me it's our record is to why most don't. Derek Carr hasn't done anything overwhelming statistically that Andrew hasn't done but his team is 7-2.

[Steamboat_Shaun]

13 minutes ago, 2006Coltsbestever said:

I think if we were 7-2 instead of 4-5 almost everyone in the media and a lot of fans would have Andrew in the Top 3 for MVP. We could easily be 7-2 actually as the losses to the Lions, Jags, and Texans were fluky but don't get me started on that because I will start sounding like Irsay. To me it's our record is to why most don't. Derek Carr hasn't done anything overwhelming statistically that Andrew hasn't done but his team is 7-2.

 

To be an MVP candidate, you have to have the stats and the wins. Whether that's fair or not is definitely debatable, but you're never going to see an MVP from a 4-12 team.

[2006Coltsbestever]

Just now, Steamboat_Shaun said:

 

To be an MVP candidate, you have to have the stats and the wins. Whether that's fair or not is definitely debatable, but you're never going to see an MVP from a 4-12 team.

What if we go 9-7 and win the Division and Andrew's stats are comparable to the other top 3 QB's.

[southwest1]

14 minutes ago, 2006Coltsbestever said:

I think if we were 7-2 instead of 4-5 almost everyone in the media and a lot of fans would have Andrew in the Top 3 for MVP. We could easily be 7-2 actually as the losses to the Lions, Jags, and Texans were fluky but don't get me started on that because I will start sounding like Irsay. To me it's our record is to why most don't. Derek Carr hasn't done anything overwhelming statistically that Andrew hasn't done but his team is 7-2.

I can already hear our former GM saying "You are what your record says you are." 

 

If Derek Carr wins MVP this yr, I'm cool with that. That dude is fascinating to watch in the 4th QTR or OT. The Rayders are making the playoffs this season. I always wonder what David Carr, his older brother, thinks when watching his sibling play.

 

"Oh look, that's what a good OL & few sacks is supposed to look like." 

 

Until he landed in NY with the Giants, David never had a good OL. 

[Coltfreak]

You all are crazy.  It's not MVP for the colts. It's MVP for the league. 

 

The reason  he's not in consideration is the people judging are not a bunch of Colts homers like some of you