Andrew Luck Is he the real deal or not

[RockThatBlue]

Yes.

 

/thread

[AZColt11]

He's got his problems like anybody else but I don't believe he is all that high on the problem list with this team.  if he had the front office NE had or just even had more around him we wouldn't even be having this discussion.

[CanuckColt]

Andrew is a top QB in this league but he is not as good as Peyton and never will be...not even close. Peyton processed information much quicker and got rid of the ball much quicker...and made the plays.  I doubt Andrew will ever be able to do this. He plays the game almost the same as Big Ben. That is who he is and always will be. Andrew does not seem able to make the quick reads and quick releases like Peyton.

 

[FanFromtheWasteland]

Other than Vinny, Pat, and maybe TY, he is the only other real deal. That includes management and coaching

[LJpalmbeacher2]

4 hours ago, jvan1973 said:

He is the third best qb in franchise history.   So if your an old Baltimore colts fan,  You should know that

 

I assume you have Unitas & Manning as top 2. But no way is Luck better than Bert Jones, even Belichek says Jones is best he's seen.

[2006Coltsbestever]

4 minutes ago, LJpalmbeacher said:

 

I assume you have Unitas & Manning as top 2. But no way is Luck better than Bert Jones, even Belichek says Jones is best he's seen.

I disagree, Bert Jones was 47-49 in his career and he only had 18,190 Yards Passing with 124 TD's and 101 INT's for his career. He never won a Playoff game either so how do you come up with the conclusion Bert Jones is better than Andrew Luck? Luck in 5 seasons already has 3 Playoff wins and has a season where he has thrown for 40 TD's. He has a career record of 45-30 as well. So many facts are in favor of Luck being better and Luck isnt even his prime yet. Jones was a Great talent but Luck is clearly 3rd behind Unitas and Peyton.

[jshipp23]

4 minutes ago, 2006Coltsbestever said:

I disagree, Bert Jones was 47-49 in his career and he only had 18,190 Yards Passing with 124 TD's and 101 INT's for his career. He never won a Playoff game either so how do you come up with the conclusion Bert Jones is better than Andrew Luck? Luck in 5 seasons already has 3 Playoff wins and has a season where he has thrown for 40 TD's. He has a career record of 45-30 as well. So many facts are in favor of Luck being better and Luck isnt even his prime yet. Jones was a Great talent but Luck is clearly 3rd behind Unitas and Peyton.

Bert Jones had a rocket for an arm...Hard to compare old timers to todays game..He was really good though...

[2006Coltsbestever]

Just now, jshipp23 said:

Bert Jones had a rocket for an arm...Hard to compare old timers to todays game..He was really good though...

I don't disagree with that but Luck is having the better career.

[2006Coltsbestever]

How about Earl Morrall? Where's he rank as a Colts QB? Jim Harbaugh as well? 

[Coltsman1788]

2 hours ago, VocableLoki said:

Luck is having his best season in terms of turnovers. His completion percentage, QBR and rating are all career highs. He has definitely progressed from a year ago and is making smarter throws from his first three seasons. Pep may not have been holding him back, but Chud is doing a better job with play calling, Luck is not as reliant on the long ball as he had been in the past. 

 

As for the "Elite" argument: the QB's you named (Brees, Rothlisberger, Rodgers and Brady) look at Luck's 2016 compared to theirs: pretty close overall. 

 

I cannot comprehend the number of posts/topics on Andrew Luck here, with arguments seeming to boil down to "he didn't look as good this year" or "he didn't lead us to as many wins." Luck put us in a position to win in all but a handful of games. Luck will be an elite quarterback barring injury going forward.

 

With all the problems on this team, dissecting Luck's play just seems like wasted energy. All but a few teams in the league would love to have Luck on their team.

 

Luck's numbers are closer to Rothlisberger than to any of the other 3 QBs.  Brady and Rogers both have significantly higher QBR ( 82.2 & 78) and RAT (110.7 & 102.7) ratings than Luck (QBR: 71.8 & RAT: 96.8) with fewer interceptions (1 & 7 vs. 12).  Brees has significantly higher TD passes (35) and total passing yards (4,858).  While this year may indeed be Luck's best season statistically, the elite QB's that I have named have put up similar or better numbers to this season consistently over the course of their careers.   All of the elite QB's that I named have also led their teams to at least one Super Bowl championship something that Luck has yet to accomplish.  Brady and Big Ben have won multiple rings.  Stats aside, until Luck is able to at least guide the Colts to a Super Bowl, he can not be elevated to their class.  All of this taken together is why the aforementioned QBs are considered elite and Andrew Luck is not...as of yet. 

 

Luck is a good QB.  Of course many teams would want him.  The Colts are not paying him to be good though.  They made him the highest paid in the game. The evidence supports this investment was made with an eye towards his potential.  With that comes the expectation that he become elite by NFL standards not Colts fans' standards to justify the cost of the investment the franchise has made in him.  Thus dissecting, discussing and critiquing Luck's play is hardly wasted energy. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[jshipp23]

1 hour ago, CanuckColt said:

Andrew is a top QB in this league but he is not as good as Peyton and never will be...not even close. Peyton processed information much quicker and got rid of the ball much quicker...and made the plays.  I doubt Andrew will ever be able to do this. He plays the game almost the same as Big Ben. That is who he is and always will be. Andrew does not seem able to make the quick reads and quick releases like Peyton.

 

Very similar to big ben except way more athletic...Elway is his best comparison..I have no doubt Luck will end up with a couple Super Bowls when the right coach comes.. 

[2006Coltsbestever]

I think Luck is a clone of Big Ben and to me Big Ben will be a HOFamer and has won 2 SB's, so I don't see that comparison as a bad thing. I guess because Luck hasn't been Peyton that he somehow has underachieved so far in his career. Luck is still young, it took Peyton 9 seasons to win a SB.

[jshipp23]

7 minutes ago, 2006Coltsbestever said:

I think Luck is a clone of Big Ben and to me Big Ben will be a HOFamer and has won 2 SB's, so I don't see that comparison as a bad thing. I guess because Luck hasn't been Peyton that he somehow has underachieved so far in his career. Luck is still young, it took Peyton 9 seasons to win a SB.

Peyton is top 4 all time right there with Montana, Marino, and Brady so those comparison's aren't fair to Luck at all...He is very good and will probably go down as a great once it's all said and done...A lot of it is the situation you end up in..If he had a Seahawk defense he might have a couple Super Bowls already...He will be in the 2nd tier with the Elways, Rothlisbergers, Youngs, and Brees type which isn't a bad thing at all...

[2006Coltsbestever]

2 minutes ago, jshipp23 said:

Peyton is top 4 all time right there with Montana, Marino, and Brady so those comparison's aren't fair to Luck at all...He is very good and will probably go down as a great once it's all said and done...A lot of it is the situation you end up in..If he had a Seahawk defense he might have a couple Super Bowls already...He will be in the 2nd tier with the Elways, Rothlisbergers, Youngs, and Brees type which isn't a bad thing at all...

Great Post, I also think Luck handled the pressure better than most could stepping in to replace a guy like Peyton. We basically got rid of most of our Roster, our Coach, and GM and was 2-14. Luck goes 11-5 with the pressure of replacing Peyton with really only Reggie Wayne for Vet help on Offense.

[VocableLoki]

24 minutes ago, Coltsman1788 said:

 

Luck's numbers are closer to Rothlisberger than to any of the other 3 QBs.  Brady and Rogers both have significantly higher QBR ( 82.2 & 78) and RAT (110.7 & 102.7) ratings than Luck (QBR: 71.8 & RAT: 96.8) with fewer interceptions (1 & 7 vs. 12).  Brees has significantly higher TD passes (35) and total passing yards (4,858).  While this year may indeed be Luck's best season statistically, the elite QB's that I have named have put up similar or better numbers to this season consistently over the course of their careers.   All of the elite QB's that I named have also led their teams to at least one Super Bowl championship something that Luck has yet to accomplish.  Brady and Big Ben have won multiple rings.  Stats aside, until Luck is able to at least guide the Colts to a Super Bowl, he can not be elevated to their class.  All of this taken together is why the aforementioned QBs are considered elite and Andrew Luck is not...as of yet. 

 

Luck is a good QB.  Of course many teams would want him.  The Colts are not paying him to be good though.  They made him the highest paid in the game. The evidence supports this investment was made with an eye towards his potential.  With that comes the expectation that he become elite by NFL standards not Colts fans' standards to justify the cost of the investment the franchise has made in him.  Thus dissecting, discussing and critiquing Luck's play is hardly wasted energy. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

No, just a misunderstanding of how paying qbs works. Nearly every quarterback coming near the end of their contract who is playing well will make great money. Flacco was the highest paid qb, Luck is being paid for being the franchise player with top five potential. Your posts above suggested that Luck was closer to an average qb: clearly not the case. Criticizing him for not being the caliber of hof qbs late in their career is silly, criticizing him for not winning a super bowl is worse. Brees and Rogers didn't win theirs right away.

 

Luck is playing at a level entirely appropriate to his pay: high level player with tons of upside who has improved every year other than one, where he was injured. By any measure he is having one of the greatest starts to a career of any qb. No need to worry about Luck, give him a competent defense and o line and we will be fine.

[Superman]

10 minutes ago, VocableLoki said:

No, just a misunderstanding of how paying qbs works. Nearly every quarterback coming near the end of their contract who is playing well will make great money. Flacco was the highest paid qb, Luck is being paid for being the franchise player with top five potential. Your posts above suggested that Luck was closer to an average qb: clearly not the case. Criticizing him for not being the caliber of hof qbs late in their career is silly, criticizing him for not winning a super bowl is worse. Brees and Rogers didn't win theirs right away.

 

Luck is playing at a level entirely appropriate to his pay: high level player with tons of upside who has improved every year other than one, where he was injured. By any measure he is having one of the greatest starts to a career of any qb. No need to worry about Luck, give him a competent defense and o line and we will be fine.

 

What a great post.

[Coltsman1788]

5 minutes ago, VocableLoki said:

No, just a misunderstanding of how paying qbs works. Nearly every quarterback coming near the end of their contract who is playing well will make great money. Flacco was the highest paid qb, Luck is being paid for being the franchise player with top five potential. Your posts above suggested that Luck was closer to an average qb: clearly not the case. Criticizing him for not being the caliber of hof qbs late in their career is silly, criticizing him for not winning a super bowl is worse. Brees and Rogers didn't win theirs right away.

 

Luck is playing at a level entirely appropriate to his pay: high level player with tons of upside who has improved every year other than one, where he was injured. By any measure he is having one of the greatest starts to a career of any qb. No need to worry about Luck, give him a competent defense and o line and we will be fine.

You want to call him elite.  My point is he is not that yet.  I never said he was closer to average. I said he was good but not elite yet.   If you are going to call Luck elite now and mention him in the same breath as Brady, Rothlisberger, Rogers, Brees, etc. then you have to consider their Super Bowls.  That's a part of being considered elite in this league.  It's also totally understandable with the team around him right now why Luck hasn't gotten there yet.   I don't think many NFL fans outside of Indy would agree that Luck is elite right now.  He has potential to be but he isn't there yet.

[VocableLoki]

3 minutes ago, Coltsman1788 said:

You want to call him elite.  My point is he is not that yet.  I never said he was closer to average. I said he was good but not elite yet.   If you are going to call Luck elite now and mention him in the same breath as Brady, Rothlisberger, Rogers, Brees, etc. then you have to consider their Super Bowls.  That's a part of being considered elite in this league.  It's also totally understandable with the team around him right now why Luck hasn't gotten there yet.   I don't think many NFL fans outside of Indy would agree that Luck is elite right now.  He has potential to be but he isn't there yet.

I haven't labeled him elite and that's not my point. He's a very good to great qb who will certainly be in that class, provided something drastic doesn't happen. 

 

The point of this thread is whether Luck is the "Real Deal" or not, I am saying he definitely is and is not the reason for our team's struggles.

[Coltsman1788]

12 minutes ago, VocableLoki said:

I haven't labeled him elite and that's not my point. He's a very good to great qb who will certainly be in that class, provided something drastic doesn't happen. 

 

The point of this thread is whether Luck is the "Real Deal" or not, I am saying he definitely is and is not the reason for our team's struggles.

Ok...well I guess we don't disagree on much here.  I think he is the real deal as well but was over hyped coming out of Stanford.  I don't think he is the "next Elway" as the media touted him in 2012.  Those are some pretty lofty accolades to live up to.  Still...he is on the path to becoming a good one.  He still has somethings to work on to take his game to the next (elite) level. If he can become more consistent and continue to work on reducing his turnovers he will put his team in a better position to win more games.

[VocableLoki]

1 minute ago, Coltsman1788 said:

Ok...well I guess we don't disagree on much here.  I think he is the real deal as well but was over hyped coming out of Stanford.  I don't think he is the "next Elway" as the media touted him in 2012.  Those are some pretty lofty accolades to live up to.  Still...he is on the path to becoming a good one.  He still has somethings to work on to take his game to the next (elite) level. If he can become more consistent and continue to work on reducing his turnovers he will put his team in a better position to win more games.

Glad we agree on that, just seen too many posts being highly critical of him lately.

[AZColt11]

Luck has played 5 years.  IDK how anybody can start comparing his CAREER yet to another player who has retired.  Let's see how it all shakes out when he's done.

[jameszeigler834]

10 hours ago, bleed blue 4 life said:

Sorry but as a lifelong Colts fan from Baltimore and still one today, I watch EVERY SINGLE GAME on Direct tv. I am just not sure Luck will ever live up tp his billing, Forget the yards and touchdowns , will this guy ever learn to read a defense and check off , yea I know the line has been a problem but this guy continues to throw into double coverage and his on one week off one week and saying every week in his pressers I made some bad decisions is getting a little old . Fans I am just not sure if he will ever be as good as advertised . Thoughts?????

Look at the WR core though the only really really good receiver luck has is Hilton I continue to say Luck is not the problem on this team he has played fairly well for the most part he still thinks he has to make all the plays for this team to win and I watch highlights of every game as a longtime colts fan and I'm at the conclusion that people throw a little bit too much blame Lucks way when he has very little talent around him. Now I don't deny that sometimes he will throw a pass and your scratching your head but as smart as peyton was he did the same thing the first 5 years of his career until we got somebody in here that helped him out and got through to him and said we will get the players we need to succeed and you don't have to make every play on every drive for this team to win after that peyton was much better but that tendency to make bone head throws was aways there for him too now like luck not every mistake he made was his fault. My point that I'm trying to make is the quarterback cant be superman you need a team around you that is actually good to win football games in the NFL you cant do it yourself now I will be the first to eat crow if we get a team around him and we are still not wining then I will say maybe he isn't the guy for the job until then no he isn't the issue.

[jameszeigler834]

1 hour ago, VocableLoki said:

I haven't labeled him elite and that's not my point. He's a very good to great qb who will certainly be in that class, provided something drastic doesn't happen. 

 

The point of this thread is whether Luck is the "Real Deal" or not, I am saying he definitely is and is not the reason for our team's struggles.

Remember everybody it took manning nearly 9 years of his career to win his first superbowl.

[Surge89]

2 hours ago, Coltsman1788 said:

Ok...well I guess we don't disagree on much here.  I think he is the real deal as well but was over hyped coming out of Stanford.  I don't think he is the "next Elway" as the media touted him in 2012.  Those are some pretty lofty accolades to live up to.  Still...he is on the path to becoming a good one.  He still has somethings to work on to take his game to the next (elite) level. If he can become more consistent and continue to work on reducing his turnovers he will put his team in a better position to win more games.

 

If he just fixes his timing passes we will be talking about one of the greats in front of us.  But as long as he throws high and behind across the middle he will never reach that next plateau.  Right now he's good with potential.  If you wanna classify I guess you could say he's in the Matt Ryan class.  When he gets an offensive coach that can make him transcend then we will be cooking. :-).  

 

People forget that Ben Rothlisberger no matter the rings wasn't that great of a QB (same level as Luck is now I'd argue lower actually) until Todd Haley came in and made him a pocket passer that could actually play the game.

 

Patience Luck still has a long time before his career is over.

[MR. Blueblood]

Luck is the real deal.  He may be the victim of some overhype, but that's not really his fault either.

 

Personally, I feel that every week he steps on the field he feels the need to have a superhuman effort in order to get this team a W.  He feels the need to try and make plays that aren't there, which often leads to some turnovers.  I don't think he feels that he can trust his defense to go out there and hold off a team and or win a game for them, just look at the Lions game when they couldn't hold the lead for 35 seconds, absolutely pathetic.  I don't feel like outside of Doyle and T.Y. that he has much faith in his recievers to make plays, so that could be why he locks on to them so much (this is probably his worst habit, IMO).

 

They (the "experts") will always say that a good run game and a good defense are a QB's best friend.  Luck has had neither of those in his 5 seasons here.  The O-line I think is on the upswing which should only help him as he's not getting pounded play after play, game after game.  Look at the Vikings game.  They kept him clean and upright and he read his progressions and picked that D apart.  The next week against the Raiders, while not sacked a lot, was under duress a lot and made poor decisions.

 

As fans we have the luxury of sitting back and saying he should've done this and he should've done that, but if it's not in the playbook then he can't do that.  If they don't have quick hitting throws that they've been working the timing out during practice then they can't go out and magically pull them off during the game.  Trust me, I'm tired of seeing the seven step drops and long developing routes too.

 

I really think people see the price tag on Andrew now and want to nit pick even more on what he does or doesn't do.  Some other team was going to pay this man the amount of money he got paid, if not even more, and I'm just thankful that it didn't come to that.

[Dark Superman]

I think he's definitely the real deal, but he does make a ton of mistakes that he needs to work on this off-season such as getting rid of the ball quicker and stop forcing passes that are well covered. Sometimes you just need to throw the ball away and not force a bad pass.

[Dark Superman]

I think the Colts need to upgrade the RG position and continue to grow Haeg and Clark at RT. I believe with a healthy Mewhort and Kelly entering his second season, the offensive line will be a lot better. We need to add a RB to pair with Gore and hopefully Turbin to add some explosiveness and force defenses to respect our ground game. Keep building the defense and adding small pieces to the offense and I think we will be okay. We need to hit some home runs this off-season.

[Malakai432]

I think Luck is a great  young QB, if the defense was even top 15 the complexion of this team would change dramatically in my opinion.  There no production from 2x offensive starters in DA/Dorsett, the OL seems to be coming to form slowly but still a lot of work to do.  I feel the staff deviates from certain things that work, for some reason during the Minnesota game the offense looked very good, crisp, efficient, short routes, but then they go back to the constant 7 step drop backs and the Raiders D looked like a top 15 defense vs the Colts.  For some reason, not sure if it's Luck or the coaching staff but they deviate from what seems to work.  I haven't seen them also utilize the Wildcat formation for awhile, which seemed to work well the very few amount of time they used it, lol! 

 

Not to say he doesn't have issues he needs to work on but I don't think this staff has the capability to really help him.  I could possibly see him being much better (which is scary) than he already is on a fully capable team like Kansas City, Denver, Houston, New England, Atlanta ect.  I think Luck could run or play in any kind of offense and I do agree with other posters that sometimes I feel he's leashed but what would I know.

 

Happy NY all!

[IinD]

Give him a middle of the road defense and a smarter coach and he's FIRE....

 

[Mr. Irrelevant]

5 hours ago, MR. Blueblood said:

Luck is the real deal.  He may be the victim of some overhype, but that's not really his fault either.

 

Personally, I feel that every week he steps on the field he feels the need to have a superhuman effort in order to get this team a W.  He feels the need to try and make plays that aren't there, which often leads to some turnovers.  I don't think he feels that he can trust his defense to go out there and hold off a team and or win a game for them, just look at the Lions game when they couldn't hold the lead for 35 seconds, absolutely pathetic.  I don't feel like outside of Doyle and T.Y. that he has much faith in his recievers to make plays, so that could be why he locks on to them so much (this is probably his worst habit, IMO).

 

They (the "experts") will always say that a good run game and a good defense are a QB's best friend.  Luck has had neither of those in his 5 seasons here.  The O-line I think is on the upswing which should only help him as he's not getting pounded play after play, game after game.  Look at the Vikings game.  They kept him clean and upright and he read his progressions and picked that D apart.  The next week against the Raiders, while not sacked a lot, was under duress a lot and made poor decisions.

 

As fans we have the luxury of sitting back and saying he should've done this and he should've done that, but if it's not in the playbook then he can't do that.  If they don't have quick hitting throws that they've been working the timing out during practice then they can't go out and magically pull them off during the game.  Trust me, I'm tired of seeing the seven step drops and long developing routes too.

 

I really think people see the price tag on Andrew now and want to nit pick even more on what he does or doesn't do.  Some other team was going to pay this man the amount of money he got paid, if not even more, and I'm just thankful that it didn't come to that.

Great post! 

[Mr. Irrelevant]

5 hours ago, Malakai432 said:

I think Luck is a great  young QB, if the defense was even top 15 the complexion of this team would change dramatically in my opinion.  There no production from 2x offensive starters in DA/Dorsett, the OL seems to be coming to form slowly but still a lot of work to do.  I feel the staff deviates from certain things that work, for some reason during the Minnesota game the offense looked very good, crisp, efficient, short routes, but then they go back to the constant 7 step drop backs and the Raiders D looked like a top 15 defense vs the Colts.  For some reason, not sure if it's Luck or the coaching staff but they deviate from what seems to work.  I haven't seen them also utilize the Wildcat formation for awhile, which seemed to work well the very few amount of time they used it, lol! 

 

Not to say he doesn't have issues he needs to work on but I don't think this staff has the capability to really help him.  I could possibly see him being much better (which is scary) than he already is on a fully capable team like Kansas City, Denver, Houston, New England, Atlanta ect.  I think Luck could run or play in any kind of offense and I do agree with other posters that sometimes I feel he's leashed but what would I know.

 

Happy NY all!

Another great post! 

 

Happy NY to ya' all!

[braveheartcolt]

17 hours ago, Steamboat_Shaun said:

 

I hear people bashing Dorsett all the time for his route running, but there are several plays each game that I see him wide open. Luck either doesn't see him, or he doesn't trust him. I don't know which.

Or he can't get the ball to him because of linemen in his face or he is running for his life........two sides to every story.

[coltsfeva]

I don't believe we've seen the best from Andrew. Herm Edwards was asked by the Philadelphia sports talk station who they would trade Carson Wentz for and he replied "that no. 12 in Indy" for what it's worth. None of us really know if Luck will continue to grow into an elite qb. We can speculate that he will or that what you see is what you get. I find it short-sighted to look only at his short comings and assess him, based only on them. His completion percentage is up, and his touchdown to int. ratio has improved. For every bone-headed int. he throws, he makes 10 sound decisions and delivers the ball with accuracy. The points you bring up are valid but to assume he won't change and grow is premature. Let's see what happens with a solid o-line, better run game and mixture of short, intermediate and long passes. People perceive him as slow intellectually, but you don't earn a 4.0 GPA at Stanford being dumb. You don't play QB in a vacuum and you don't earn rings by yourself. 

[braveheartcolt]

17 hours ago, Coltsman1788 said:

He was over hyped coming out of college.  He had a nice start to his career but has failed to evolve his game and on field I.Q.  Thus, his development has been stunted.  He continues to make bad throws, poor decisions and turn the ball.  His self depreciating pressers are wearing thin minus improvements in his game.  He is what he is right now...a  solid to good but not  elite QB in this league. 

To balance your very biased views, how many good throws does he make, compared to bad ones. Or do they not count? And all his other game winning performances? It looks like you have pushed them into the back of your cupboard. No matter, you will never appreciate his ability I suspect.....

[dudeski]

18 hours ago, a06cc said:

Statistically he is on his way. The only thing I don't like about his game is timing. He still needs to throw guys open instead of waiting for them to get open. That ball needs to come out a half second sooner. 

this

 

and the fact that he doesn't seem to read blitzes very well at times.  although peyton did have that problem at times as a young qb

 

the offense as a hole just has never used effective blitz beaters.  they think they can block it up when obviously they can't

[Moose Of Woe]

He's not the next Peyton Manning. That being said, that's not a fair comparison. 

 

Luck is the real deal as in he's a very good quarterback. He goes well beyond what one could reasonably expect with  garbage for a line and defense.

 

As the team improves (god willing) and Luck gains more experience he can only get better from here. We just have to hope the line doesn't keep getting him killed.

[Coltsman1788]

3 hours ago, braveheartcolt said:

To balance your very biased views, how many good throws does he make, compared to bad ones. Or do they not count? And all his other game winning performances? It looks like you have pushed them into the back of your cupboard. No matter, you will never appreciate his ability I suspect.....

Braveheart...if you read my other comments further down in the thread then you would know that I come down on the side of Luck being the real deal.  Nevertheless, he still has plenty to work on to reach elite status which I believe is his potential.  Sure he has made some small strides this season but more development is needed for him to transcend into the next level QB that we need him to be.  I expect a QB of his caliber to make more good throws than bad ones.  He does not deserve a cookie for doing what he is supposed to in my opinion.  As far as game winning performances go, in my opinion quarterbacks generally get too much credit and blame for wins & losses.  Often lost in game winning QB drives at the end of games is the fact that the very same QB made mistakes, turnovers, etc. that significantly contributed to the very deficit that he brought his team back from.  Furthermore, in the past two seasons, there really have not been many game winning drives at the end of games by Luck.  Most of those occurred during his first three seasons.  As far as this season's game winning drives we have what...San Diego...Chicago maybe?  Credit for any of those that Luck has this season but let's get real...anytime you got to have game ending drives to beat such woe begotten opponents it's really not something to beat our chests over in my opinion.  You just appreciate the fact that they found a way to win and scratch your head over how they ended up in that position in the first place.   

 

 

[jvan1973]

16 hours ago, LJpalmbeacher said:

 

I assume you have Unitas & Manning as top 2. But no way is Luck better than Bert Jones, even Belichek says Jones is best he's seen.

Luck is better than Bert Jones.   In every aspect

[braveheartcolt]

2 hours ago, Coltsman1788 said:

Braveheart...if you read my other comments further down in the thread then you would know that I come down on the side of Luck being the real deal.  Nevertheless, he still has plenty to work on to reach elite status which I believe is his potential.  Sure he has made some small strides this season but more development is needed for him to transcend into the next level QB that we need him to be.  I expect a QB of his caliber to make more good throws than bad ones.  He does not deserve a cookie for doing what he is supposed to in my opinion.  As far as game winning performances go, in my opinion quarterbacks generally get too much credit and blame for wins & losses.  Often lost in game winning QB drives at the end of games is the fact that the very same QB made mistakes, turnovers, etc. that significantly contributed to the very deficit that he brought his team back from.  Furthermore, in the past two seasons, there really have not been many game winning drives at the end of games by Luck.  Most of those occurred during his first three seasons.  As far as this season's game winning drives we have what...San Diego...Chicago maybe?  Credit for any of those that Luck has this season but let's get real...anytime you got to have game ending drives to beat such woe begotten opponents it's really not something to beat our chests over in my opinion.  You just appreciate the fact that they found a way to win and scratch your head over how they ended up in that position in the first place.   

 

 

Again, you show a lopsided view. I'm not a blind Luck suppporter, he has a fair way to go, but I can see his strengths, but you fail to, which leaves me suspicious. I trust you are a fair minded fan though, so no worries.

[BloodyChamp]

Luck has won a crapload of games by playing to win instead of to not-lose. It caught up with him this year but only because this team stinks and the coaching stinks worse.