Jump to content

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

chad72

Andrew Luck's comparison to Matthew Stafford

Recommended Posts

This was written before our 2016 regular season game 1 where Luck lost to the Detroit Lions thanks to our D letting them drive down the field for a game winning FG.

 

https://www.prideofdetroit.com/2016/8/24/12618920/matthew-stafford-andrew-luck-statistical-comparison-almost-identical

 

I did not realize how much their statistics compare closely over their first 55 games.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Wasn't stafford hurt though in the beginning of his career

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

1 big difference between the 2, Luck has 3 Playoff wins and Stafford has 0. It was mostly Luck who won those Playoff games as well considering we had no Run game and a Bad to Mediocre Defense from 2012-2014. So Luck wasn't carried in his playoff wins by his Defense unlike Blake Bortles was last season or a Mark Sanchez was back in 2009 and 2010. Until Stafford wins a Playoff game (although he is Good) it is kind of tough to take him real serious.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
31 minutes ago, 2006Coltsbestever said:

1 big difference between the 2, Luck has 3 Playoff wins and Stafford has 0. It was mostly Luck who won those Playoff games as well considering we had no Run game and a Bad to Mediocre Defense from 2012-2014. So Luck wasn't carried in his playoff wins by his Defense unlike Blake Bortles was last season or a Mark Sanchez was back in 2009 and 2010. Until Stafford wins a Playoff game (although he is Good) it is kind of tough to take him real serious.

Not true.  The defense was actually very good in the early Luck years.   Redding and Mathis, as well as probably the best secondary in the NFL at the time.  Davis and a pre injury Toler were excellent man corners,  and an enthused Landry and Bethea made a great S team.  Butler was a great slot corner.

 

But Luck competed in the AFC South and Detroit always had GB to contend with.  I think the Bears may have had decent teams back then.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, DougDew said:

Not true.  The defense was actually very good in the early Luck years.   Redding and Mathis, as well as probably the best secondary in the NFL at the time.  Davis and a pre injury Toler were excellent man corners,  and an enthused Landry and Bethea made a great S team.  Butler was a great slot corner.

In 2012 we were 21st in Defense and in 2014 were 19th in Defense. 2013 was the only season we had a respectable Defense, we were 9th in Defense and that was when Mathis had a career year in Sacks. In 2 of Luck's 1st 3 seasons our Defense wasn't that good so my Post is true.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, DougDew said:

Not true.  The defense was actually very good in the early Luck years.   Redding and Mathis, as well as probably the best secondary in the NFL at the time.  Davis and a pre injury Toler were excellent man corners,  and an enthused Landry, and Bethea made a great S team.  Butler was a great slot corner.

The defense hasn't been very good at any time luck has been here

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, DougDew said:

Not true.  The defense was actually very good in the early Luck years.   Redding and Mathis, as well as probably the best secondary in the NFL at the time.  Davis and a pre injury Toler were excellent man corners,  and an enthused Landry, and Bethea made a great S team.  Butler was a great slot corner. 

Very good is a stretch. 2014 was the best D we had in the Pagano era and we still got boat raced by several teams, namely Pittsburgh, NE, and Dallas. The secondary was good when healthy but not better than Seattle or Denver. Landry was never good here, Bethea should have never been let go. Bethea and Mike Adams would have made a great tandem.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Boiler_Colt said:

Very good is a stretch. 2014 was the best D we had in the Pagano era and we still got boat raced by several teams, namely Pittsburgh, NE, and Dallas. The secondary was good when healthy but not better than Seattle or Denver. Landry was never good here, Bethea should have never been let go. Bethea and Mike Adams would have made a great tandem.

We ranked 19th in 2014, see above. Over that 3 Year span our Defense was mediocre as a whole. Very Good would be Top 10 every season. Great would be Top 5. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, 2006Coltsbestever said:

We ranked 19th in 2014, see above. Over that 3 Year span our Defense was mediocre as a whole. Very Good would be Top 10 every season. Great would be Top 5.  

Nowhere did I disagree with what you said.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, jvan1973 said:

The defense hasn't been very good at any time luck has been here

It was good in those early Luck years.  Not comparing to this year because 2018 is a small sample, but compared to 2015 to 2017, the pass rush was better, and the secondary was much, much better.  Davis hardly ever gave up during those years.   Butler was excellent.  Toler held up.

 

Then Toler got hurt, Landry quit, and Bethea got older, as did Mathis.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, DougDew said:

Not true.  The defense was actually very good in the early Luck years.   Redding and Mathis, as well as probably the best secondary in the NFL at the time.  Davis and a pre injury Toler were excellent man corners,  and an enthused Landry and Bethea made a great S team.  Butler was a great slot corner.

 

But Luck competed in the AFC South and Detroit always had GB to contend with.  I think the Bears may have had decent teams back then.

Nope, nope, nope.

 

Mathis and Vontae were the only legit defenders on those teams. Toler was routinely abused when he was on the field, Landry consistently went for- and missed -big hits, Bethea and Butler were solid. That secondary was far from the best in the league at the time, I don't know what Colts team you were watching. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Boiler_Colt said:

Nowhere did I disagree with what you said.

I know you weren't. I just wasn't sure you seen my Post with where we were rated. It's Dougdew that think it was Very Good and the numbers prove otherwise.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, DougDew said:

It was good in those early Luck years.  Not comparing to this year because 2018 is a small sample, but compared to 2015 to 2017, the pass rush was better, and the secondary was much, much better.  Davis hardly ever gave up during those years.   Butler was excellent.  Toler held up.

 

Then Toler got hurt, Landry quit, and Bethea got older, as did Mathis.

They were better than 15-17.  But they weren't very good

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Boiler_Colt said:

Very good is a stretch. 2014 was the best D we had in the Pagano era and we still got boat raced by several teams, namely Pittsburgh, NE, and Dallas. The secondary was good when healthy but not better than Seattle or Denver. Landry was never good here, Bethea should have never been let go. Bethea and Mike Adams would have made a great tandem.

Landry was good the first two years, as was Toler, Butler, and VD.  Bethea was actually the weak link by then. 

 

Maybe "very good" is a poor description of the defense, but  I'd dispute "poor to mediocre".  Luck threw his share of picks too, just like Stafford.

 

And when you invest in QBs like that, a team will never have a defense like Seattle's or Denver's.  That's an unrealistic comparison.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, 2006Coltsbestever said:

I now you weren't. I just wasn't sure you seen my Post with where we were rated. It's Dougdew that think it was Very Good and the numbers prove otherwise.

Yep, I was saying we weren't good either but in 2014 the D was ranked 11th in yardage which is why I said that was the best we've seen. I'll forgive the OP as we're all Colts fans so we have no idea what very good defense looks like. When we're mediocre it looks great by comparison.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, colt18 said:

Nope, nope, nope.

 

Mathis and Vontae were the only legit defenders on those teams. Toler was routinely abused when he was on the field, Landry consistently went for- and missed -big hits, Bethea and Butler were solid. That secondary was far from the best in the league at the time, I don't know what Colts team you were watching. 

Toler was fine when he got here.  He was a season removed from having his knee injury with the cards.  He was also targeted frequently because VD gave up nothing on his side.  The secondary was very good.  Landry and Toler were always nicked up, and it caught up with them after two seasons here.  They were the forum whipping boys, but they played well early on with us.

 

The LBs stunk, and always have until we drafted Leonard.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, DougDew said:

Landry was good the first two years, as was Toler, Butler, and VD.  Bethea was actually the weak link by then. 

 

Maybe "very good" is a poor description of the defense, but  I'd dispute "poor to mediocre".  Luck threw his share of picks too, just like Stafford.

 

And when you invest in QBs like that, a team will never have a defense like Seattle's or Denver's.  That's an unrealistic comparison.

Agree to disagree on the former. Bethea went on to have several good years with Arizona. Landry was always trash, he did not make one impact play here and was abused in coverage on a consistent basis.

 

Denver had Peyton Manning on a high dollar contract and still fielded a great D.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, DougDew said:

Landry was good the first two years, as was Toler, Butler, and VD.  Bethea was actually the weak link by then. 

 

Maybe "very good" is a poor description of the defense, but  I'd dispute "poor to mediocre".  Luck threw his share of picks too, just like Stafford.

 

And when you invest in QBs like that, a team will never have a defense like Seattle's or Denver's.  That's an unrealistic comparison.

What would your definition be if a Defense ranks 21st and 19th? In 2013 we had a Good to Very Good Defense but the other 2 seasons it was Bad to Mediocre. It was only decent in 2013 because Mathis had a career year.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, 2006Coltsbestever said:

What would your definition be if a Defense ranks 21st and 19th? In 2013 we had a Good to Very Good Defense but the other 2 seasons it was Bad to Mediocre. It was only decent in 2013 because Mathis had a career year.

Ranked by what?    I'll say that the defense we had in those years was better than anything we had since Bob Sanders was playing.  I think is was good to very good then. 

 

Landry and Toler were hated by the forum almost immediately back then, because of their contracts and who WASN'T signed.  They were second tier free agents signed when everybody wanted first tier at all positions.  Every mistake they made was magnified.  They played well, and with VD, a younger Bethea, and Butler, the secondary was very good and among the top in the NFL, IMO.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, DougDew said:

Toler was fine when he got here.  He was a season removed from having his knee injury with the cards.  He was also targeted frequently because VD gave up nothing on his side.  The secondary was very good.  Landry and Toler were always nicked up, and it caught up with them after two seasons here.  They were the forum whipping boys, but they played well early on with us.

 

The LBs stunk, and always have until we drafted Leonard.

Toler was not fine, lol. He was mediocre at best. Of course QBs are going to target the weaker link....remember when he gave up 3 TDs against Dallas? He was not good. 

 

Landry made a couple good hits, missed a lot more, got hit with injuries and PED suspensions. Both seasons. 

 

The secondary was solid, not very good due our front 7 being mediocre. Don't even get me started on Arthur Jones.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, DougDew said:

Ranked by what?    I'll say that the defense we had in those years was better than anything we had since Bob Sanders was playing.  I think is was good to very good then. 

 

Landry and Toler were hated by the forum almost immediately back then, because of their contracts and who WASN'T signed.  They were second tier free agents signed when everybody wanted first tier at all positions.  Every mistake they made was magnified.  They played well, and with VD, a younger Bethea, and Butler, the secondary was very good and among the top in the NFL, IMO.

We were ranked 21st in 2012 and 19th in 2014. Look it up. I just don't see that as Good. To me that is Medicore at best. I will give you 2013, our Defense was ranked 9th - so Luck had a Defense that played Good to Very Good in 1 of those seasons = Points allowed. We can thank Mathis for that because he had like 20 Sacks that season.

 

If you are comparing the Defenses we have had from 2015-2017 to those Defenses, then yes those Defenses were better but they still weren't "Very Good" as a whole.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, 2006Coltsbestever said:

We were ranked 21st in 2012 and 19th in 2014. Look it up. I just don't see that as Good. To me that is Medicore at best. I will give you 2013, our Defense was ranked 9th - so Luck had a Defense that played Good to Very Good in 1 of those seasons = Points allowed. We can thank Mathis for that because he had like 20 Sacks that season.

 

If you are comparing the Defenses we have had from 2015-2017 to those Defenses, then yes those Defenses were better but they still weren't "Very Good" as a whole.

But rankings are nothing more than a collection of stats.  Its ranked 21st, 9th, then 19th with basically the same players, and one player getting a bunch of sacks changes the ranking.

 

Going beyond that, the D fell short of being good during the playoff teams, and so did the O.  In the context of the comparison between Luck and Stafford, the statement that both QBs had poor defenses I think is wrong.   Luck's D was much better, IMO.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, DougDew said:

But rankings are nothing more than a collection of stats.  Its ranked 21st, 9th, then 19th with basically the same players, and one player getting a bunch of sacks changes the ranking.

 

Going beyond that, the D fell short of being good during the playoff teams, and so did the O.  In the context of the comparison between Luck and Stafford, the statement that both QBs had poor defenses I think is wrong.   Luck's D was much better, IMO.

Statistically over that 3 season span from 2012-2014 we ranked 16th on Average in Points Allowed. 16th. To me 16th is Mediocre right in the middle of the league. If you disagree than we will have to just disagree :thmup: no biggy. At least I have stats to back up my claim saying "Medicore" and honestly it was Bad at times in the Playoffs. We couldn't stop the Patriots at all.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I kind of got off topic so I apologize for that but I had to show Luck's Defenses were Mediocre from 2012-2014. By almost anyone's Eye Test they could see that actually. Mathis was Great in 2013 and Davis was solid for that 3 year span, Butler had game but outside of that = MEH.

 

-Matt Stafford is Good but Luck is better, JMO. Stafford has been in the league much longer and has 0 Playoff wins. You would think he would at least have 1 by now. Luck already has 3 and will play 10 more years more than likely.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
33 minutes ago, 2006Coltsbestever said:

Statistically over that 3 season span from 2012-2014 we ranked 16th on Average in Points Allowed. 16th. To me 16th is Mediocre right in the middle of the league. If you disagree than we will have to just disagree :thmup: no biggy. At least I have stats to back up my claim saying "Medicore" and honestly it was Bad at times in the Playoffs. We couldn't stop the Patriots at all.

Well, I guess I remember the 9th ranked team and the earlier team that lost to the Ravens in the playoffs by a couple of long, lucky bombs. 

 

How were the stats early in 2012 compared to later in 2012, considering it was a brand new defense the first few weeks.  Stats probably don't go that deep without some effort.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, DougDew said:

Well, I guess I remember the 9th ranked team and the team that lost to the Ravens in the playoffs by a couple of long, lucky bombs. 

We had our moments on Defense so it wasn't all Bad, especially in 2013. Mathis, Davis, and Butler were all solid in those years. It sucked Mathis was injured in 2014 all season. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, chad72 said:

This was written before our 2016 regular season game 1 where Luck lost to the Detroit Lions thanks to our D not being able to tackle the entire game.

 

https://www.prideofdetroit.com/2016/8/24/12618920/matthew-stafford-andrew-luck-statistical-comparison-almost-identical

 

I did not realize how much their statistics compare closely over their first 55 games.

 

Fixed it for you.  

 

I remember that game because the Colt's defense made Theo Riddick look like he was Barry Sanders. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, DougDew said:

Not true.  The defense was actually very good in the early Luck years.   Redding and Mathis, as well as probably the best secondary in the NFL at the time.  Davis and a pre injury Toler were excellent man corners,  and an enthused Landry and Bethea made a great S team.  Butler was a great slot corner.

 

But Luck competed in the AFC South and Detroit always had GB to contend with.  I think the Bears may have had decent teams back then.

What team were you watching? Because it certainly wasn't the Colts

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, if Andrew Luck compares to Matthew Stafford, we now have Stafford's TE Ebron to help us, so we have the upper hand now hopefully!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
24 minutes ago, Valpo2004 said:

 

Fixed it for you.  

 

I remember that game because the Colt's defense made Theo Riddick look like he was Barry Sanders. 

 

Yes, when I saw Kenny Moore tackle Chris Thompson, who is just as elusive, if not more elusive than Theo Riddick, I knew our team's tackling emphasis had gone way way up, as it should have been all along. 

 

I always wondered when Sproles would gash us with Dungy and Meeks era LBs and then turn around be game planned for by well coached LBs of the Steelers and bottled up, it made me shake my head. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, chad72 said:

 

Yes, when I saw Kenny Moore tackle Chris Thompson, who is just as elusive, if not more elusive than Theo Riddick, I knew our team's tackling emphasis had gone way way up, as it should have been all along. 

 

I always wondered when Sproles would gash us with Dungy and Meeks era LBs and then turn around be game planned for by well coached LBs of the Steelers and bottled up, it made me shake my head. 

Sproles used to destroy us

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, DougDew said:

Landry was good the first two years, as was Toler, Butler, and VD.  Bethea was actually the weak link by then. 

 

Maybe "very good" is a poor description of the defense, but  I'd dispute "poor to mediocre".  Luck threw his share of picks too, just like Stafford.

 

And when you invest in QBs like that, a team will never have a defense like Seattle's or Denver's.  That's an unrealistic comparison.

 

Landry was good THE FIRST TWO YEARS?   Landry was only with the Colts for two years.   He signed for four years and was never good for the team.  He was GONE in two years.   Released.

 

As for “investing” in QBs...   Luck only became an issue for the salary cap in year 6.  That’s when his new contract kicked in.   The Grigson excuse never held up and was killed here and in the media.    If you want to accept it, be my guest, but you’re on the wrong side of history.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
35 minutes ago, NewColtsFan said:

As for “investing” in QBs...   Luck only became an issue for the salary cap in year 6.  That’s when his new contract kicked in.   The Grigson excuse never held up and was killed here and in the media.    If you want to accept it, be my guest, but you’re on the wrong side of history.

 

Luck's contract still isn't an issue. The Colts will have $100m in cap space next season, with Luck hitting the cap for $27.5m, about 15% of the cap. 

 

The QB contract is never an excuse. If you want a good QB -- and everyone does, that's why they're making $30m/year -- you have to pay him. The critical part is drafting well, developing young players and coaching well. Coincidentally, that's what the Seahawks did well in 2012-2014. They weren't SB contenders just because they hadn't paid Russell Wilson; they were contenders because they did that other stuff well, in addition to having good QB play.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, DougDew said:

Not true.  The defense was actually very good in the early Luck years.   Redding and Mathis, as well as probably the best secondary in the NFL at the time.  Davis and a pre injury Toler were excellent man corners,  and an enthused Landry and Bethea made a great S team.  Butler was a great slot corner.

 

But Luck competed in the AFC South and Detroit always had GB to contend with.  I think the Bears may have had decent teams back then.

Landry wasn’t very good, Toler was terrible. Our defense was certainly better than the last few years, but saying it was very good is a bit extreme.

 

The past is the past however. I’m excited how our defense looks NOW

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
26 minutes ago, ColtsBlitz said:

Landry wasn’t very good, Toler was terrible. Our defense was certainly better than the last few years, but saying it was very good is a bit extreme.

 

The past is the past however. I’m excited how our defense looks NOW

I think Doug is Grigson's dad.  It really is the only reason he defends him so much

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Superman said:

 

Luck's contract still isn't an issue. The Colts will have $100m in cap space next season, with Luck hitting the cap for $27.5m, about 15% of the cap. 

 

The QB contract is never an excuse. If you want a good QB -- and everyone does, that's why they're making $30m/year -- you have to pay him. The critical part is drafting well, developing young players and coaching well. Coincidentally, that's what the Seahawks did well in 2012-2014. They weren't SB contenders just because they hadn't paid Russell Wilson; they were contenders because they did that other stuff well, in addition to having good QB play.

 

Thank you.   Really.    I hope your post is read by all.    Especially our friend who bought what Grigson was selling.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

  • Thread of the Week

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • Willis - the 4th round pick they traded up to get will be lucky to make the 53?  Man that is highly questionable. I’d say he is much closer to a lock to make the roster than be cut prior to opening day. 
    • Well Im back been a long haul , my wife being blind had rotator cuff surgery and been in bad turn at same time so my cups been full.  But look lol the Central is just about where I left it. 162 games tells the story . Cards Cubs Brewers all right there together.
    • Faulk was a great player, but he was never a pure grind out yards type running back. Edge was.   James is a huge part of why the offense exploded in 1999 after we traded Faulk & drafted James. The play action to Edge/ bomb over the top to Harrison was absolutely LETHAL 
    • As you have noticed,  I have taken a long time to respond.   Apologies in advance,  my response is long....   Everything you think I "overstated" I personally think I understated.     And I think all the arguments you used to make a case that the spring is more ideal than the winter is hugely overstated.   Look at the last sentence of your post...    how you describe "looking at the bigger picture and taking your time..."        Says who?      Who says an owner didn't look at the bigger picture in December as a disappointing season was coming to an end and that a decision was rushed?    That's entirely written by you as opinion based on zero known facts.    And it's your interpretation that better decisions can be made in the spring.   Huh?    When it's too late to fire the HC and his staff that gave you the disappointing previous season that got the GM fired in the first place.    Now, your new GM has to deal with a HC and staff that he didn't hire.   Now everyone in the building is walking on pins and neeedles wondering if they'll get fired or be retained.   So,  all the advantages of doing those decisions in winter of Y1 for the new GM,  now have to be done in winter of Y2.     So, if they're going to be done,  how is it better to flush a year down the drain and do it the following year?   I see lots of opinion,  and very little fact.    You've tossed out a number of interesting names that are available now....    nice names and none were in the running for a GM job 5 months ago,  and suddenly you think the next hot GM is in the pile?    I appreciate that Nick Caserio might be the exception to the Patriots rule from the BB tree....    but BB has a poor record of turning out good HC's elsewhere.   He might someday....   but not so far.    Front office is decent I think, so maybe Caserio is good?   But Don't you want to get all of this done sooner than later?    Don't you want to rip the band-aid off ASAP?   Doesn't the new GM want to hire his own guy,  his own staff, ASAP?     And if you think the answer is no,  then why don't all GM's who get hired in January,  do it your way?    Why don't they keep the staff,  the HC,  coordinators and assistants,  all the front office types and the scouts,  and do all the changes the following winter?     Why don't they do that?   They don't,  do they?   I really wish this was just a simple thought experiment.   That you were simply making a case that making a GM change in the spring is do-able and not anythig else.    Some here don't understand when it happens at all in the spring and I've made the argument several times that the spring isn't as bad as you think.    Doable under certain circumstances is perfectly OK.   But you're not doing that.     You're not arguing for doable.   Instead you're arguing for desireable.    And you think it's an easy decision.    I confess that even as your biggest admirer,  perhaps BECAUSE I'm your biggest admirer,  I find this position more than a little head scratching.....   Just saying....      
    • Middleton had a contract that was 4 years or longer and the Bucks have his bird rights. That doesn't apply for Randle and the Pelicans.
  • Members

    • shakedownstreet

      shakedownstreet 6,661

      Senior Member
      Joined:
      Last active:
    • Krauses

      Krauses 78

      Member
      Joined:
      Last active:
    • IkeAramba

      IkeAramba 11

      New Member
      Joined:
      Last active:
    • TwoTonShogun

      TwoTonShogun 0

      Rookie
      Joined:
      Last active:
    • Bluesmith

      Bluesmith 94

      New Member
      Joined:
      Last active:
    • jskinnz

      jskinnz 5,178

      Senior Member
      Joined:
      Last active:
    • bravo4460

      bravo4460 1,509

      Senior Member
      Joined:
      Last active:
    • DynaMike

      DynaMike 0

      Rookie
      Joined:
      Last active:
    • Fluke_33

      Fluke_33 804

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