Colin Cowherd asks if we should give more credit to Luck than A. Rodgers

[coltsblue1844]

1 hour ago, NannyMcafee said:

 

While I agree the numbers may look the same the era was completely different from then to now. Much more pass happy now, than even in Peyton’s day. 

 

Im not saying Andrew isn’t good either. But Peyton was simply a master on the field. Could read defenses like no other, and ran the no huddle offense on every single snap. The dude was amazing to watch, he was like a Dr. operating a surgery on the opposing defense.

 I love Andrew. But if I was building a team from scratch I would still draft Peyton over him. In a heart beat.  

 

Andrew can still do amazing things and I have no doubt he will. And who knows, maybe he will make me eat my words. 

 

 

 

While i dont disagree that Manning was the best to ever do it... Many who arent old enough to have watched every snap in his career, do not remember that he struggled in the beginning... he wasnt always the surgeon on the field that he looked for the last 2/3 of his career.  I'm sure you remember his 6 int game vs the Chargers... if Luck had a game like that, the posters on here would be calling for his head on a platter!  lol

 

Either way, my all time favorite player is Peyton Manning. I think he is the GOAT.  But Andrew is my 2nd...and i think his first 5 seasons are better than what Peyton's first 5 were...now as for the rest of his career, we shall see!

[crazycolt1]

Is Luck better than Marino or Fouts was? Luck's dilemma is team play.

Manning changed the way the QB position is played. Just about every pocket passer in the league immolates Manning including Brady.

I remember thinking to myself when Manning first started, just snap the ball and quit with all this stuff. Now it has become part of the game and no one thinks anything about it because Manning knew what he was doing.

[Myles]

2 hours ago, NannyMcafee said:

 

While I agree the numbers may look the same the era was completely different from then to now. Much more pass happy now, than even in Peyton’s day. 

 

Im not saying Andrew isn’t good either. But Peyton was simply a master on the field. Could read defenses like no other, and ran the no huddle offense on every single snap. The dude was amazing to watch, he was like a Dr. operating a surgery on the opposing defense.

 I love Andrew. But if I was building a team from scratch I would still draft Peyton over him. In a heart beat.  

 

Andrew can still do amazing things and I have no doubt he will. And who knows, maybe he will make me eat my words. 

 

 

I've never seen anyone do it better.    Get out of position on defense and he would make you pay.   Better get off the field quick if you are the 12th man or Peyton will take the 5 yards.  

 

Luck is very good, but he still needs to improve.  

[NannyMcafee]

44 minutes ago, Myles said:

I've never seen anyone do it better.    Get out of position on defense and he would make you pay.   Better get off the field quick if you are the 12th man or Peyton will take the 5 yards.  

 

Luck is very good, but he still needs to improve.  

 Andrew has elite skills... but Peyton Manning was special. I can’t say Andrew is special. 

[NannyMcafee]

2 hours ago, coltsblue1844 said:

 

While i dont disagree that Manning was the best to ever do it... Many who arent old enough to have watched every snap in his career, do not remember that he struggled in the beginning... he wasnt always the surgeon on the field that he looked for the last 2/3 of his career.  I'm sure you remember his 6 int game vs the Chargers... if Luck had a game like that, the posters on here would be calling for his head on a platter!  lol

 

Either way, my all time favorite player is Peyton Manning. I think he is the GOAT.  But Andrew is my 2nd...and i think his first 5 seasons are better than what Peyton's first 5 were...now as for the rest of his career, we shall see!

 

Yeah I remember. the forums weren’t too happy back then either lol. You bring up solid points. I have no doubt Andrew can lead this team to multiple SBs. The dude is gifted. I think the main comparison would be his mental game isn’t quite as on par as Peyton was but that can change and also this year he has shown a lot of Improvement. 

 

Glad and to see that Peyton has effected your life as positively as it did mine. 

[crazycolt1]

55 minutes ago, Myles said:

I've never seen anyone do it better.    Get out of position on defense and he would make you pay.   Better get off the field quick if you are the 12th man or Peyton will take the 5 yards.  

 

Luck is very good, but he still needs to improve.  

What helped Manning was his photogenic memory. He never forgot what the defenses did against him or what he seen watching film.  Had he had the team and the coaches the Colts needed he would have had the rings that so many cherish. IMO rings do not tell the story of legends.

[Moosejawcolt]

I love Peyton.....he is the master.   Honestly if u gave me teams with the  same talent,  I am picking Luck.  I just think he is such a team guy and mentally so strong.    As much as we don't want to admit it  Peyton was more about stats then we or he wants to admit.  I think the reason why he didn't  win more super bowls was because of his stubbornness to not comitting to the run in the playoffs.  He was the qb and coordinator.  I was felt if he had a legit coordinator he wins more super bowls.  Can't deny his play off failures and blame it on his defence.  His playoff offences  performed well below his regular season offences. 

[crazycolt1]

6 hours ago, Moosejawcolt said:

I love Peyton.....he is the master.   Honestly if u gave me teams with the  same talent,  I am picking Luck.  I just think he is such a team guy and mentally so strong.    As much as we don't want to admit it  Peyton was more about stats then we or he wants to admit.  I think the reason why he didn't  win more super bowls was because of his stubbornness to not comitting to the run in the playoffs.  He was the qb and coordinator.  I was felt if he had a legit coordinator he wins more super bowls.  Can't deny his play off failures and blame it on his defence.  His playoff offences  performed well below his regular season offences. 

I don't even know where to begin with this so I will let it lay in the gutter.  Heavy trash comes next Friday.

[jskinnz]

13 hours ago, 2006Coltsbestever said:

Not saying Rodgers didn't deserve it in 2014 but Luck had 4761 Yards and 40 TD's in 2014 and his team went 11-5. Not much difference at all between the 2 in 2014. Luck actually had more Yards and TD's and only won 1 game less. IMO Luck had a strong argument for MVP in 2014. Luck's numbers in 2014 are almost identical to Matt Ryan's in 2016 when the Falcons went 11-5 and he won MVP. The media does overlook us a bit, JMO.

 

Comparable #'s to be sure in 2014 but does not mean Luck or the Colts were overlooked by the media.  That is an argument I don't buy.  Rodgers was a deserving winner of the award.

 

Your 2016 point is rendered moot by the Colts' record.  Luck's team was 8-8.  He was never going to be in the conversation nor should he have been.

 

The troll said he should have been a 2-time MVP and while you can make a case for 2014, in the other years of Luck's career there is no reasonable case to be made.

 

[2006Coltsbestever]

19 minutes ago, jskinnz said:

 

Comparable #'s to be sure in 2014 but does not mean Luck or the Colts were overlooked by the media.  That is an argument I don't buy.  Rodgers was a deserving winner of the award.

 

Your 2016 point is rendered moot by the Colts' record.  Luck's team was 8-8.  He was never going to be in the conversation nor should he have been.

 

The troll said he should have been a 2-time MVP and while you can make a case for 2014, in the other years of Luck's career there is no reasonable case to be made.

 

"The Troll"  , that is funny stuff but you aren't lying  . Yeah 2014 is the only season Luck had an argument for MVP but I am ok with Rodgers winning it. I understand why he won it and I do not think Luck got ripped off at all. Luck did put up MVP type numbers that season though. 

[AZColt11]

It's tough to compare over generations because the game changes as well as the talent in the athletes changes.  Athletes today are bigger stronger and faster than they were just a decade ago, let alone 30 or 40 years ago.  On top of that, schemes change, coaching styles change, rules change, etc.  It's a bit like saying an apple tastes better than an orange.  Oh really???  In who's opinion?  Much easier to say this apple tastes better than this apple, etc.  So I wouldn't worry about comparing Luck to Manning, or Marino, or Johnny Unitas.  Totally different eras and different conditions for each player.  I would stick to comparing Luck to his current QB companions and leave it at that.

[Finball]

18 hours ago, 2006Coltsbestever said:

Not saying Rodgers didn't deserve it in 2014 but Luck had 4761 Yards and 40 TD's in 2014 and his team went 11-5. Not much difference at all between the 2 in 2014. Luck actually had more Yards and TD's and only won 1 game less. IMO Luck had a strong argument for MVP in 2014. Luck's numbers in 2014 are almost identical to Matt Ryan's in 2016 when the Falcons went 11-5 and he won MVP. The media does overlook us a bit, JMO.

 

I recall Luck being in the MVP conversation in 2014 but Rodgers had only 5 picks that year (of which 3 were receivers fault IIRC) and Luck had 16. MVP winning QBs this decade have all had 10 picks or less. Blowout losses to NE and DAL at the end of the year didn't help.

[Jason_]

20 hours ago, crazycolt1 said:

Is Luck better than Marino or Fouts was? Luck's dilemma is team play.

Manning changed the way the QB position is played. Just about every pocket passer in the league immolates Manning including Brady.

I remember thinking to myself when Manning first started, just snap the ball and quit with all this stuff. Now it has become part of the game and no one thinks anything about it because Manning knew what he was doing.

 

just a hunch here, but I think you meant immitates.  Immolates means something very....very different lol

[BloodyChamp]

Luck is better than Rodgers. Luck is so good that I won't elaborate because it's not as big of a compliment to Colt's fans as it sounds.

[crazycolt1]

1 hour ago, J@son said:

 

just a hunch here, but I think you meant immitates.  Immolates means something very....very different lol

Well Manning did sacrifice a few defenses.

[Superman]

On 10/9/2018 at 1:42 PM, coltsblue1844 said:

I'm sure you remember his 6 int game vs the Chargers...

 

Not really the point, just wanted to say that Manning already had two MVPs and a SB win by that point. That game was in November 2007, and the Colts still should have won. Vinatieri missed a short kick, in the rain. We also missed a two point conversion that would have tied the game. 

 

Such a bizarre game...

[LJpalmbeacher2]

13 hours ago, AZColt11 said:

It's tough to compare over generations because the game changes as well as the talent in the athletes changes.  Athletes today are bigger stronger and faster than they were just a decade ago, let alone 30 or 40 years ago.  On top of that, schemes change, coaching styles change, rules change, etc.  It's a bit like saying an apple tastes better than an orange.  Oh really???  In who's opinion?  Much easier to say this apple tastes better than this apple, etc.  So I wouldn't worry about comparing Luck to Manning, or Marino, or Johnny Unitas.  Totally different eras and different conditions for each player.  I would stick to comparing Luck to his current QB companions and leave it at that.

 

I think watermelon taste better than broccoli. 

[2006Coltsbestever]

1 hour ago, Superman said:

 

Not really the point, just wanted to say that Manning already had two MVPs and a SB win by that point. That game was in November 2007, and the Colts still should have won. Vinatieri missed a short kick, in the rain. We also missed a two point conversion that would have tied the game. 

 

Such a bizarre game...

Yeah for some reason the Chargers always gave us problems. Manning dominated every team except early 2000's Patriots from 2001-2004 and the Chargers of all teams  

[braveheartcolt]

55 minutes ago, 2006Coltsbestever said:

Yeah for some reason the Chargers always gave us problems. Manning dominated every team except early 2000's Patriots from 2001-2004 and the Chargers of all teams  

It was that punter of the Chargers. He was brutal.

[2006Coltsbestever]

2 minutes ago, braveheartcolt said:

It was that punter of the Chargers. He was brutal.

He and Sproles. They always seem to be able to get to Manning too better than every team with the Blitz! Merriman was a beast.

[Finball]

7 hours ago, braveheartcolt said:

It was that punter of the Chargers. He was brutal.

 

He never made Pro Bowl but looked like the best punter ever when he played against us.

 

06-08 Chargers were IMO the most talented team for 3 yr period that didn't win the SB nor even made one.

[2006Coltsbestever]

1 hour ago, Finball said:

 

He never made Pro Bowl but looked like the best punter ever when he played against us.

 

06-08 Chargers were IMO the most talented team for 3 yr period that didn't win the SB nor even made one.

This sounds crazy but I was actually happy the Pats beat the Chargers in 2006. We were unbeatable at home, had the Chargers beat the Pats, we would've had to play at SD in the 2006 Title Game. 

[John Waylon]

On 10/9/2018 at 10:06 PM, Moosejawcolt said:

I love Peyton.....he is the master.   Honestly if u gave me teams with the  same talent,  I am picking Luck.  I just think he is such a team guy and mentally so strong.    As much as we don't want to admit it  Peyton was more about stats then we or he wants to admit.  I think the reason why he didn't  win more super bowls was because of his stubbornness to not comitting to the run in the playoffs.  He was the qb and coordinator.  I was felt if he had a legit coordinator he wins more super bowls.  Can't deny his play off failures and blame it on his defence.  His playoff offences  performed well below his regular season offences. 

 

[2006Coltsbestever]

Just now, John Waylon said:

 

I don't even think DR Phil could figure out that Post 

[John Waylon]

Just now, 2006Coltsbestever said:

I don't even think DR Phil could figure out that Post 

 

I’m scheduling therapy for myself after navigating that one. 

 

Good god almighty. 

[tikyle]

On 10/8/2018 at 4:00 PM, 2006Coltsbestever said:

When it comes to Brady, Montana, and Peyton it is tough to put one of them above the other when it comes to Cowherd's Brady talk. Even though this is an opinion, I have little doubt though if Peyton played on those Pats or 49ers teams that he would have 4 or 5 Rings as well. The Ring argument is the only reason why the media doesn't put Peyton as the clear cut #1 best ever, because he has won 5 League MVP's. He still won 2 Rings with 2 different teams which is very respectable. To be on topic now, Luck and Rodgers are equally important to their teams IMO, but Rodgers is the best QB in the league.

 

Going by everything you just said why isn't Marino in that group?  Is it because he hasn't won one?  Or what about Brees?  To me football success is all about where/when and then about you as a talent.

 

If Mahomes was a Jet or Brown right now he'd be abysmal.  He's in the perfect situation for him and it's lights out.  Dak was the toast of the NFL and now he looks to be a bottom feeder.  Brees was a throw away in SD and now he's had a far superior career to the guy they got to replace him in Rivers (who is a fine QB in his own right).

 

To me if you give any above average QB the coaching ingenuity of Belichick and that defense he had in the early 00's and you're going to win at least one SB.

 

I mean Manning won one despite being horrid in DEN and the same goes for Rothlisberger's first one in PIT.

[aaron11]

peyton was a top 3 qb of all time, luck is a top 5-10 qb in the league now.  they are not really close imo

 

i think rodgers is better than luck too

[coltsblue1844]

2 hours ago, aaron11 said:

peyton was a top 3 qb of all time, luck is a top 5-10 qb in the league now.  they are not really close imo

 

i think rodgers is better than luck too

I'm not arguing this... my point is that through their first 75 games in the NFL, Luck has been better...Peyton went on to have the best career of any QB...but Luck is still very early into his career. 

As big a Peyton fan as I am, as a COLTS fan, I hope for our sake, that Luck has the better career when it's all said n done!

[2006Coltsbestever]

4 hours ago, tikyle said:

 

Going by everything you just said why isn't Marino in that group?  Is it because he hasn't won one?  Or what about Brees?  To me football success is all about where/when and then about you as a talent.

 

If Mahomes was a Jet or Brown right now he'd be abysmal.  He's in the perfect situation for him and it's lights out.  Dak was the toast of the NFL and now he looks to be a bottom feeder.  Brees was a throw away in SD and now he's had a far superior career to the guy they got to replace him in Rivers (who is a fine QB in his own right).

 

To me if you give any above average QB the coaching ingenuity of Belichick and that defense he had in the early 00's and you're going to win at least one SB.

 

I mean Manning won one despite being horrid in DEN and the same goes for Rothlisberger's first one in PIT.

All good points, I always tell people Marino is the best ever out of the QB's without a Ring. A lot of different factors do go into ranking the all-time QB's, it's just not about the Rings. Rings are important though. A QB that is in any GOAT convo should have at least 1 Ring as a starter, don't you agree? I get QB's like Dilfer and B. Johnson have won a SB but they aren't in any GOAT talks because everyone knows by the eye test they were Average QB's. Stats and MVP's are a big part of the equation too when ranking QB's, so it is just not Rings.

[Myles]

4 hours ago, tikyle said:

 

Going by everything you just said why isn't Marino in that group?  Is it because he hasn't won one?  Or what about Brees?  To me football success is all about where/when and then about you as a talent.

 

 

Marino will always be top 5 with me.   He was great.   Loved that quick release.   He took very few sacks as I recall.  

 

Brees maybe top 10.   Mostly because he was always like the 3rd best QB each year of his career.  

Similar reason why I would never put Phillip Rivers into the Hall of Fame.   Rivers was never a top 3 QB in any year he played.

 

[2006Coltsbestever]

39 minutes ago, Myles said:

Marino will always be top 5 with me.   He was great.   Loved that quick release.   He took very few sacks as I recall.  

 

Brees maybe top 10.   Mostly because he was always like the 3rd best QB each year of his career.  

Similar reason why I would never put Phillip Rivers into the Hall of Fame.   Rivers was never a top 3 QB in any year he played.

 

Marino is definitely Top 10 in my book, Top 5 is pushing it. I think Elway was better but Marino was a great talent. Brees is in my Top 20.

 

I would go something like:

1. Brady

2. Montana

3. Peyton

4. Unitas (way different era but is Top 5)

5. Elway

6. I can see Marino here actually based on eye test and his numbers. Favre is in the Top 10 as well and he won a SB, Marino didn't. A lot of people remember Favre's terrible INT's in the Playoffs but mid 90's Favre was a beast in the Playoffs. He won 3 League MVP's in a row from 1994-1996. 

 

-I would rank Rodgers over Brees all-time, Rodgers is just better and more talented IMO.

 

[2006Coltsbestever]

34 minutes ago, 2006Coltsbestever said:

Marino is definitely Top 10 in my book, Top 5 is pushing it. I think Elway was better but Marino was a great talent. Brees is in my Top 20.

 

I would go something like:

1. Brady

2. Montana

3. Peyton

4. Unitas (way different era but is Top 5)

5. Elway

6. I can see Marino here actually based on eye test and his numbers. Favre is in the Top 10 as well and he won a SB, Marino didn't. A lot of people remember Favre's terrible INT's in the Playoffs but mid 90's Favre was a beast in the Playoffs. He won 3 League MVP's in a row from 1994-1996. 

 

-I would rank Rodgers over Brees all-time, Rodgers is just better and more talented IMO.

 

*1995-1997 Favre won MVP, my memory is going  . Steve Young won MVP in 1994. Young is another one that is in the Top 10 discussion. He was real accurate and could run like a RB.

[Myles]

3 hours ago, 2006Coltsbestever said:

*1995-1997 Favre won MVP, my memory is going  . Steve Young won MVP in 1994. Young is another one that is in the Top 10 discussion. He was real accurate and could run like a RB.

Yep, Steve Young was great.

 

My top 5:

Manning

Montana

Unitas

Marino

Brady

 

 

[Coffeedrinker]

I've seen this thread for a few days and something about it struck me funny (strange not ha ha) and it finally dawned on me.... give Luck more credit for what, the Colts being 1-4?  Wouldn't that be blaming him for the losses then?

[BlueShoe]

The video linked by the OP has been removed. 

 

I think this is it:

 

 

[BlueShoe]

On 10/11/2018 at 8:40 PM, Myles said:

Yep, Steve Young was great.

 

My top 5:

Manning

Montana

Unitas

Marino

Brady

 

 

 

My top 5:

Manning

Marino

Unitas

Montana

Elway

[NM_Colts]

On 10/11/2018 at 3:15 PM, 2006Coltsbestever said:

.....

I would go something like:

1. Brady

2. Montana

3. Peyton

4. Unitas (way different era but is Top 5)

5. Elway

6. I can see Marino here actually based on eye test and his numbers. 

 

Now that Brady is back in the conversation...... (Yes this is OT)

Back in the day, Brady once said that he was disappointed that San Francisco didn't draft him. Now remembering how lousy SF has been all of those years, how many coaching changes they had, etc..... IF they had drafted him

1. Would we even know who he was?

2. Would he even be in the league right now?

3. Would he be in this conversation right now?

 I had this conversation with a Patriots fan at work and he agreed with me that we'd probably never have heard of Brady except for a brief blip in the year he was drafted.