Most ridiculous Luck take I have ever seen

[Restinpeacesweetchloe]

What is Max smoking.  

 

 

[Boiler_Colt]

Steven A. Smith the voice of reason? I must be delusional.

[crazycolt1]

8 minutes ago, Boiler_Colt said:

Steven A. Smith the voice of reason? I must be delusional.

I was thinking the same thing.

[EastStreet]

max is an *

 

CC1 above is spot on. i'm delusional too.

[NorthernBlue]

I knew before clicking on this that it would be the Kellerman one  

 

It's not Luck's fault that he came into this league as the successor to Peyton Manning, to go along with being a generational talent at QB, and that all the media expected him to be the second coming of football jesus. 

 

They lost a playoff game. To a really, really good team. On the road. I find it so stupid that the barometer to how good a player is, is how his TEAM does in the playoffs.

 

BTW, in all four of Andrew Luck's playoff eliminations, they were on the road to a team that was straight up better.

 

2012 at Baltimore. 2013 at New England, 2014 at New England, 2018 at KC.

 

He was the heavy underdog in all of those games. 

[Restinpeacesweetchloe]

I am pretty sure lucks first three years as far as statistics are very close to Manning’s first three years. If Ballard was the GM in 2012 I think Luck would have multiple SB and might not of got hurt so bad.

[CurBeatElite]

3 minutes ago, Chloe6124 said:

I am pretty sure lucks first three years as far as statistics are very close to Manning’s first three years. If Ballard was the GM in 2012 I think Luck would have multiple SB and might not of got hurt so bad.

 

Luck went 11-5 with 4347 yards, 23 TDs, 18 INTs as a rookie (sacked 41 times, 54.1% on 627 attempts, 6.93 yards/attempt).

Peyton went 3-13 with 3739 yards 26 TDs, 28 INTs as a rookie (sacked 22 times, 56.7% on 575 attempts, 6.5 yards/attempt).

Luck went 11-5 with 3822 yards, 23 TDs, 9 INTs in year two (sacked 32 times, 60.2% on 570 attempts, 6.7 yards/attempt).

Peyton went 13-3 for 4135 yards 26 TDs, 15 INTs in year two (sacked 14 times, 62.1% on 533 attempts, 7.76 yards/attempt).

Luck went 11-5 with 4761 yards, 40 TDs, 16 INT in year three (sacked 27 times, 61.7% on 616 attempts, 7.73 yards/attempt).

Peyton went 10-6 4413 yards, 33 TDs, 15 INT in year three (sacked 20 times, 62.1% on 571 attempts, 7.73 yards/attempt).

 

Overall, Luck had 33 wins to Peyton's 26 wins ....12,930 yards to  Peyton's 12,287 .... 86 TDs to Peyton's 85... and 43 INTs to Peyton's 58 INTs.  Luck was sacked 100 times in his first 3 years, compared to Peyton only being sacked 56 times.

 

Luck and Peyton both were number 1 draft picks, meaning they each inherited the worst team from the NFL in the year before.  Some numbers may be skewed due to a different era (which one may argue favors Luck in a more 'passer-friendly league') or a different coaching staff (which one may argue favors Peyton's numbers with a less defensive-minded/more-offensive minded head coach in his first 3 years).  Regardless, Luck had 7 more wins, 700 more yards, 1 more TD, and 15 less INT's than Peyton in his first three years.  In year 1, Luck had 0.4 more yards/attempt, in year 2, Peyton had 1.06 more yards/attempt, and in year 3, they had the exact same yards/attempt.  Peyton had the best RB in the league in his 2nd and 3rd years, Luck has never had close to that type of running game.

 

In Peyton's first 7 season, he was sacked 20 times or less 4x and was never sacked for 30 or more times.  In Luck's first 5 seasons, he was sacked over 40 times 2x, over 30 times 1x, and 27 times another time.  In his 4th year, he was on pace to be sacked >34 times before he was injured.

 

Some of Luck's hits and sacks are on Luck for holding the ball longer than Peyton and being a more aggressive runner.  However, as far as numbers are concerned Luck had significantly more wins than Peyton in his first 3 years, and was slightly better in yards and TDs.  He was also significantly better in reducing interceptions.  Peyton had a slight edge on completion percentage.  Their yards per attempt were tied in year 3 and split in the other years.

 

The main thing that sticks out looking at the stats outside the above numbers is the amount of sacks they each took.  Luck in his first 5 years had a sack % numbers of 6.1, 5.3, 4.2, 4.9, 7.0.  Peyton's numbers looked like 3.7, 2.6, 3.4, 5.0, 3.7.  In fact, in Peyton's 17 years in the league, he only had a sack % of 5 or greater 1 time and he had one other season where his sack % was 4.6.  

 

Again, some of Luck's hits could have been on Luck.  However, there has to be something to be said for what the Colts did with Peyton vs. what they did with Luck.  Peyton, they knew was going to be their franchise player, they made darned sure he was protected at all times.  Luck, they knew was going to be their franchise player, and they let him get the living heck beat out of him every year until last year when Ballard finally made significant steps to improving our O-Line.

 

It's hard to say that Luck would already have a SB with Ballard, since we're in the same conference as the Pats.... but I think it's hard to argue that Luck wouldn't have been better protected and less injured if Ballard was the GM from day 1.

 

 

[GoColts00]

The Moral of the story is... It takes a TEAM to win the Super Bowl. Andrew Luck can't do it on his own. Once the TEAM is in place and has fought those gridiron battles together they can hoist a Lombardi. Obviously, Ballard understands that and is in the process of making it happen!

[Restinpeacesweetchloe]

Thanks for that terrific post with all those statistics. Just makes me so mad they didn’t protect him better and surround him with a better team. Just goes to show how special Luck  really is.

[Restinpeacesweetchloe]

I hope we can win a SB next year. I love the players have said we have unfinished business. I am so excited for the season this fall and pray there are no significant injuries.

 

 

[crazycolt1]

7 minutes ago, CurBeatElite said:

 

Luck went 11-5 with 4347 yards, 23 TDs, 18 INTs as a rookie (sacked 41 times, 54.1% on 627 attempts, 6.93 yards/attempt).

Peyton went 3-13 with 3739 yards 26 TDs, 28 INTs as a rookie (sacked 22 times, 56.7% on 575 attempts, 6.5 yards/attempt).

Luck went 11-5 with 3822 yards, 23 TDs, 9 INTs in year two (sacked 32 times, 60.2% on 570 attempts, 6.7 yards/attempt).

Peyton went 13-3 for 4135 yards 26 TDs, 15 INTs in year two (sacked 14 times, 62.1% on 533 attempts, 7.76 yards/attempt).

Luck went 11-5 with 4761 yards, 40 TDs, 16 INT in year three (sacked 27 times, 61.7% on 616 attempts, 7.73 yards/attempt).

Peyton went 10-6 4413 yards, 33 TDs, 15 INT in year three (sacked 20 times, 62.1% on 571 attempts, 7.73 yards/attempt).

 

Overall, Luck had 33 wins to Peyton's 26 wins ....12,930 yards to  Peyton's 12,287 .... 86 TDs to Peyton's 85... and 43 INTs to Peyton's 58 INTs.  Luck was sacked 100 times in his first 3 years, compared to Peyton only being sacked 56 times.

 

Luck and Peyton both were number 1 draft picks, meaning they each inherited the worst team from the NFL in the year before.  Some numbers may be skewed due to a different era (which one may argue favors Luck in a more 'passer-friendly league') or a different coaching staff (which one may argue favors Peyton's numbers with a less defensive-minded/more-offensive minded head coach in his first 3 years).  Regardless, Luck had 7 more wins, 700 more yards, 1 more TD, and 15 less INT's than Peyton in his first three years.  In year 1, Luck had 0.4 more yards/attempt, in year 2, Peyton had 1.06 more yards/attempt, and in year 3, they had the exact same yards/attempt.  Peyton had the best RB in the league in his 2nd and 3rd years, Luck has never had close to that type of running game.

 

In Peyton's first 7 season, he was sacked 20 times or less 4x and was never sacked for 30 or more times.  In Luck's first 5 seasons, he was sacked over 40 times 2x, over 30 times 1x, and 27 times another time.  In his 4th year, he was on pace to be sacked >34 times before he was injured.

 

Some of Luck's hits and sacks are on Luck for holding the ball longer than Peyton and being a more aggressive runner.  However, as far as numbers are concerned Luck had significantly more wins than Peyton in his first 3 years, and was slightly better in yards and TDs.  He was also significantly better in reducing interceptions.  Peyton had a slight edge on completion percentage.  Their yards per attempt were tied in year 3 and split in the other years.

 

The main thing that sticks out looking at the stats outside the above numbers is the amount of sacks they each took.  Luck in his first 5 years had a sack % numbers of 6.1, 5.3, 4.2, 4.9, 7.0.  Peyton's numbers looked like 3.7, 2.6, 3.4, 5.0, 3.7.  In fact, in Peyton's 17 years in the league, he only had a sack % of 5 or greater 1 time and he had one other season where his sack % was 4.6.  

 

Again, some of Luck's hits could have been on Luck.  However, there has to be something to be said for what the Colts did with Peyton vs. what they did with Luck.  Peyton, they knew was going to be their franchise player, they made darned sure he was protected at all times.  Luck, they knew was going to be their franchise player, and they let him get the living heck beat out of him every year until last year when Ballard finally made significant steps to improving our O-Line.

 

It's hard to say that Luck would already have a SB with Ballard, since we're in the same conference as the Pats.... but I think it's hard to argue that Luck wouldn't have been better protected and less injured if Ballard was the GM from day 1.

 

 

Nothing wrong with putting facts out as far as I can see.

 

 

[Deadpool]

22 minutes ago, CurBeatElite said:

 

Luck went 11-5 with 4347 yards, 23 TDs, 18 INTs as a rookie (sacked 41 times, 54.1% on 627 attempts, 6.93 yards/attempt).

Peyton went 3-13 with 3739 yards 26 TDs, 28 INTs as a rookie (sacked 22 times, 56.7% on 575 attempts, 6.5 yards/attempt).

Luck went 11-5 with 3822 yards, 23 TDs, 9 INTs in year two (sacked 32 times, 60.2% on 570 attempts, 6.7 yards/attempt).

Peyton went 13-3 for 4135 yards 26 TDs, 15 INTs in year two (sacked 14 times, 62.1% on 533 attempts, 7.76 yards/attempt).

Luck went 11-5 with 4761 yards, 40 TDs, 16 INT in year three (sacked 27 times, 61.7% on 616 attempts, 7.73 yards/attempt).

Peyton went 10-6 4413 yards, 33 TDs, 15 INT in year three (sacked 20 times, 62.1% on 571 attempts, 7.73 yards/attempt).

 

Overall, Luck had 33 wins to Peyton's 26 wins ....12,930 yards to  Peyton's 12,287 .... 86 TDs to Peyton's 85... and 43 INTs to Peyton's 58 INTs.  Luck was sacked 100 times in his first 3 years, compared to Peyton only being sacked 56 times.

 

Luck and Peyton both were number 1 draft picks, meaning they each inherited the worst team from the NFL in the year before.  Some numbers may be skewed due to a different era (which one may argue favors Luck in a more 'passer-friendly league') or a different coaching staff (which one may argue favors Peyton's numbers with a less defensive-minded/more-offensive minded head coach in his first 3 years).  Regardless, Luck had 7 more wins, 700 more yards, 1 more TD, and 15 less INT's than Peyton in his first three years.  In year 1, Luck had 0.4 more yards/attempt, in year 2, Peyton had 1.06 more yards/attempt, and in year 3, they had the exact same yards/attempt.  Peyton had the best RB in the league in his 2nd and 3rd years, Luck has never had close to that type of running game.

 

In Peyton's first 7 season, he was sacked 20 times or less 4x and was never sacked for 30 or more times.  In Luck's first 5 seasons, he was sacked over 40 times 2x, over 30 times 1x, and 27 times another time.  In his 4th year, he was on pace to be sacked >34 times before he was injured.

 

Some of Luck's hits and sacks are on Luck for holding the ball longer than Peyton and being a more aggressive runner.  However, as far as numbers are concerned Luck had significantly more wins than Peyton in his first 3 years, and was slightly better in yards and TDs.  He was also significantly better in reducing interceptions.  Peyton had a slight edge on completion percentage.  Their yards per attempt were tied in year 3 and split in the other years.

 

The main thing that sticks out looking at the stats outside the above numbers is the amount of sacks they each took.  Luck in his first 5 years had a sack % numbers of 6.1, 5.3, 4.2, 4.9, 7.0.  Peyton's numbers looked like 3.7, 2.6, 3.4, 5.0, 3.7.  In fact, in Peyton's 17 years in the league, he only had a sack % of 5 or greater 1 time and he had one other season where his sack % was 4.6.  

 

Again, some of Luck's hits could have been on Luck.  However, there has to be something to be said for what the Colts did with Peyton vs. what they did with Luck.  Peyton, they knew was going to be their franchise player, they made darned sure he was protected at all times.  Luck, they knew was going to be their franchise player, and they let him get the living heck beat out of him every year until last year when Ballard finally made significant steps to improving our O-Line.

 

It's hard to say that Luck would already have a SB with Ballard, since we're in the same conference as the Pats.... but I think it's hard to argue that Luck wouldn't have been better protected and less injured if Ballard was the GM from day 1.

 

 

spot on...…. But it's true, I think if Ballard was the GM the year luck was drafted. the colts would prob have a super bowl in the Luck era. BUT also could be said, would we have TY Hilton or would he have drafted defense in the second round? would he have traded for Vontae Davis? we all know he would not have wasted a first rounder on the AAFL leading rusher in TD's Trent Richardson …..but it's all hypothetical. in the end though, can't go wrong with facts that you provided. well said! 

[Deadpool]

16 minutes ago, Chloe6124 said:

Thanks for that terrific post with all those statistics. Just makes me so mad they didn’t protect him better and surround him with a better team. Just goes to show how special Luck  really is.

can blame Grigson for that. He tore this team apart starting in year 2. He was made to look like a great GM his first year because guys like Luck, Fleener, Allen and Hilton fell right into his lap. after that with poor signings, bad trades etc. Ballard has performed a miracle in two years as the colts GM. 

[CurBeatElite]

12 minutes ago, Chloe6124 said:

Thanks for that terrific post with all those statistics. Just makes me so mad they didn’t protect him better and surround him with a better team. Just goes to show how special Luck  really is.

 

Another interesting stat is if you look at their 4th quarter comebacks.... 

 

Peyton had 1, 7, 3 of them in his first 3 years respectively.  Luck had 7, 4, 1 of them in his first three years.

 

Right out of the gate Luck was almost single-handedly winning games for the Colts.  Peyton struggled a lot more with that as a rookie, though he went on to become the all-time NFL leader in 4Q comebacks.  

 

Hopefully, as we continue to build a team around Andrew, his need to have those comebacks lessens.  However, where I think this bodes well will be in the playoffs.  So far, every time the Colts have been knocked out of the playoffs with Luck, they've been knocked out by a team who is hands-down a better team (we should've been knocked out by KC the year Luck lead one of the greatest playoff comebacks in NFL history).  Peyton seemingly got better at winning big games later in his career, but I think that would be Peyton's biggest knock on his overall game is that there were many years where he didn't show up to play at his best in big-time 'win or go home' games.  I get the sense from watching Andrew his teammates all have faith that they are never actually out of a game.  Only a few times do I recall feeling that 'magic' with Peyton at the helm.

[HOZER]

1 hour ago, CurBeatElite said:

 

Luck went 11-5 with 4347 yards, 23 TDs, 18 INTs as a rookie (sacked 41 times, 54.1% on 627 attempts, 6.93 yards/attempt).

Peyton went 3-13 with 3739 yards 26 TDs, 28 INTs as a rookie (sacked 22 times, 56.7% on 575 attempts, 6.5 yards/attempt).

Luck went 11-5 with 3822 yards, 23 TDs, 9 INTs in year two (sacked 32 times, 60.2% on 570 attempts, 6.7 yards/attempt).

Peyton went 13-3 for 4135 yards 26 TDs, 15 INTs in year two (sacked 14 times, 62.1% on 533 attempts, 7.76 yards/attempt).

Luck went 11-5 with 4761 yards, 40 TDs, 16 INT in year three (sacked 27 times, 61.7% on 616 attempts, 7.73 yards/attempt).

Peyton went 10-6 4413 yards, 33 TDs, 15 INT in year three (sacked 20 times, 62.1% on 571 attempts, 7.73 yards/attempt).

 

Overall, Luck had 33 wins to Peyton's 26 wins ....12,930 yards to  Peyton's 12,287 .... 86 TDs to Peyton's 85... and 43 INTs to Peyton's 58 INTs.  Luck was sacked 100 times in his first 3 years, compared to Peyton only being sacked 56 times.

 

Luck and Peyton both were number 1 draft picks, meaning they each inherited the worst team from the NFL in the year before.  Some numbers may be skewed due to a different era (which one may argue favors Luck in a more 'passer-friendly league') or a different coaching staff (which one may argue favors Peyton's numbers with a less defensive-minded/more-offensive minded head coach in his first 3 years).  Regardless, Luck had 7 more wins, 700 more yards, 1 more TD, and 15 less INT's than Peyton in his first three years.  In year 1, Luck had 0.4 more yards/attempt, in year 2, Peyton had 1.06 more yards/attempt, and in year 3, they had the exact same yards/attempt.  Peyton had the best RB in the league in his 2nd and 3rd years, Luck has never had close to that type of running game.

 

In Peyton's first 7 season, he was sacked 20 times or less 4x and was never sacked for 30 or more times.  In Luck's first 5 seasons, he was sacked over 40 times 2x, over 30 times 1x, and 27 times another time.  In his 4th year, he was on pace to be sacked >34 times before he was injured.

 

Some of Luck's hits and sacks are on Luck for holding the ball longer than Peyton and being a more aggressive runner.  However, as far as numbers are concerned Luck had significantly more wins than Peyton in his first 3 years, and was slightly better in yards and TDs.  He was also significantly better in reducing interceptions.  Peyton had a slight edge on completion percentage.  Their yards per attempt were tied in year 3 and split in the other years.

 

The main thing that sticks out looking at the stats outside the above numbers is the amount of sacks they each took.  Luck in his first 5 years had a sack % numbers of 6.1, 5.3, 4.2, 4.9, 7.0.  Peyton's numbers looked like 3.7, 2.6, 3.4, 5.0, 3.7.  In fact, in Peyton's 17 years in the league, he only had a sack % of 5 or greater 1 time and he had one other season where his sack % was 4.6.  

 

Again, some of Luck's hits could have been on Luck.  However, there has to be something to be said for what the Colts did with Peyton vs. what they did with Luck.  Peyton, they knew was going to be their franchise player, they made darned sure he was protected at all times.  Luck, they knew was going to be their franchise player, and they let him get the living heck beat out of him every year until last year when Ballard finally made significant steps to improving our O-Line.

 

It's hard to say that Luck would already have a SB with Ballard, since we're in the same conference as the Pats.... but I think it's hard to argue that Luck wouldn't have been better protected and less injured if Ballard was the GM from day 1.

 

 

[CurBeatElite]

6 minutes ago, Deadpool said:

spot on...…. But it's true, I think if Ballard was the GM the year luck was drafted. the colts would prob have a super bowl in the Luck era. BUT also could be said, would we have TY Hilton or would he have drafted defense in the second round? would he have traded for Vontae Davis? we all know he would not have wasted a first rounder on the AAFL leading rusher in TD's Trent Richardson …..but it's all hypothetical. in the end though, can't go wrong with facts that you provided. well said! 

 

Ballard and Grigson both basically say the same thing: "The game is won in the trenches, we need a solid OL and a solid front 7 on D."  

 

Grigson made some attempts with the OL, which mostly failed (Thornton, Holmes, Justin Anderson, Satele, etc..).  Mewhort would have been good if not for injury.  But after Luck was sacked 41 and 32 times in his first 2 seasons, the only OL additions Ballard attempted for were Mewhort and Ulrich John (7th round major project) and Chad Anderson a G from the Los Angeles Kiss.  It wasn't until Luck missed time due to injuries in 2 consecutive seasons that Grigs did anything to really address the line by selecting Kelly, Haeg, and Clark in the draft.

 

Ballard had Luck as the least sacked QB in the NFL during Luck's first season back from injury.  Pretty remarkable difference.

 

Same with the defensive front 7... Grigs had always said we'd get that fixed.  Outside of inheriting Mathis the only guys I can really remember him bringing in that were worth anything to this team were Corey Redding and D'Qwell Jackson who were both older 'gap stop' guys.  He also did well with Henry Anderson who unfortunately had injury issues with the Colts.  Erik Walden also got progressively better as time went on, though for what he was paid he did not perform all that well early in his career.

 

He failed with Werner, Adongo, RJF, Arthur Jones (partially to injury, partially to drugs), Antonio Morrison, and multiple others during his time here.

 

It is kind of insane to think about, but from the 53 Ballard inherited from Grigs just 2 seasons ago we have 11 left (Vinatieri and Costanzo who were from the Polian era --- and Luck, TY, Geathers, Doyle, Haeg, Kelly, L. Clark, Ridgeway, and Farley from the Grigs era).

 

I have my doubts about Ridgeway, Clark and Farley being on next year's roster.  In just 2 years, Ballard has almost totally cleaned house, has made Luck the least sacked QB in the game, has given Luck the best running game he has had as a pro, and has added a first team all-pro and multiple other young, promising players to our DL.

 

You're right, it is all hypothetical  -- but I don't think there's an argument against us being in better hands with Ballard than we were with Grigs.

 

 

[jvan1973]

Max is paid to do what any of us could.   Have an opinion and be well spoken.     Andrew is very good.  If he never wins a super bowl,   he was still very good. 

[LockeDown]

As long as a person is articulate and reasonable and not a hater, I can respect his opinion....but it just seems so obvious that most sports pundits are emotional, biased, have an agenda and just want to be famous.  I’ll take a Greg Cosell objective tape evaluation  any day over these guys. 

[LJpalmbeacher2]

Obviously, someone needs to tell Colin Cowherd to go talk to Max.

[NannyMcafee]

Lol the o ly thing worse than being hated by the media is being loved by the media. 

[coltsfeva]

   Since they mentioned Elway, he waited 14years to host a Lombardi (once he got a running game with Terrell Davis).

    Then he won 2.

    We all know champions are won by teams (and I include coaching in that), yet we still give too much credit to the qb (Brady) or assess too much blame (Luck), when they fail.

     Brady won 6 rings, that’s true but his defenses never ranked worse than 8th in points allowed. Luck never had that. Brady has Belichick, which is an obvious advantage. 

      If Max is putting the KC loss solely on Andrew, he’s over simplifying the reason for that loss. The TEAM didn’t play well.

     If this year, if the defense improves, the running game is effective, his receivers get open and he has a horrible playoff loss, (missing wide-open receivers, poor decisions, etc), then it will rest on him. I don’t see that happening and I wouldn’t want any other qb over Luck.

 

[2006Coltsbestever]

So far if I had to rank Andrew Luck's career on a scale of good, very good, or great, I would say it has been very good. He has had 4 seasons of 10 or more wins and has 4 playoff wins in his career already. He also had a season where he threw for 40 TD's (2014), he also had 39 TD's last season. In all of his playoff losses he was a huge underdog, so when one is a huge underdog and you lose, it is not a choke. In order to be considered great, he does need to win at least 1 SB though. It will be disappointing if he doesn't. Everytime someone brings up Dan Marino, they say he is great BUT they say he never won the big one.

[NewEra]

Moronic at best. The dude literally missed a year. Thought he would never play again. And we're talking about his throwing shoulder. I think he did amazing considering. This year I think he's going to ball out 

[Horse Shoe Heaven]

Honestly not even wroth talking about this non sense!

On 3/23/2019 at 4:08 PM, Boiler_Colt said:

Steven A. Smith the voice of reason? I must be delusional.

Exactly !!

[lollygagger8]

Before I even clicked on this thread, I saw the title and said I bet it's Stephen Smith. 

 

Dude is a joke

[jameszeigler834]

On 3/23/2019 at 7:08 PM, Boiler_Colt said:

Steven A. Smith the voice of reason? I must be delusional.

I agree with Stephen for probably the first time ever while he was great against KC the whole team laid an egg.

[HorsePower_]

I haven't turned on ESPN in years, and this is why. Shock jocks for ratings,  nothing more. NFLN is my go to for football news.

 

Embarassing.

[NewEra]

1 hour ago, lollygagger8 said:

Before I even clicked on this thread, I saw the title and said I bet it's Stephen Smith. 

 

Dude is a joke

He has a punch face. Add in his mouth and makes me want to punch it even more.

[Restinpeacesweetchloe]

More ridiculousness from Max.

 

MA

[John Waylon]

Don’t dignify absurdities with attention.  

[SOMDColtsfan]

On 3/23/2019 at 8:32 PM, CurBeatElite said:

 

Another interesting stat is if you look at their 4th quarter comebacks.... 

 

Peyton had 1, 7, 3 of them in his first 3 years respectively.  Luck had 7, 4, 1 of them in his first three years.

 

Right out of the gate Luck was almost single-handedly winning games for the Colts.  Peyton struggled a lot more with that as a rookie, though he went on to become the all-time NFL leader in 4Q comebacks.  

 

Hopefully, as we continue to build a team around Andrew, his need to have those comebacks lessens.  However, where I think this bodes well will be in the playoffs.  So far, every time the Colts have been knocked out of the playoffs with Luck, they've been knocked out by a team who is hands-down a better team (we should've been knocked out by KC the year Luck lead one of the greatest playoff comebacks in NFL history).  Peyton seemingly got better at winning big games later in his career, but I think that would be Peyton's biggest knock on his overall game is that there were many years where he didn't show up to play at his best in big-time 'win or go home' games.  I get the sense from watching Andrew his teammates all have faith that they are never actually out of a game.  Only a few times do I recall feeling that 'magic' with Peyton at the helm.

Totally agree with everything you posted til the last sentence..I never felt there wasn't "magic" or no  chance to come back with Peyton. Thats stretching it 

[CamMo]

This really puts the GRRRRRR in Grigson. 

 

 

But seriously, I wish we didn’t have to have these talks. Support Luck, keep him upright, and watch magic happen. He will keep getting better as long as he’s healthy. And I think we now have the right guy at GM to support him.

[a06cc]

Max wants Andrew to win the Super Bowl. He didn’t mine anything ill by what he stated. However it takes a team. So hopefully Ballard can do that for us. 

[dodsworth]

Chris Ballard 2018: "it's not about one player"

[Restinpeacesweetchloe]

I find it all entertaining even if it is ridiculous.

[CurBeatElite]

3 hours ago, SOMDColtsfan said:

Totally agree with everything you posted til the last sentence..I never felt there wasn't "magic" or no  chance to come back with Peyton. Thats stretching it 

 

There were times where Peyton looked dejected on the sidelines in losing efforts.  Luck, no matter the case, always seems positive on the sidelines.

 

Peyton lead some of the best comebacks in NFL history (the one that comes to my mind is a MNF game against Tampa Bay in Indy).  There were other times where you could watch Peyton's body language and demeanor on the sideline and he just didn't seem to think he had it (especially early in his career).

 

Luck, since Day 1, has basically never looked dejected on the sidelines and has never been seen calling out his teammates on the sidelines when things were going bad. 

[Four2itus]

On 3/23/2019 at 5:00 PM, CurBeatElite said:

 

Luck went 11-5 with 4347 yards, 23 TDs, 18 INTs as a rookie (sacked 41 times, 54.1% on 627 attempts, 6.93 yards/attempt).

Peyton went 3-13 with 3739 yards 26 TDs, 28 INTs as a rookie (sacked 22 times, 56.7% on 575 attempts, 6.5 yards/attempt).

Luck went 11-5 with 3822 yards, 23 TDs, 9 INTs in year two (sacked 32 times, 60.2% on 570 attempts, 6.7 yards/attempt).

Peyton went 13-3 for 4135 yards 26 TDs, 15 INTs in year two (sacked 14 times, 62.1% on 533 attempts, 7.76 yards/attempt).

Luck went 11-5 with 4761 yards, 40 TDs, 16 INT in year three (sacked 27 times, 61.7% on 616 attempts, 7.73 yards/attempt).

Peyton went 10-6 4413 yards, 33 TDs, 15 INT in year three (sacked 20 times, 62.1% on 571 attempts, 7.73 yards/attempt).

 

Overall, Luck had 33 wins to Peyton's 26 wins ....12,930 yards to  Peyton's 12,287 .... 86 TDs to Peyton's 85... and 43 INTs to Peyton's 58 INTs.  Luck was sacked 100 times in his first 3 years, compared to Peyton only being sacked 56 times.

 

Luck and Peyton both were number 1 draft picks, meaning they each inherited the worst team from the NFL in the year before.  Some numbers may be skewed due to a different era (which one may argue favors Luck in a more 'passer-friendly league') or a different coaching staff (which one may argue favors Peyton's numbers with a less defensive-minded/more-offensive minded head coach in his first 3 years).  Regardless, Luck had 7 more wins, 700 more yards, 1 more TD, and 15 less INT's than Peyton in his first three years.  In year 1, Luck had 0.4 more yards/attempt, in year 2, Peyton had 1.06 more yards/attempt, and in year 3, they had the exact same yards/attempt.  Peyton had the best RB in the league in his 2nd and 3rd years, Luck has never had close to that type of running game.

 

In Peyton's first 7 season, he was sacked 20 times or less 4x and was never sacked for 30 or more times.  In Luck's first 5 seasons, he was sacked over 40 times 2x, over 30 times 1x, and 27 times another time.  In his 4th year, he was on pace to be sacked >34 times before he was injured.

 

Some of Luck's hits and sacks are on Luck for holding the ball longer than Peyton and being a more aggressive runner.  However, as far as numbers are concerned Luck had significantly more wins than Peyton in his first 3 years, and was slightly better in yards and TDs.  He was also significantly better in reducing interceptions.  Peyton had a slight edge on completion percentage.  Their yards per attempt were tied in year 3 and split in the other years.

 

The main thing that sticks out looking at the stats outside the above numbers is the amount of sacks they each took.  Luck in his first 5 years had a sack % numbers of 6.1, 5.3, 4.2, 4.9, 7.0.  Peyton's numbers looked like 3.7, 2.6, 3.4, 5.0, 3.7.  In fact, in Peyton's 17 years in the league, he only had a sack % of 5 or greater 1 time and he had one other season where his sack % was 4.6.  

 

Again, some of Luck's hits could have been on Luck.  However, there has to be something to be said for what the Colts did with Peyton vs. what they did with Luck.  Peyton, they knew was going to be their franchise player, they made darned sure he was protected at all times.  Luck, they knew was going to be their franchise player, and they let him get the living heck beat out of him every year until last year when Ballard finally made significant steps to improving our O-Line.

 

It's hard to say that Luck would already have a SB with Ballard, since we're in the same conference as the Pats.... but I think it's hard to argue that Luck wouldn't have been better protected and less injured if Ballard was the GM from day 1.

 

 

This reply is about this general idea, not to dis the quoted. 

 

There is a missing stat...and IMO, one that could be very telling. I agree with the aim of these stats, but not the implication (even if unintended) that Luck being sacked has mainly been the result of a bad oline. Of course he got his butt beat up. We all saw it, but what I would like to know is, how do those same years compare in terms of QB release time. All it takes is a stroll down memory lane on youtube to see how freaking fast Manning got rid of the ball. Was that because of his endless hours working the route tree with Marvin? Was it because of our RB's? 

 

I don't know the complete answer, but I would be willing to bet that Manning got rid of the ball...on average...at near a second faster in his first three years. And I think that Andrew has been a huge part of his sack numbers. How many times did Andrew throw the ball away before he was seriously injured? Maybe 5 total? Perhaps he felt he had to hold on to the ball, to get the wins....and maybe that is true, but painting Andrew as the QB who did everything right while the franchise let him down, doesn't fully wash with me. For clarification, I love Luck. I feel like the Colts are quite blessed to have him. I also think Manning was special, and his most dangerous quality, was how fast he got the ball out to the right skill player, in the correctly called play. I think Lucks greatest quality IS his ability to make it happen, in the face of serious defensive challenges...regardless of the team around him.

[CurBeatElite]

21 hours ago, Four2itus said:

This reply is about this general idea, not to dis the quoted. 

 

There is a missing stat...and IMO, one that could be very telling. I agree with the aim of these stats, but not the implication (even if unintended) that Luck being sacked has mainly been the result of a bad oline. Of course he got his butt beat up. We all saw it, but what I would like to know is, how do those same years compare in terms of QB release time. All it takes is a stroll down memory lane on youtube to see how freaking fast Manning got rid of the ball. Was that because of his endless hours working the route tree with Marvin? Was it because of our RB's? 

 

I don't know the complete answer, but I would be willing to bet that Manning got rid of the ball...on average...at near a second faster in his first three years. And I think that Andrew has been a huge part of his sack numbers. How many times did Andrew throw the ball away before he was seriously injured? Maybe 5 total? Perhaps he felt he had to hold on to the ball, to get the wins....and maybe that is true, but painting Andrew as the QB who did everything right while the franchise let him down, doesn't fully wash with me. For clarification, I love Luck. I feel like the Colts are quite blessed to have him. I also think Manning was special, and his most dangerous quality, was how fast he got the ball out to the right skill player, in the correctly called play. I think Lucks greatest quality IS his ability to make it happen, in the face of serious defensive challenges...regardless of the team around him.

 

Yes, I acknowledged that Luck himself likely had a lot to do with getting sacked and getting beat up.  A lot of big hits he took were because he was too stubborn to slide on scrambles... but, if you watch a lot of Luck tape prior to last year, he was basically running for his life the second he got the ball.

 

Arians liked to let Luck air the ball out, therefore, forcing him to hold the ball a little longer than Peyton usually did.  Peyton basically only really aired it out on plays which were set up by the play action.  A luxury Peyton could afford early in his career because he had HOF Marshall Faulk as an RB as a rookie and Edge who was the best RB in the NFL in his next 3 years.  

 

Luck has never had the ability to use the play action that effectively in his career, because we've never had a run game that scared opponents.  Reich talks about that in his interview at the owners' meetings (see Colts.com front page -- he wants to be a top 7 run team, which allows for play action and other things that we couldn't do last year).

 

Reich also brought in a more timing oriented offense.  Allowing Luck to get the ball out of his hands faster than previous schemes he has played in.  Peyton pretty much always played in a timing oriented offense where he could get the ball out quick (on plays where he didn't use play action to bide himself a couple of extra seconds).  I think this will pay dividends for Luck.

 

Regardless, the Colts FO put a major emphasis on protecting Peyton from Day 1.  Luck didn't have the FO put that as a priority really until Grigs' last year (Ryan Kelly) and moreso when Ballard came on and added Big Q, Braden Smith, and others.  Protecting Peyton and giving him weapons was a major point of emphasis for the Colts since the day he was drafted.  It took about 5 years before the FO really seemed to put that on the top of the list for Luck.

[ManningGM]

On 3/24/2019 at 7:58 AM, 2006Coltsbestever said:

So far if I had to rank Andrew Luck's career on a scale of good, very good, or great, I would say it has been very good. He has had 4 seasons of 10 or more wins and has 4 playoff wins in his career already. He also had a season where he threw for 40 TD's (2014), he also had 39 TD's last season. In all of his playoff losses he was a huge underdog, so when one is a huge underdog and you lose, it is not a choke. In order to be considered great, he does need to win at least 1 SB though. It will be disappointing if he doesn't. Everytime someone brings up Dan Marino, they say he is great BUT they say he never won the big one.

I honestly think Luck is going to end up with more Super Bowl wins than Peyton. That's how much faith I have in this front office/coaching regime.

 

I just wish we had them in 2012. 

[Trueman]

This take is dumb , but sadly I've seen Colts fans say the same thing. 

Peyton played for a solid organization. 

Andrew carried the dumb-dumb's and a trash roster and almost lost his career because of it. 

Luck is absolutely great.