How do you view Andrew without a championship?

[CR91]

A friend of mine asked me this question and I thought it was interesting. My view of Andrew I don't think changes. I still think hes one of the greatest QBs to wear the horseshoe. All time is a different story though. As unfair as it may be, history judges you on championships. If Marino even won one championship, he would be the greatest just from arm talent alone. Andrew imo has done more with a lot less if we are comparing him to Peyton and its not even close. Peyton played with basically 5 HOFers Marv, Reggie, Edge, Freeney, Mathis compared to one potentially with Hilton. Andrew took what was perhaps talent-wise the worst team to ever reach the AFC Championship game in NFL history. Our starting RB was Dan Herron Of course now the colts are very talented and its all on Andrew now to perform to the level to get us to the super bowl. 

[Korey]

Are you talking about viewing him as a Colt or overall QB?

 

If you are talking about being an Indianapolis Colt then yes he is up there number 2 behind Peyton. However if you are asking about overall this will be one that will take some more time to figure out. His legacy will be determined on how he does in the playoffs and not by the team that is surrounding him.  I get a lot of shade thrown at me about Luck not being a QB that can handle the pressure of the big game. I hope that this isn't the case after he decides to hang it up.

 

Go Colts!!

[jskinnz]

1 hour ago, CR91 said:

A friend of mine asked me this question and I thought it was interesting. My view of Andrew I don't think changes. I still think hes one of the greatest QBs to wear the horseshoe. All time is a different story though. As unfair as it may be, history judges you on championships. If Marino even won one championship, he would be the greatest just from arm talent alone. Andrew imo has done more with a lot less if we are comparing him to Peyton and its not even close. Peyton played with basically 5 HOFers Marv, Reggie, Edge, Freeney, Mathis compared to one potentially with Hilton. Andrew took what was perhaps talent-wise the worst team to ever reach the AFC Championship game in NFL history. Our starting RB was Dan Herron Of course now the colts are very talented and its all on Andrew now to perform to the level to get us to the super bowl. 

 

Per usual, I've got some disagreements with some of your conclusions.

 

Dan Marino - what does the bolded mean?  If his "arm talent" is the greatest, what difference does the fact he did not win the Super Bowl make? 

 

More on greatest QB - Marino is in the conversation but even if he had won one, it is still a hard argument to make with Brady's accomplishments.  Needing a 2nd hand for all your rings is pretty damn good.

 

Least talented team ever to make the AFCCG?  Seriously, how do you know that?  It is just something that people say to make their argument with no effort / ability to prove that it's true.  

 

To the point of the thread - Luck is probably # 3 on the Colts all-time QB list behind Manning and Unitas.  I guess there could be some Bert Jones support but I think it small and not something that will last.  

[CR91]

4 minutes ago, jskinnz said:

 

Per usual, I've got some disagreements with some of your conclusions.

 

Dan Marino - what does the bolded mean?  If his "arm talent" is the greatest, what difference does the fact he did not win the Super Bowl make? 

 

More on greatest QB - Marino is in the conversation but even if he had won one, it is still a hard argument to make with Brady's accomplishments.  Needing a 2nd hand for all your rings is pretty damn good.

 

Least talented team ever to make the AFCCG?  Seriously, how do you know that?  It is just something that people say to make their argument with no effort / ability to prove that it's true.  

 

To the point of the thread - Luck is probably # 3 on the Colts all-time QB list behind Manning and Unitas.  I guess there could be some Bert Jones support but I think it small and not something that will last.  

 

Would not be surprised @jskinnz. Imo if Marino won as many championship as Brady, would you really take Brady over Marino from an arm talent prospective? That is my argument that QBs that win championships are put at a higher pedestal rather that is fair or not which is why when you argue Peyton vs Brady, the first thing that comes out is 6 beats 2. 

 

That roster had three great players imo and the rest average at best. That being Luck, Hilton who was still growing as a player, and Vontae Davis. Sure reggie was still on the team, but that was coming back from a tore ACL. Compare the talent the colts currently have on the roster and its not even close. Jon Newsome led us in sacks I believe that year. 

[jskinnz]

1 hour ago, CR91 said:

 

Would not be surprised @jskinnz. Imo if Marino won as many championship as Brady, would you really take Brady over Marino from an arm talent prospective? That is my argument that QBs that win championships are put at a higher pedestal rather that is fair or not which is why when you argue Peyton vs Brady, the first thing that comes out is 6 beats 2. 

 

That roster had three great players imo and the rest average at best. That being Luck, Hilton who was still growing as a player, and Vontae Davis. Sure reggie was still on the team, but that was coming back from a tore ACL. Compare the talent the colts currently have on the roster and its not even close. Jon Newsome led us in sacks I believe that year. 

 

1. If my aunt had a set, she'd be my uncle.  Marino didn't win 6 so who cares?  

2. The larger point is I am lost on your arm talent argument.  Who cares who had the best arm?  That is only one small component of what makes an elite level QB.  Greg Maddux is a HoF pitcher and he had not close to the velocity of Kyle Farnsworth, who can only get into the HoF if he bought a ticket.  In an NFL comparison, Joe Montana did not have near the arm that Marino or Elway did but he is clearly among the best QB's ever to play the game.

3. I don't care about the Colts 2014 roster.  I know who was on the team and I don't think they would have been a good match up for the 1970 Steelers. I am simply saying that you don't really know if it was the worst roster to make the AFCCG in history.  It's over an over the top argument simply made to prove a point you can't make otherwise.

[Korey]

So I'm a little confused now. Are you basing your views on the roster that the QB is playing with instead of the QB himself? I don't see how you can say the AFC championship game on only had "3 great players." 

 

If you ask me has Luck done more with less then some other QB's then that answer is 100% yes. But your question is How do you view Andrew without a championship?    

 

Not how Andrew Luck will be viewed because he doesn't have great teams around him.

[CR91]

2 minutes ago, jskinnz said:

 

1. If my aunt had a set, she'd be my uncle.  Marino didn't win 6 so who cares?  

2. The larger point is I am lost on your arm talent argument.  Who cares who had the best arm?  That is only one small component of what makes an elite level QB.  Gred Maddux is a HoF pitcher and he had not close to the velocity of Kyle Farnsworth, who can only get into the HoF if he bought a ticket.  In an NFL comparison, Joe Montana did not have near the arm that Marino or Elway did but he is clearly among the best QB's ever to play the game.

3. I don't care about the Colts 2014 roster.  I know who was on the team and I don't think they would have been a good match up for the 1970 Steelers. I am simply saying that you don't really know if it was the worst roster to make the AFCCG in history.  It's over an over the top argument simply made to prove a point you can't make otherwise.

 

1. Again that is how people view QBs rather that is fair or not

 

2. Im referring more from a talent perspective

 

3. Its more to justify Luck as a talent.

[CR91]

3 minutes ago, Korey said:

So I'm a little confused now. Are you basing your views on the roster that the QB is playing with instead of the QB himself? I don't see how you can say the AFC championship game on only had "3 great players." 

 

If you ask me has Luck done more with less then some other QB's then that answer is 100% yes. But your question is How do you view Andrew without a championship?    

 

Not how Andrew Luck will be viewed because he doesn't have great teams around him.

 

Im justifying Andrew's talent  

[CoachLite]

I view Andrew Luck as an ancient mariner wearing the albatross of Chuck Pagano and Ryan Grigson, through no fault of his own. He tried to be the super hero he could never be. Today, things may be different, but we can never change our past history.

[Lucky Colts Fan]

5 hours ago, jskinnz said:

More on greatest QB - Marino is in the conversation but even if he had won one, it is still a hard argument to make with Brady's accomplishments.  Needing a 2nd hand for all your rings is pretty damn good.

 

I think anytime someone uses the phrase "greatest QB", there needs to be a caveat.  Because there's no single QB that ever played that was the best at everything.

 

Most talented?  Marino, Elway, Vick, Baugh, etc.

Most accomplished?  Brady, Montana, Bradshaw, Graham, etc.

Best at running an offense?  Manning, Unitas, Montana, etc.

Had the best coaches?  Brady, Montana/Young, Starr, etc.

 

The debate goes round and round because a QB can't just hang their hat on one thing (like SBs, which is a TEAM accomplishment) and say that's why they're the best.

 

6 hours ago, CR91 said:

I still think hes one of the greatest QBs to wear the horseshoe. All time is a different story though.

 

Andrew is arguably the most talented QB the Colts have ever had.  But he's not as accomplished as Manning or Unitas (yet).  He has time to prove he can run an offense like they did.  And maybe Reich will be the kind of coach for Luck that other great QBs have benefited from in the past (and currently).

 

Bottom line:  Andrew Luck is only halfway done, and the second half of his career will decide his place in the pantheon of NFL QBs.

[2006Coltsbestever]

Not all but most people view a QB differently if they have won a SB. Before John Elway won a SB, hardly nobody in the media had him ranked over Dan Marino. Once he won 2 at the end of his career, the media had him up there with Joe Montana. I think without winning a SB that is a huge thing to be missing from a QB's resume. Until Peyton won in 2006, all you heard was he can't win the big one, blah, blah. Once he won most looked at him differently. I think if Andrew just wins 1 the rest of his career will be gravy. 

 

As far as ranking all-time Colts QB's, I have:

Peyton 1

Unitas 2

Luck 3

[WarGhost21]

For me as of now, Unitas and Manning are 1a and 1b. Luck isn’t too far off in 3rd, and he still has a long time left to get there, but sure, a ring would help, though I don’t know if it’s totally necessary. Like was mentioned, Marino is considered one of the greats and he never won a ring. If Luck can continue to put up big numbers and lead the team on deep playoff runs if not championships, he certainly could be the best QB to ever don the Shoe, but he needs to get it all done first, so it’s not really worth speculating IMO

[Four2itus]

3 hours ago, Lucky Colts Fan said:

Most talented?  Marino, Elway, Vick, Baugh, etc.

I would put Warren Moon in that category, before I put Vick. 

[rock8591]

31 minutes ago, Four2itus said:

I would put Warren Moon in that category, before I put Vick. 

 

More like a bucket of spit before Vick.

[NewColtsFan]

 

Andrew Luck is roughly half-way through his career.     This will be his 8th year.

 

Years '15, '16 and '17 were not his fault.    When he was playing he was hurt, and surrounded by bad talent.    And 17 he didn't play at all.

 

So, we really only have 4 reasonably healthy years to judge him.   He's taken each team to the playoffs.    And in years '12, '13 and '14,  those weren't very talented teams.

 

We're going to get a much better look at Andrew.    He's surrounded by better talent.   He's in a more quarterback friendly system.    I think his next 7-8 years will be fun for all of us.   

 

[2006Coltsbestever]

4 minutes ago, NewColtsFan said:

 

Andrew Luck is roughly half-way through his career.     This will be his 8th year.

 

Years '15, '16 and '17 were not his fault.    When he was playing he was hurt, and surrounded by bad talent.    And 17 he didn't play at all.

 

So, we really only have 4 reasonably healthy years to judge him.   He's taken each team to the playoffs.    And in years '12, '13 and '14,  those weren't very talented teams.

 

We're going to get a much better look at Andrew.    He's surrounded by better talent.   He's in a more quarterback friendly system.    I think his next 7-8 years will be fun for all of us.   

 

I agree. We should be good to great for the next 5-7 years if Luck stays healthy. 

[NannyMcafee]

It doesn't matter how many stats Andrew piles up, beyond 6+ MVPs and every record beaten, without SB rings very few outside of Indy will see him as competing with the touted GOAT in status. 

 

Colts fans have talked about Peytons lack of a defense for years, and we dreamed for years of a great defense. So lack of supporting cast is really only seen by those that are fans of the team. We see every weakness every Sunday unlike everyone else. And we are bias in ways whether we like that or not, it comes with being a fan. Every team has weaknesses, and we have rarely seen a team fire on all cylinders for an entire season. Hopefully Ballard has something here. 

[2006Coltsbestever]

As long as you win 1 championship to go along with a great career nobody can question your resume. Just 1. It may not be right but people bash Dan Marino all the time for not winning 1. Before Peyton won 1, almost everyone said - yeah he is great but no championships. Before Michael Jordan won his 1st, everyone had Magic Johnson as the far superior player and I know this because I followed the NBA back then everyday. People thought Bird was better too. It took a 3-peat by Jordan before most people in the media crowned Jordan better than Magic.

 

In Football winning 2 SB's or more as a starter puts a QB in an elite group, so it was cool seeing Peyton at least get that regarding winning. Only 11 QB's have done that in 53 years. I was happy for him winning that 2nd one and then retiring on top.

[Lucky Colts Fan]

9 hours ago, rock8591 said:

More like a bucket of spit before Vick.

 

Look, I hate the stuff Vick was doing off the field.  He's lucky I didn't get to decide his punishment...

 

(20 dog years, which is like 140 people years, in the pound with no visitors and no toys, solitary confinement, no playing with the other dogs, no food bowl, has to eat scraps off the floor, no blanket for a bed, etc.)

 

You can not like him as a person, but you can't deny his talent on the field.

 

He's like the fastest person to ever play QB, and he had a rocket for an arm.  He was harder to catch and tackle than a greased pig on wheels.

[King Colt]

Too broad a statement to declare one player over another if one is to go back in to the fifties. It is a different game so no need to compare and that applies to all sports even tennis because of the knowledge of physical training in modern times versus 70 years ago.

[Jason_]

20 hours ago, CR91 said:

 

1. Again that is how SOME people view QBs rather that is fair or not

 

2. Im referring more from a talent perspective

 

3. Its more to justify Luck as a talent.

 

fixed it for ya ;)

 

if someone is arguing that Luck (or any QB) having a ring affects his talent level then stop wasting your time arguing with that person because they clearly don't truly understand the game of football.

[CR91]

1 minute ago, J@son said:

 

fixed it for ya ;)

 

if someone is arguing that Luck (or any QB) having a ring affects his talent level then stop wasting your time arguing with that person because they clearly don't truly understand the game of football.

 

Well its not just Luck. Peyton vs Brady is a perfect example 

[Jason_]

3 minutes ago, CR91 said:

 

Well its not just Luck. Peyton vs Brady is a perfect example 

 

that's why (or any QB) is in the post you quoted .  Saying that Brady is better than Manning simply because Brady has more rings is a lazy reason used by people who simply want to like Brady more but don't know any other way to prove it.  Same can be said for virtually any other QB debate.  

[shasta519]

17 hours ago, Lucky Colts Fan said:

 

I think anytime someone uses the phrase "greatest QB", there needs to be a caveat.  Because there's no single QB that ever played that was the best at everything.

 

Most talented?  Marino, Elway, Vick, Baugh, etc.

Most accomplished?  Brady, Montana, Bradshaw, Graham, etc.

Best at running an offense?  Manning, Unitas, Montana, etc.

Had the best coaches?  Brady, Montana/Young, Starr, etc.

 

The debate goes round and round because a QB can't just hang their hat on one thing (like SBs, which is a TEAM accomplishment) and say that's why they're the best.

 

 

Andrew is arguably the most talented QB the Colts have ever had.  But he's not as accomplished as Manning or Unitas (yet).  He has time to prove he can run an offense like they did.  And maybe Reich will be the kind of coach for Luck that other great QBs have benefited from in the past (and currently).

 

Bottom line:  Andrew Luck is only halfway done, and the second half of his career will decide his place in the pantheon of NFL QBs.

 

Rodgers is the most talented IMO...the best to ever play the game. Smart, mobility, arm strength, accuracy, ability to throw on the run...he has it all. He won't go down as the greatest though...unless he goes on a run to win a few before he hangs it up.

[2006Coltsbestever]

2 hours ago, J@son said:

 

that's why (or any QB) is in the post you quoted .  Saying that Brady is better than Manning simply because Brady has more rings is a lazy reason used by people who simply want to like Brady more but don't know any other way to prove it.  Same can be said for virtually any other QB debate.  

Winning more SB's doesn't mean a QB is better than another I agree. If a QB is great though he should at least win 1. It is rare for a QB to be great and not win at least 1. We can point to Dan Marino and a few others but it is common sense a QB is looked at differently once he wins 1. Peyton was looked at differently by most, if you do not think so than you never watch TV, read a newspaper, or follow the media. Once Peyton won it in 2006 I was relieved. Everyone thought Peyton was great before he won the SB but once he won it he was looked at differently. Luck will be too. 

[Restinpeacesweetchloe]

Luck finally has a team and good coaches around  him. It’s time for him to take his game to the next level.

[Myles]

I view Luck as the 3rd best Colt QB of all time.  Behind Manning and Trudeau.

Just kidding, I meant Chris Chandler.  No, Mike Pagel.   Jeff George?

But really, Johnny Unitas is number 2. 

We have a few more years to see what Luck can do.   

 

Really though, the Colts haven't had too many QB's in their history.   We should be able to rank them all.

 

 

SeasonQuarterback(s) (games)Ref(s)

Baltimore Colts (1953–1983)

1953Fred Enke (8) / George Taliaferro (3) / Ed Mioduszewski (1)

1954Gary Kerkorian (10) / Fred Enke (1) / Cotton Davidson (1)

1955George Shaw (12)

1956Johnny Unitas† (7) / George Shaw (5)

1957Johnny Unitas†* (12)

1958Johnny Unitas† *(10) / George Shaw (2)

1959Johnny Unitas†+* (12)

1960Johnny Unitas†* (12)

1961[c]Johnny Unitas†* (14)

1962[15]

1963[15]

1964Johnny Unitas†+* (14)

1965Johnny Unitas† (11) / Gary Cuozzo (2) / Tom Matte (1)

1966Johnny Unitas†* (13) / Gary Cuozzo (1)

1967Johnny Unitas†+* (14)

1968Earl Morrall+* (14)

1969Johnny Unitas† (12) / Earl Morrall (2)

1970Johnny Unitas† (13) / Earl Morrall (1)

1971Earl Morrall (9) / Johnny Unitas† (5)

1972Marty Domres (9) / Johnny Unitas† (5)

1973Marty Domres (9) / Bert Jones (5)

1974Bert Jones (8) / Marty Domres (6)

1975Bert Jones (14)

1976Bert Jones+* (14)

1977Bert Jones (14)

1978[c]Bill Troup (11) / Bert Jones (3) / Mike Kirkland (2)

1979Greg Landry (12) / Bert Jones (4)

1980Bert Jones (15) / Greg Landry (1)

1981Bert Jones (15) / David Humm (1)

1982[d]Mike Pagel (9)

1983Mike Pagel (15) / Mark Herrmann (1)

Indianapolis Colts since 1984

1984Mike Pagel (9) / Art Schlichter (5) / Mark Herrmann (2)

1985Mike Pagel (14) / Matt Kofler (1) / Art Schlichter (1)

1986Jack Trudeau (11) / Gary Hogeboom (5)

1987[d]Jack Trudeau (8) / Gary Hogeboom (6) / Blair Kiel (1)

1988Chris Chandler (13) / Jack Trudeau (2) / Gary Hogeboom (1)

1989Jack Trudeau (12) / Chris Chandler (3) / Tom Ramsey (1)

1990Jeff George (12) / Jack Trudeau (4)

1991Jeff George (16)

1992Jeff George (10) / Jack Trudeau (5) / Mark Herrmann (1)

1993Jeff George (11) / Jack Trudeau (5)

1994Jim Harbaugh (9) / Don Majkowski (6) / Browning Nagle (1)

1995Jim Harbaugh* (12) / Craig Erickson (3) / Paul Justin (1)

1996Jim Harbaugh (14) / Paul Justin (2)

1997Jim Harbaugh (11) / Paul Justin (4) / Kelly Holcomb (1)

1998Peyton Manning (16)

1999Peyton Manning* (16)

2000Peyton Manning* (16)

2001Peyton Manning (16)

2002Peyton Manning* (16)

2003Peyton Manning+* (16)

2004Peyton Manning* (16)

2005Peyton Manning* (16)

2006Peyton Manning* (16)

2007Peyton Manning* (16)

2008Peyton Manning+* (16)

2009Peyton Manning* (16)

2010Peyton Manning* (16)

2011Curtis Painter (8) / Dan Orlovsky (5) / Kerry Collins (3)

2012Andrew Luck* (16)

2013Andrew Luck* (16)

2014Andrew Luck* (16)

2015Matt Hasselbeck (8) / Andrew Luck (7) / Josh Freeman (1)

2016Andrew Luck (15) / Scott Tolzien (1)

2017Jacoby Brissett (15) / Scott Tolzien (1)

2018Andrew Luck* (16)

 

[NorthernBlue]

Basically this is the first year where Luck will be close to fully healthy and has a roster with decent talent with touch of playoff experience. Plus strong leadership up front. So let’s see how he does. Is this enough for the colts to become a 12-13 win juggernaut? Or do we still need to surround Andrew with more talent to truly be a super bowl contender?

[2006Coltsbestever]

20 minutes ago, Myles said:

I view Luck as the 3rd best Colt QB of all time.  Behind Manning and Trudeau.

Just kidding, I meant Chris Chandler.  No, Mike Pagel.   Jeff George?

But really, Johnny Unitas is number 2. 

We have a few more years to see what Luck can do.   

 

Really though, the Colts haven't had too many QB's in their history.   We should be able to rank them all.

 

 

SeasonQuarterback(s) (games)Ref(s)

Baltimore Colts (1953–1983)

1953Fred Enke (8) / George Taliaferro (3) / Ed Mioduszewski (1)

1954Gary Kerkorian (10) / Fred Enke (1) / Cotton Davidson (1)

1955George Shaw (12)

1956Johnny Unitas† (7) / George Shaw (5)

1957Johnny Unitas†* (12)

1958Johnny Unitas† *(10) / George Shaw (2)

1959Johnny Unitas†+* (12)

1960Johnny Unitas†* (12)

1961[c]Johnny Unitas†* (14)

1962[15]

1963[15]

1964Johnny Unitas†+* (14)

1965Johnny Unitas† (11) / Gary Cuozzo (2) / Tom Matte (1)

1966Johnny Unitas†* (13) / Gary Cuozzo (1)

1967Johnny Unitas†+* (14)

1968Earl Morrall+* (14)

1969Johnny Unitas† (12) / Earl Morrall (2)

1970Johnny Unitas† (13) / Earl Morrall (1)

1971Earl Morrall (9) / Johnny Unitas† (5)

1972Marty Domres (9) / Johnny Unitas† (5)

1973Marty Domres (9) / Bert Jones (5)

1974Bert Jones (8) / Marty Domres (6)

1975Bert Jones (14)

1976Bert Jones+* (14)

1977Bert Jones (14)

1978[c]Bill Troup (11) / Bert Jones (3) / Mike Kirkland (2)

1979Greg Landry (12) / Bert Jones (4)

1980Bert Jones (15) / Greg Landry (1)

1981Bert Jones (15) / David Humm (1)

1982[d]Mike Pagel (9)

1983Mike Pagel (15) / Mark Herrmann (1)

Indianapolis Colts since 1984

1984Mike Pagel (9) / Art Schlichter (5) / Mark Herrmann (2)

1985Mike Pagel (14) / Matt Kofler (1) / Art Schlichter (1)

1986Jack Trudeau (11) / Gary Hogeboom (5)

1987[d]Jack Trudeau (8) / Gary Hogeboom (6) / Blair Kiel (1)

1988Chris Chandler (13) / Jack Trudeau (2) / Gary Hogeboom (1)

1989Jack Trudeau (12) / Chris Chandler (3) / Tom Ramsey (1)

1990Jeff George (12) / Jack Trudeau (4)

1991Jeff George (16)

1992Jeff George (10) / Jack Trudeau (5) / Mark Herrmann (1)

1993Jeff George (11) / Jack Trudeau (5)

1994Jim Harbaugh (9) / Don Majkowski (6) / Browning Nagle (1)

1995Jim Harbaugh* (12) / Craig Erickson (3) / Paul Justin (1)

1996Jim Harbaugh (14) / Paul Justin (2)

1997Jim Harbaugh (11) / Paul Justin (4) / Kelly Holcomb (1)

1998Peyton Manning (16)

1999Peyton Manning* (16)

2000Peyton Manning* (16)

2001Peyton Manning (16)

2002Peyton Manning* (16)

2003Peyton Manning+* (16)

2004Peyton Manning* (16)

2005Peyton Manning* (16)

2006Peyton Manning* (16)

2007Peyton Manning* (16)

2008Peyton Manning+* (16)

2009Peyton Manning* (16)

2010Peyton Manning* (16)

2011Curtis Painter (8) / Dan Orlovsky (5) / Kerry Collins (3)

2012Andrew Luck* (16)

2013Andrew Luck* (16)

2014Andrew Luck* (16)

2015Matt Hasselbeck (8) / Andrew Luck (7) / Josh Freeman (1)

2016Andrew Luck (15) / Scott Tolzien (1)

2017Jacoby Brissett (15) / Scott Tolzien (1)

2018Andrew Luck* (16)

 

I remember when the team 1st moved here we had big bad Pagel and Art to boot . Imagine if fans had to put up with that today. I would rather have Painter 

[Jason_]

1 hour ago, 2006Coltsbestever said:

Winning more SB's doesn't mean a QB is better than another I agree. If a QB is great though he should at least win 1. It is rare for a QB to be great and not win at least 1. We can point to Dan Marino and a few others but it is common sense a QB is looked at differently once he wins 1. Peyton was looked at differently by most, if you do not think so than you never watch TV, read a newspaper, or follow the media. Once Peyton won it in 2006 I was relieved. Everyone thought Peyton was great before he won the SB but once he won it he was looked at differently. Luck will be too. 

 

 

Oh I've heard it and read it numerous times, but it's stupid so I don't give it any credence whatsoever.  I don't really care what members of the media, newspaper writers and/or analysts think of my favorite team's QB.  They can rank them however they want, and I refuse to get sucked into a debate with people who use SB rings as a criteria for ranking a QB against the all time greats.  

 

[2006Coltsbestever]

1 minute ago, J@son said:

 

 

Oh I've heard it and read it numerous times, but it's stupid so I don't give it any credence whatsoever.  I don't really care what members of the media, newspaper writers and/or analysts think of my favorite team's QB.  They can rank them however they want, and I refuse to get sucked into a debate with people who use SB rings as a criteria for ranking a QB against the all time greats.  

 

That is fair enough but I hope Luck wins at least 1. I was so happy that Peyton won finally because that was the only thing missing from his resume.

[SC-Coltsfan]

I personally don't think a QB has to win a SB to be considered great. If having to win a SB is the standard to make a QB great does winning a SB automatically make a QB great. The answer is no unless you consider Jeff Hosteler, Doug Williams, Trent Dilfer, Brad Johnson, Joe Flacco great QBs. Those guys don't even belong in the same conversation as Luck and Marino when considering who is the better QB.

[superrep1967]

On 7/17/2019 at 7:39 PM, Lucky Colts Fan said:

 

I think anytime someone uses the phrase "greatest QB", there needs to be a caveat.  Because there's no single QB that ever played that was the best at everything.

 

Most talented?  Marino, Elway, Vick, Baugh, etc.

Most accomplished?  Brady, Montana, Bradshaw, Graham, etc.

Best at running an offense?  Manning, Unitas, Montana, etc.

Had the best coaches?  Brady, Montana/Young, Starr, etc.

 

The debate goes round and round because a QB can't just hang their hat on one thing (like SBs, which is a TEAM accomplishment) and say that's why they're the best.

 

 

Andrew is arguably the most talented QB the Colts have ever had.  But he's not as accomplished as Manning or Unitas (yet).  He has time to prove he can run an offense like they did.  And maybe Reich will be the kind of coach for Luck that other great QBs have benefited from in the past (and currently).

 

Bottom line:  Andrew Luck is only halfway done, and the second half of his career will decide his place in the pantheon of NFL QBs.

Exactly, I totally agree

[superrep1967]

On 7/18/2019 at 3:26 PM, NorthernBlue said:

Basically this is the first year where Luck will be close to fully healthy and has a roster with decent talent with touch of playoff experience. Plus strong leadership up front. So let’s see how he does. Is this enough for the colts to become a 12-13 win juggernaut? Or do we still need to surround Andrew with more talent to truly be a super bowl contender?

Your last line needs to be a thread of it own. But to you point only time will tell it's so hard to know at this point. 

[Moosejawcolt]

I will say one thing bout Luck.  I am not sure how many of the greats would have accomplished what he did in the 1st 6 years of his career given what he had to work with.  Do u think Montana, Brady , Manning, Marino and Elway would have flourished if they would have been in Luck's situation?? I think Luck has a chance to b one of the greats.  It looks like he has stable coaching and a front office.  Now cut down on those interception and he will take that next step.

[Lucky Colts Fan]

6 hours ago, Moosejawcolt said:

Do u think Montana, Brady , Manning, Marino and Elway would have flourished if they would have been in Luck's situation??

 

That is a very interesting point.  Typically HoF HCs and HoF QBs go hand-in-hand.

 

Lombardi - Starr

Knoll - Bradshaw

Landry - Staubach

Walsh - Montana/Young

Parcells - Simms

Shula - Marino

Johnson - Aikman

Belichick - Brady

Dungy - Manning

 

It's hard to know how well these QBs would have done without those coaches.  I wonder how well Archie Manning would have done with one of these coaches...  

 

Reich and Luck got off to a good start last year.  Maybe they'll join this list...  

[Coltsfan66]

 

On 7/18/2019 at 12:21 AM, NewColtsFan said:

 

Andrew Luck is roughly half-way through his career.     This will be his 8th year.

 

Years '15, '16 and '17 were not his fault.    When he was playing he was hurt, and surrounded by bad talent.    And 17 he didn't play at all.

 

So, we really only have 4 reasonably healthy years to judge him.   He's taken each team to the playoffs.    And in years '12, '13 and '14,  those weren't very talented teams.

 

We're going to get a much better look at Andrew.    He's surrounded by better talent.   He's in a more quarterback friendly system.    I think his next 7-8 years will be fun for all of us.   

 

I whole heartedly concur!

[Dark Superman]

Depends on the persons knowledge for the Colts. *s label Luck as an underachiever and blame him for the Colts not winning a Super Bowl. Smart people realize Luck literally carried this franchise on his back and should be seen as an overachiever with the with how many games he's won this franchise while being surrounded by *s like Grigson, Pagano, and terrible rosters year after year.

 

Thank goodness for Chris Ballard.

[Dark Superman]

If you think Luck is the reason the Colts haven't won a Super Bowl since the Manning era. I can't remember one guy carrying an entire franchise on his back the way Luck had before Ballard and Reich arrived. Name someone who's won more with less. I'll wait

[horseshoecrabs]

We are finally building a team around Andrew, that he  should have had, years ago. We were impatient, and thought that we could just start where we left off with Peyton.