Luck Retirement One Year On: Are We Better?

[DaveA1102]

Seeing a lot of twitter posts about the fact that Luck retired one year ago today.  Is it just me or does it feel like that was 5 years ago!?! 

 

Anyway, not wanting to revisit any of the old Luck retirement "takes" on here but I wanted to mention that, in my opinion, even without Luck I think we are in a better position today than we were at this point last year. 

 

A solid, if uninspiring, outing last year for the team was understandable with the bombshell aftershocks still reverberating throughout LOS and now add in Rivers (TBC on impact), Buckner (stud), two electric offensive piece in Pitman and Taylor, the potential for Campbell to have a strong year after a frustrating rookie campaign and I have big hopes for at least one of Turay or Banogu to emerge this year also.  I know, I know, its the pre-season buzz and optimism creeping in but, hey, I gotta have something to look forward to!

 

I welcome any dissenting voices but, as a well-known Ballard-ite, it is beyond impressive to be where we are a year to the day since we lost one of the best QB's the league has seen in the last decade.

 

Also, as a final word, all the best to Andrew and glad to hear he is healthy and happy as per Zak Keefer:

 

 

[Smonroe]

On paper, yes, we're better.  Not at the QB position, obviously, but as a team on the whole.

 

That's on paper.  The real determining factor should be the record that this team has at the end of the season, and how far it goes in the playoffs.

[DaveA1102]

1 minute ago, Smonroe said:

On paper, yes, we're better.  Not at the QB position, obviously, but as a team on the whole.

 

That's on paper.  The real determining factor should be the record that this team has at the end of the season, and how far it goes in the playoffs.

 

I doubt we get better at the QB position for a number of years but I think Rivers seemed like the best fit for what the 2020 Colts will be and Reich and Sirianni seemed all in on Rivers from the moment the season ended last year, so I will trust their judgement that Rivers can still do it when he has a good line in front of him.

[Smonroe]

2 minutes ago, DaveA1102 said:

 

I doubt we get better at the QB position for a number of years but I think Rivers seemed like the best fit for what the 2020 Colts will be and Reich and Sirianni seemed all in on Rivers from the moment the season ended last year, so I will trust their judgement that Rivers can still do it when he has a good line in front of him.

 

I'm not sure we'll ever get better at the QB position than we were in the last 20 plus years.

[DaveA1102]

2 minutes ago, Smonroe said:

 

I'm not sure we'll ever get better at the QB position than we were in the last 20 plus years.

 

Sad, but entirely probable.  Only one Superbowl from it too.

[Myles]

Of course the team is better.  QB position maybe not.  I hope the team does well enough for Luck to wish he had stayed.  

[Four2itus]

This team is the most solid team I have seen in some time. The actual progression of the Dline is what could make it special. 

[Korey]

I think this team is special even without Luck. I hope Rivers has some gas left because with the oline, dline and the Running backs they are built to make a deep run. Go Colts!

[Myles]

4 minutes ago, Korey said:

I think this team is special even without Luck. I hope Rivers has some gas left because with the oline, dline and the Running backs they are built to make a deep run. Go Colts!

I mostly agree.   I need to see the D-line get consistent pressure on the QB though.  Buckner is great, but I have to see if he can change the whole line.  In order for Hooker and the crew to do well, there must be pressure applied.   I am very optimistic, but not certain that the problem is solved. 

[Myles]

While not intentional, the thread title is almost misleading.   

I first thought it meant - Are we better without Luck?

[shasta519]

So the argument sort of boils down to...the improvement the Colts made this offseason is > than the difference between Luck and Rivers.

 

Last time we saw Luck, the Colts were coming off a 10-6 season with a trip to the Divisional Round...so 11 wins (including one playoff game). They were also the #10 offense and #10 defense...according to DVOA.

 

The 2018 defense ranking was helped a bit by playing really bad offenses...and we saw it fall to #19 last year...also in part due to injuries. So let's say a #15 ranked defense is a fair ranking where it was heading into the 2019 season.

 

So...for this 2020 team to be better than it was heading into last year with Luck...it should at least match that record or number of wins...and be a top 10 offense and a top 15 defense. The defense is doable...and it's something that (hopefully) would happen organic...especially with the addition of Buckner and development of other young players.

 

The offense and overall win total is tougher...but doable...though without seeing Rivers yet...I just don't know if I would bet on it.

 

 

[Myles]

11 minutes ago, shasta519 said:

So the argument sort of boils down to...the improvement the Colts made this offseason is > than the difference between Luck and Rivers.

 

 

 

 

I think that is a definite yes.   The RB position is a + with Taylow, Mack, Hines and Wilkins

The WR position is a + with Hilton, Campbell, Pittman, Pascal, and others

The O-line is a + being great and with another year under the belt

The D-line is a + with Buckner and the rest

 

I really don't know that, outside of TE, there is any position not better than it was.   Also depth.

[DaveA1102]

28 minutes ago, Myles said:

While not intentional, the thread title is almost misleading.   

I first thought it meant - Are we better without Luck?

 

Yeah I potentially could have worded better, but struggled to fit my sentiment in there without making it an opening paragraph! 

 

As @shasta519 states, it comes down to whether the improvements of the roster match up against having one of the best QBs in the league and the same roster just earlier in development.

 

It was also partly another letter of love to Mr Ballard to mention how impressive a feat that is.  

[Horsey]

No. This team would be much better with Luck. All we are missing is an elite QB.

[RollerColt]

QB wise, we of course aren't better. Andrew was for all intents and purposes a top 10, arguably top 5 QB with us. 

 

I knew there was a reason for waking up this morning feeling down... One year ago... Sigh.

 

The team as a whole at least is going in the right direction. And Rivers is no slouch. 

 

There's a lot of ifs to get sorted through for this to be a special season and a special team. We need to stay healthy for one. Something we just haven't been able to accomplish in years...

[NewColtsFan]

All my comments are said with a back ground of someone who has followed Andrew Luck and admired him professionally and personally since his senior year in High School....

 

Im in the camp with all the others who say this is a better team even without AL.   It’s a better 53 man roster even though we’re not as good at the QB position.    But if Rivers is just good to very good, we should be in business given a little bit of luck with potential injuries.   
 

On paper, we SHOULD be a playoff caliber team.    On paper, we SHOULD make a run in the post-season.   On paper, we give the look of a team that other teams likely won’t want to play.   We’re different on both sides of the ball.   We should be well coached.   We likely will make fewer turnovers and commit fewer penalties than the other team.   We shouldn’t beat ourselves.   Those are great qualities for Playoff football.   Covid allowing, we should be a very good team this year and hopefully fun to watch.

[csmopar]

I think we are better. Overall and at the QB position. Now, I don’t mean talent or skill when I say that about the QB position. What I mean is that I’d rather have a QB like Rivers or even Brissett that is fully committed, not a better talented QB who is only half at best interested in playing. 
 

obviously the rest of the team on paper is more talented than a year ago, but a dedicated and devoted leader can make a huge difference even if he is older and maybe not as physically skilled as he once was

[Myles]

30 minutes ago, csmopar said:

I think we are better. Overall and at the QB position. Now, I don’t mean talent or skill when I say that about the QB position. What I mean is that I’d rather have a QB like Rivers or even Brissett that is fully committed, not a better talented QB who is only half at best interested in playing. 
 

obviously the rest of the team on paper is more talented than a year ago, but a dedicated and devoted leader can make a huge difference even if he is older and maybe not as physically skilled as he once was

I can agree with Rivers, but I'd rather have a half interested Luck than Brissett.  

[csmopar]

2 minutes ago, Myles said:

I can agree with Rivers, but I'd rather have a half interested Luck than Brissett.  

I hesitated to throw Brissett in there but I got thinking, a year ago, if Luck was only in it half way, who’s to say he wouldn’t have retired the first time he felt sore or had a bad pop or something? So that’s why I’d rather go into battle with a QB who’s in it fully and got the full reps n such. 

[landrus13]

I agree with most people in here. Roster is definitely better. QB position? Probably not. But I think getting Rivers is the next best thing. No he's not as good as Luck. But he doesn't have to be. That's the good thing about the roster being improved. One guy doesn't have to carry the team anymore. Rivers brings a fire and flair to the team that Luck didn't. Rivers isn't afraid to let the opposing defense know he's coming for their *. I think Rivers brings a lot to the table.

[King Colt]

I don't believe Brissett will be the choice for the next 10+ years with the rebuilding ongoing but I wonder if any of the two others are as well. 

[NewColtsFan]

2 hours ago, csmopar said:

I think we are better. Overall and at the QB position. Now, I don’t mean talent or skill when I say that about the QB position. What I mean is that I’d rather have a QB like Rivers or even Brissett that is fully committed, not a better talented QB who is only half at best interested in playing. 
 

obviously the rest of the team on paper is more talented than a year ago, but a dedicated and devoted leader can make a huge difference even if he is older and maybe not as physically skilled as he once was

When Andrew Luck was a member of the Colts he was 100 percent committed to the Colts, right up to some point in 2019.  Exactly when that was nobody really knows.   But 2012 thru 2018, Luck was committed.   There’s nothing that I’m aware of that says otherwise. 

[csmopar]

38 minutes ago, NewColtsFan said:

When Andrew Luck was a member of the Colts he was 100 percent committed to the Colts, right up to some point in 2019.  Exactly when that was nobody really knows.   But 2012 thru 2018, Luck was committed.   There’s nothing that I’m aware of that says otherwise. 

I'm not disputing that part. Not at all. But no one makes the decision to walk away from 500 million dollars (assumed life earnings had he stayed) over night.  It likely started creeping into his mind weeks to months before, at least at sometime in the 2019 off season.  So no one can say whether or not his heart or mind would have been fully into it had he infact chosen to stay. So it's a legit concern. We will just never know for sure and even Luck himself, won't ever know that for sure either

[CF4L]

Better? No

 

However I like that we have a QB who wants to be here and we don't have to wonder about his availability or where his head is at least for the upcoming season.  

[Architects08]

With a healthy Luck this team is a legit superbowl contender. Not saying we cant be with Rivers, but theres more uncertainty regarding his age and if he has anything left. 

[csmopar]

17 minutes ago, Architects08 said:

With a healthy Luck this team is a legit superbowl contender. Not saying we cant be with Rivers, but theres more uncertainty regarding his age and if he has anything left. 

No doubt there. But I think the roster is better. And as mentioned above, for the first time in 3 years, we have a fairly solid idea at who will be starting week 1. Knock on wood

[crazycolt1]

28 minutes ago, CF4L said:

Better? No

 

However I like that we have a QB who wants to be here and we don't have to wonder about his availability or where his head is at least for the upcoming season.  

How can you say no at this point?

This team is much more talented than last year and the depth is also much better. 

Yes the QB has to be good but the QB position is not what makes a team ready for a super bowl. 

If that were the case why didn't the Colts win more than one super bowl with Manning? 

The very reason Brady is wearing his rings is because of the teams he played on. 

Example- The 85 Bears. Jim McMahon was not a great QB by no means. 

[2006Coltsbestever]

10 hours ago, NewColtsFan said:

All my comments are said with a back ground of someone who has followed Andrew Luck and admired him professionally and personally since his senior year in High School....

 

Im in the camp with all the others who say this is a better team even without AL.   It’s a better 53 man roster even though we’re not as good at the QB position.    But if Rivers is just good to very good, we should be in business given a little bit of luck with potential injuries.   
 

On paper, we SHOULD be a playoff caliber team.    On paper, we SHOULD make a run in the post-season.   On paper, we give the look of a team that other teams likely won’t want to play.   We’re different on both sides of the ball.   We should be well coached.   We likely will make fewer turnovers and commit fewer penalties than the other team.   We shouldn’t beat ourselves.   Those are great qualities for Playoff football.   Covid allowing, we should be a very good team this year and hopefully fun to watch.

Good post and I gave it a 'like'. Having said that if we had Andrew with the team we have now I would pick us to go to the AFC Title Game at worse. With Rivers we should win the division though and please a lot of people with our play.

[Yoshinator]

3 minutes ago, 2006Coltsbestever said:

Good post and I gave it a 'like'. Having said that if we had Andrew with the team we have now I would pick us to go to the AFC Title Game at worse. With Rivers we should win the division though and please a lot of people with our play.

With Luck, I'd say in the AFC there would be a 25% chance for the Ravens, Chiefs and Colts each to make the SB and a 25% for a random other team to make it. Without Luck, I'd up the Chiefs and Ravens chance to 30% each to make the SB and lower ours to 15%. Still a definite shot, but it'll be a little harder now.

 

However, we look great on paper, and the practices are fun and there's players doing well, so I think this team is much improved from last year, and even 2018 honestly.

[2006Coltsbestever]

3 minutes ago, Jared Cisneros said:

With Luck, I'd say in the AFC there would be a 25% chance for the Ravens, Chiefs and Colts each to make the SB and a 25% for a random other team to make it. Without Luck, I'd up the Chiefs and Ravens chance to 30% each to make the SB and lower ours to 15%. Still a definite shot, but it'll be a little harder now.

 

However, we look great on paper, and the practices are fun and there's players doing well, so I think this team is much improved from last year, and even 2018 honestly.

% wise that is about where I have it too. I think Tennessee will be good again as well but not sure they will duplicate what they did last year? I like Watson but without Hopkins, I can see the Texans being 8-8 or so.

[Yoshinator]

3 minutes ago, 2006Coltsbestever said:

% wise that is about where I have it too. I think Tennessee will be good again as well but not sure they will duplicate what they did last year? I like Watson but without Hopkins, I can see the Texans being 8-8 or so.

Texans are about to fall apart soon, this may be their last competitive year for awhile. Tennessee is really good, and they will be our competition in the division. Very underrated team. I'll say we finish 10-6/11-5, the Titans finish 9-7, and the Texans finish 7-9/8-8. The Jags are going to be in the mix for the no1 pick obviously.

[2006Coltsbestever]

2 minutes ago, Jared Cisneros said:

Texans are about to fall apart soon, this may be their last competitive year for awhile. Tennessee is really good, and they will be our competition in the division. Very underrated team. I'll say we finish 10-6/11-5, the Titans finish 9-7, and the Texans finish 7-9/8-8. The Jags are going to be in the mix for the no1 pick obviously.

Yeah I say we go 10-6, Titans may as well but I will pick us to win the division by tiebreaker. I will put the Texans at 9-7 because they do have Watson. I just hope the Jags do not get the #1 pick because that will mean Lawrence.

[2006Coltsbestever]

The Jags might be in lose for Lawrence mode  

[CF4L]

2 hours ago, crazycolt1 said:

How can you say no at this point?

This team is much more talented than last year and the depth is also much better. 

Yes the QB has to be good but the QB position is not what makes a team ready for a super bowl. 

If that were the case why didn't the Colts win more than one super bowl with Manning? 

The very reason Brady is wearing his rings is because of the teams he played on. 

Example- The 85 Bears. Jim McMahon was not a great QB by no means. 

 

On paper but you still have to play the games. The Colts started off well at 5-2 but still missed the playoffs. 

Funny you mention the Bears that's the only SB they won. I do agree that you need more than QB to win championships but I think Luck is more talented and with a better roster and him I trust more than Philip Rivers which was what I thought the question was.

 

Unfortunately he lacked heart to play this game it was something he was good at but he was never passionate about it. Which is fine but not the makeup for a franchise QB either.

[EastStreet]

The overall team is better, especially if healthy. I think this is likely the most well rounded team we've had in quite some time.

 

We'll see if the passing game turns out to be better. The DBs are the only other question mark I have. 

[2006Coltsbestever]

Our roster is good, maybe very good but you still need a QB to make plays to win. Not a great QB as some mentioned but at least good. In 2012, Flacco was great in those playoffs but in reality he is just an above average QB for his career, sometimes good.

[EastStreet]

1 minute ago, 2006Coltsbestever said:

Our roster is good, maybe very good but you still need a QB to make plays to win. Not a great QB as some mentioned but at least good. In 2012, Flacco was great in those playoffs but in reality he is just an above average QB for his career, sometimes good.

Yup, Flacco has a very nice run of performance when it really counted.

Timing can be everything.

[2006Coltsbestever]

3 minutes ago, EastStreet said:

Yup, Flacco has a very nice run of performance when it really counted.

Timing can be everything.

Yeah out of all the average to above average QB's to win it, he was the best one IMO. He was better than McMahon, Hostetler, Dilfer, and Johnson. I loved McMahon's cocky confidence though  

[EastStreet]

3 minutes ago, 2006Coltsbestever said:

Yeah out of all the average to above average QB's to win it, he was the best one IMO. He was better than McMahon, Hostetler, Dilfer, and Johnson. I loved McMahon's cocky confidence though  

I loved that Bears team lol. My best friend and cousin were huge Bears fans at that time. I had to endure the SB Shuffle wayyyyyyy too much. 

 

It's going to be interesting to see if Foles wins the job in Chicago this year. That's been a messy situation. Flacco might have been a good fit there too lol.

[CF4L]

Foles magic only works in Philly he's failed everywhere else.