Why People Try To Knock Andrew Luck

[FireJimCaldwell]

That wasn't the question I asked.

I asked how many of the 20 college QBs you listed ran a pro-style offense in college?

Let me rephrase my answer

Schaub is the only one that runs anything close in the pros that he ran in College. Arians isn't a WCO guy so Luck isn't going to be in the same system, so again pretty much all of them have an inflated cmp% due to the system they ran in college(Spread, R&S, or WCO).

I disagree.

Luck operated the offense based on what Jim Harbaugh installed, which is almost identical to what is installed now with the 49ers.

Luck ran a pro-style offense based on the power run, and play action off that.

Luck ran a hybrid WCO offense installed by Jim Harbaugh, and yes Harbaguh runs a similar offense in San Fran with slight changes to reflect better skill players on the outside position.

Luck will not run a hybrid West Coast Offense here, and ran nothing similar to what Arians ran during his time as OC in Cleveland and/or Pittsburgh, so what Luck ran in college is irrelevant.

So whether or not you like the response, that is the response you are getting.

[UndecidedFrog]

Let me rephrase my answer

Luck ran a hybrid WCO offense installed by Jim Harbaugh, and yes Harbaguh runs a similar offense in San Fran with slight changes to reflect better skill players on the outside position.

Luck will not run a hybrid West Coast Offense here, and ran nothing similar to what Arians ran during his time as OC in Cleveland and/or Pittsburgh, so what Luck ran in college is irrelevant.

So whether or not you like the response, that is the response you are getting.

It's not a matter of whether I like the responses you provided to my questions as much as how much your responses have been irrelevant to the question I asked.

I did not ask if any of the QBs ran an offensive system in college that they later ran as a pro.

I asked if any of the 20 QBs on the list ran a pro-style offense in college.

Since you acknowledged that what Harbaugh installed at Stanford was a pro-style offense, very similar to the offense he installed with the SF 49ers, I am satisfied that Luck ran a pro-style offense in college.

Given that, I see Luck's numbers in college running a pro-style offense even that much more compelling than his cohorts that were running spread offenses.

[FireJimCaldwell]

It's not a matter of whether I like the responses you provided to my questions as much as how much your responses have been irrelevant to the question I asked.

I did not ask if any of the QBs ran an offensive system in college that they later ran as a pro.

I asked if any of the 20 QBs on the list ran a pro-style offense in college.

Since you acknowledged that what Harbaugh installed at Stanford was a pro-style offense, very similar to the offense he installed with the SF 49ers, I am satisfied that Luck ran a pro-style offense in college.

Given that, I see Luck's numbers in college running a pro-style offense even that much more compelling than his cohorts that were running spread offenses.

He ran more of a pro style offense than anyone on the list other than Schaub(who also ran a WCO at UVA), but it is still irrelevant because he won't be running the same system in the pros.

So in the end his #'s were inflated by a WCO, just as others have been inflated by the run and shoot, and or spread as opposed to running a full blown pro-style offense that other schools run.

Which is why I preferred a WCO coach coming in on the offensive side of the ball to capitalize on Luck's experience in the WCO. It didn't happen.

[UndecidedFrog]

He ran more of a pro style offense than anyone on the list other than Schaub(who also ran a WCO at UVA), but it is still irrelevant because he won't be running the same system in the pros.

So in the end his #'s were inflated by a WCO, just as others have been inflated by the run and shoot, and or spread as opposed to running a full blown pro-style offense that other schools run.

Which is why I preferred a WCO coach coming in on the offensive side of the ball to capitalize on Luck's experience in the WCO. It didn't happen.

It matters not what he or any of the other 19 college QBs on the list will be/have run as a pro. That was not the point I was making.

I was making the point, from an apples to apples comparison, college to college level player, that the completion percentage was higher for Luck and RG3 than others. I think since Luck was running a pro-style offense in college, his completion percentage number is that much more impressive compared to his spread offense cohorts.

[FireJimCaldwell]

It matters not what he or any of the other 19 college QBs on the list will be/have run as a pro. That was not the point I was making.

I was making the point, from an apples to apples comparison, college to college level player, that the completion percentage was higher for Luck and RG3 than others. I think since Luck was running a pro-style offense in college, his completion percentage number is that much more impressive compared to his spread offense cohorts.

Irrelevant when he's not running the same style of pro style system. 2012 apples aren't equivalent to 1997 or 1983 apples.

[WeSpy]

Luck ran a WCO in college, and won't be running one in the NFL. hence his #'s were inflated by the system he ran in college just like the others.

I disagree.

Luck operated the offense based on what Jim Harbaugh installed, which is almost identical to what is installed now with the 49ers.

Luck ran a pro-style offense based on the power run, and play action off that.

Given that his offense was run first, his passing numbers are all the more impressive.

What I think is necesary to understand is that the Stanford Cardinals are a run-first team, and have been from 2007-2011. That is the point that UndecidedFrog is making, I believe.

The point you are making, firejimcaldwell, if I am right, is that when Luck was passing, he was passing in a West Coast Offensive system, which is what the other QB's ran in college, and is the system that inflates numbers. So, when Luck threw, it was easy to throw---because he was throwing in a WCO.

However, as UndecidedFrog apparently is attempting to point out---his chances to throw were limited more so than the other QB's due to the fact that the running game was predominant in Stanford during his tenure there. That is where you two end up with a difference of opinion, or at least that is what I'm seeing.

[WeSpy]

By the way, firejimcaldwell and UndecidedFrog---it's good to see you both in ruksak's group! Glad to have you both...

[FireJimCaldwell]

What I think is necesary to understand is that the Stanford Cardinals are a run-first team, and have been from 2007-2011. That is the point that UndecidedFrog is making, I believe.

The point you are making, firejimcaldwell, if I am right, is that when Luck was passing, he was passing in a West Coast Offensive system, which is what the other QB's ran in college, and is the system that inflates numbers. So, when Luck threw, it was easy to throw---because he was throwing in a WCO.

However, as UndecidedFrog apparently is attempting to point out---his chances to throw were limited more so than the other QB's due to the fact that the running game was predominant in Stanford during his tenure there. That is where you two end up with a difference of opinion, or at least that is what I'm seeing.

I'm saying a WCO/Run and Shoot/Spread offense will inflate a quarterbacks numbers as apposed to a pure pro-style offense or even a pure WCO as opposed to the Stanford Hybrid WCO.

The fact that Stanford had more rushing plays than passing plays is irrelevant because he still threw the ball quite a bit. It's not like he threw it 10 times a game.. He wasn't in a pass happy system like Keenum in Houston but he was still putting the pig in the air 30 times a game.

[WeSpy]

I'm saying a WCO/Run and Shoot/Spread offense will inflate a quarterbacks numbers as apposed to a pure pro-style offense or even a pure WCO as opposed to the Stanford Hybrid WCO.

The fact that Stanford had more rushing plays than passing plays is irrelevant because he still threw the ball quite a bit. It's not like he threw it 10 times a game.. He wasn't in a pass happy system like Keenum in Houston but he was still putting the pig in the air 30 times a game.

I agree that a college level WCO will inflate the numbers. But I do not agree that the pass-run ratio is irrelevant. Other teams have a more pass-happy offense, and because of this, can have numbers that are inflated in the passing game even more so than other teams. Yes, Luck was still throwing 30 times a game, but others were throwing even more.

[FireJimCaldwell]

I agree that a college level WCO will inflate the numbers. But I do not agree that the pass-run ratio is irrelevant. Other teams have a more pass-happy offense, and because of this, can have numbers that are inflated in the passing game even more so than other teams. Yes, Luck was still throwing 30 times a game, but others were throwing even more.

I'm talking about from a CMP %. Of course yards will go up with more attempts, will TD's, INt's, etc. 70% of 100 is 70 just as 70% of 200 is 140...

[WeSpy]

I'm talking about from a CMP %. Of course yards will go up with more attempts, will TD's, INt's, etc. 70% of 100 is 70 just as 70% of 200 is 140...

I meant the same, firejimcaldwell, I meant the numbers, but completion percentage wise... Sorry for the lack of clarity.

[Blue Horseshoe]

why do soldiers knock greenies in the army? why do prisoners knock new prisoners?

Andrew Luck can't just come in here and get instant respect. He has to earn it. Until then he is just a basic rookie like everyone else.

Ding! Ding! Dadingdingding! We have a winner!

[KaylaD]

This has been fun to read. I honestly do not care what type of offense he ran at Stanford. I did not watch him play at Stanford. I have heard that he did not have the best of wide receivers to throw to. I do not know if that is true, Either way it does not matter to me. I am fully confident in his abilities the more I see of him.

I have not been on the Andrew Luck bandwagon, I promise. I was more interested in RG3 because he seemed so much more exciting and to make big plays. Just from my own research I had decided I really liked RG3.

Now the more I see of Luck, the more he grows on me. We may not have as good a 1st year as RG3, we may take a little time to get there. Once all the pieces are in place though I think we will start to get very good. I feel like if this guy can go to Stanford, be getting a degree there, and be a star quarterback then he must be one heck of a hard worker.

People can knock him if they want, nothing anyone can do about that. I would rather see all the good things and be optimistic. No criticism until I see him play. This first season I'm having low expectations and hoping for good things. remember Peyton's first year everyone and try to have patience with him. We will be great again, its just going to take some time. I see exciting games in our future. When is the last time,( besides this last season) we were even worried as fans about not having a winning record? i think it might be fun watching us underdogs this year!

[Andy]

It's funny how he says he saw John Elway in high school, but TRENT DILFER WAS 7/8 YEARS OLD WHEN JOHN WAS IN HIGH SCHOOL. This is why Dilfer tickes me off and is the reason he should NOT be up there talking. He thinks he's best after that D and Jamal Lewis won the SB. He's a low life.

[KaylaD]

why do soldiers knock greenies in the army? why do prisoners knock new prisoners?

Andrew Luck can't just come in here and get instant respect. He has to earn it. Until then he is just a basic rookie like everyone else.

Yes he is a rookie who has to earn respect as an NFL player, he also does not deserve instant criticism either. I think he at least deserves our support. i don't know why everyone is looking for reasons to doubt him, lets me positive, not negative!

[Dan]

why do soldiers knock greenies in the army? why do prisoners knock new prisoners?

Andrew Luck can't just come in here and get instant respect. He has to earn it. Until then he is just a basic rookie like everyone else.

Yeah let's treat our rookies the same way people are treated in prison! That's certainly not shunning aside social conventions, we should base all decisions off how things are done in prison!

[RGIII]

It's funny how he says he saw John Elway in high school, but TRENT DILFER WAS 7/8 YEARS OLD WHEN JOHN WAS IN HIGH SCHOOL. This is why Dilfer tickes me off and is the reason he should NOT be up there talking. He thinks he's best after that D and Jamal Lewis won the SB. He's a low life.

Mortensen said that, not Dilfer. Mort was in his late 20s at the time Elway was in high school.

[Andy]

Mortensen said that, not Dilfer. Mort was in his late 20s at the time Elway was in high school.

Ok then, good to know. I kinda feel like an * now

[Warhorse]

A true revelation only conceivable from the brightest of sports journalist minds.

Just reading his comment helped me achieve omnipresent supergalactic oneness. Now what about my medallion of spiritual accomplishment?

[subvet]

why do soldiers knock greenies in the army? why do prisoners knock new prisoners?

Andrew Luck can't just come in here and get instant respect. He has to earn it. Until then he is just a basic rookie like everyone else.

Ok but how many rookies get talked about like this? He'll never be just a rookie unless he is a total bust, but I really doubt that will happen.

[John Dee]

i remember something joe montana said about driving the ball. he said i dont throw darts at balloons i throw balloons at dirts.

If any of us Colt fans can remember the "young" Peyton Manning... he threw dieing ducks in the wind... truly ugly balls. But later in this career he started throwing a tighter spiral.

[Gavin]

Simply put, he receives all this criticism and most of it unjustly because HE is the guy that will likely replace Manning its really that simple, its not cause of passing ability or decision making blah blah, Manning didnt always make the right decisions and neither will Luck its part of the game its best to just sit back and enjoy watching these players grow as a TEAM and not carried by one player

[subvet]

Simply put, he receives all this criticism and most of it unjustly because HE is the guy that will likely replace Manning its really that simple, its not cause of passing ability or decision making blah blah, Manning didnt always make the right decisions and neither will Luck its part of the game its best to just sit back and enjoy watching these players grow as a TEAM and not carried by one player

Yes, all true but you have to admit it was fun watching him carry them until he dropped, and then we found out how good he really was.

[Gavin]

Yes, all true but you have to admit it was fun watching him carry them until he dropped, and then we found out how good he really was.

watcha mean dropped? and who?

[The Peytonator]

Yes, all true but you have to admit it was fun watching him carry them until he dropped, and then we found out how good he really was.

Aye...

That guy's pretty good. If you like 6'5, 230 lb quarterbacks, lazer, rocket arm.....

#Reminiscions

[subvet]

watcha mean dropped? and who?

You said "and not carried by one player" so I assume you meant Peyton Manning. If I mistook your intent I apologize.

[Gavin]

I meant Peyton your correct

[subvet]

Aye...

That guy's pretty good. If you like 6'5, 230 lb quarterbacks, lazer, rocket arm.....

Whoa! Deja vu, I feel like I've heard that before!!

[The Peytonator]

Whoa! Deja vu, I feel like I've heard that before!!

I think it was some jugheaded man with a mustache.

[Gavin]

Im enjoying watching the fiesta bowl, thanks John

[John Dee]

He ran more of a pro style offense than anyone on the list other than Schaub(who also ran a WCO at UVA), but it is still irrelevant because he won't be running the same system in the pros.

So in the end his #'s were inflated by a WCO, just as others have been inflated by the run and shoot, and or spread as opposed to running a full blown pro-style offense that other schools run.

Which is why I preferred a WCO coach coming in on the offensive side of the ball to capitalize on Luck's experience in the WCO. It didn't happen.

Develop a "very good" running game and Luck will be fine. It's any QB's best friend. That and a strong D.

[Jay305]

How dare he say those things about our Andrew to shame. Trents just jealous that Andrew is the greatest quarterback of all time before hes even played in the NFL. Haters gon hate

[jvan1973]

It's funny how he says he saw John Elway in high school, but TRENT DILFER WAS 7/8 YEARS OLD WHEN JOHN WAS IN HIGH SCHOOL. This is why Dilfer tickes me off and is the reason he should NOT be up there talking. He thinks he's best after that D and Jamal Lewis won the SB. He's a low life.

mort said he saw him in high school.. not dilfer

[Gavin]

No it does not. If you want to make a true apples to apples comparison you have to account for the evolution of the passing game over the last 10-20 years. Completion percentages have been on the rise for every NFL and college QB over that time.

I keep hearing the 'the evolution of the passing game' I still have no idea what that means exactly, in truth their is no 'evolution' of the passing game, the rule changes made it simpler for long completions or easy short completions, cant touch a guy after 5 yards? then how ya supposed to keep up with a guy like Andre Johnson or a Mike Wallace? not many can unless the refs dont make the call when a corner is getting physical after 5 yards, their is no 'evolution' of the passing game, simply put the rules changed so much now that ya got a pass happy league, thats not evolution, thats a commissioner changing a rule that DIDNT need to be changed, and yes I know that rule helped us to a GREAT extent but I have NEVER liked it

[Blue Horseshoe]

Ok but how many rookies get talked about like this? He'll never be just a rookie unless he is a total bust, but I really doubt that will happen.

Some people will deny it forever if it does happen. I just cannot understand the fanatical cult surrounding this guy.

[andreaallennyc]

I'm an Andrew Luck fan. Pretty much every analyst, coach and scout thinks he has great QB skills and now realizes he's also a great athlete. I prefer him to RGIII for many reasons, but I'm not going to get onto that debate here because my opinion on it really doesn't matter. Some people think RGIII is better, who knows; maybe one or the other or both won't live up to their potential, who knows. One thing I do know is that Andrew Luck is an incredible guy. He works very very hard. He's a great leader, his teammates adore him (by the way, that was not true of Elway ... I knew some of his Stanford teammates and I'm an Elway fan so believe me). He is totally respectful of his competitors and supportive of his teammates. He's humble when others are arrogant. He's mentally very strong and thrives under pressure (Look at his red zone stats and his stats after interceptions and how he has handled hyped expectations). There is so much you are going to love about him if the Colts are smart enough to draft him. If that happens, I hope you fans will give him a chance and support and respect him. I am disturbed by some Colts fans saying he needs to earn your respect. I think everyone deserves respect and reasonable expectations and a chance to prove themselves. He's a young guy who hasn't done anything wrong, who has worked amazingly hard on his football skills and is starting out his NFL career with enthusiasm and high hopes. He doesn't need for you to sign on to be everlasting fans, but he does deserve you support and a fair chance.

[schwamm]

I was 6 in '98. So anything other than game day I can't say.

I meant even through his career as a Colt.

I've never been a QB, but was taught by my older cousin as a kid to try to throw a tight spiral. Because of that, I often thought Manning's throws looked sloppy (flutter ball?), but have been told since that it makes it more catchable. I assume the same is true with Luck's throws.

[Fx Stryker]

I meant even through his career as a Colt.

I've never been a QB, but was taught by my older cousin as a kid to try to throw a tight spiral. Because of that, I often thought Manning's throws looked sloppy (flutter ball?), but have been told since that it makes it more catchable. I assume the same is true with Luck's throws.

I was meaning his powerless throws.

[schwamm]

I was meaning his powerless throws.

I must not be watching the same gamefilm. I've seen touch throws, but I'm not sure I see where you are coming from on "powerless".

[Fx Stryker]

I must not be watching the same gamefilm. I've seen touch throws, but I'm not sure I see where you are coming from on "powerless".

Well I thought it before I heard even analysts say it. His Pro Day was the first time I actually heard of anyone else saying. I know he is capable of launching the ball many yards. We know he can do that, but to me there seems no drive behind the ball.