Andrew Luck "far From Finished Product" Says Qb Coach

[Dan]

http://www.nfl.com/news/story/09000d5d82803066/article/lucks-personal-coach-says-qb-is-far-from-a-finished-product?campaign=Twitter_news

While the Indianapolis Colts haven't gone out and said so themselves, Andrew Luck seems to be pre-ordained to be the No. 1 overall draft pick later this month and become the face of the franchise's rebuilding efforts.

If the Colts suddenly become enamored with Baylor quarterback Robert Griffin III over the next couple of weeks and decide to pass on Luck, one person close to the Stanford quarterback said they'd be making a huge mistake.

"If they over-think this, they're going to make a mistake they'll regret for years," George Whitfield Jr., Luck's private quarterbacks coach, told The Indianapolis Star.

"He's constantly being categorized as being safe, the sure thing, almost to the point where it's a negative like there's a ceiling, no apparent way for him to get better," Whitfield added. "It's like they're describing a girl you've never seen as smart, witty, funny, consistent, without saying anything about her physically. It almost feels like they're looking at him as the guy with the least amount of negatives."

For many, Griffin has become such an attractive option in part because of the potential upside he possesses thanks to his incredible athleticism. Whitfield was quick to point out that Luck is not a statue sitting in the pocket, and his talents were somewhat limited in college because of his teammates at Stanford.

"Let me tell you: He's far from a finished product," Whitfield said. "He's very far along, but there are still things he's working on mechanically and there are lots of things he'll get better at by being in the NFL. People are now seeing him throw those intermediate and perimeter passes, and those are throws he's been dying to make. You don't think (Stanford coach) David Shaw didn't want to make more of those perimeter throws or go downtown more during the season? But look at Stanford's skill position guys. You can only spend within the budget you have.

"But he's athletic. He's cat quick. He's strong. People are saying he's a prototypical pocket passer, like they're putting him in this category. But there's a lot more he can do."

Obviously to be taken with a pinch of salt - his own QB coach isn't exactly going to say "yeah he's crap, don't pick him", but still an interesting insight from somebody who knows him very well.

[ruksak]

The author completely omitted Luck's experience calling plays and operating under a pro-offense so long and so effectively. This is what puts him head-n-shoulders above the rest, including Griffin. Of course he's got work to do, he's a rookie. But this kid is ready spaghetti.

Good thread OP though. Thanks for posting, Dan.

[Gavin]

I dont understand what people mean when they talk about a player and say the words "finished product" like they never will make mistakes or wont throw a bad pass, its life and football bad things will come up from time to time, if he learns from them thats what matters, "finished products" arent players that have mechanics to work on or better decision making or any of that, yes thats a huge factor in a 'finished product' but what a finished product really is is this- a football player who has retired, plain and simple, not someone thats never thrown a pass in the NFL, but at no time are products finished at the beginning or even middle of their career. is Eli Manning a finished product? no hes still winning superbowls

[chad72]

Hey, Peyton did not call his own audibles till he was a few years into Tom Moore's system. Peyton used to throw more INTs towards the middle early in his career, they went down when Dungy came along and first Stokely, then Dallas Clark got their groove and his chemistry with Peyton going, that is when the seam routes were perfected. Plus, more fade and comeback routes became a staple play in the offense making his throws safer (unless the CBs jumped it faster than his wideouts like Samuel or Porter ). Luck will be fine.

Overanalyzing and nitpicking happens which is what the NFL wants us fans to do, more talking and hyping for their product!!!

[ruksak]

I dont understand what people mean when they talk about a player and say the words "finished product" like they never will make mistakes or wont throw a bad pass, its life and football bad things will come up from time to time, if he learns from them thats what matters, "finished products" arent players that have mechanics to work on or better decision making or any of that, yes thats a huge factor in a 'finished product' but what a finished product really is is this- a football player who has retired, plain and simple, not someone thats never thrown a pass in the NFL, but at no time are products finished at the beginning or even middle of their career. is Eli Manning a finished product? no hes still winning superbowls

This is exactly right. A player isn't done until he's retires, always learning. I believe what the author was implying was perhaps maybe Luck isn't as pro-ready as some believe? If so, I disagree. Either way his opinion seemed rather innocuous.

[Slick_Rick]

I think he was just speaking on the fact that AL can always improve and is looking to do so. Which is exactly what you want to see. I don't like players who come in and think they don't have to work anymore.

[21isSuperman]

You could argue that almost every QB in the NFL is far from a finished product. Heck, even Brady and Peyton will tell you they have room to improve and get better

[Chris_21]

You could argue that almost every QB in the NFL is far from a finished product. Heck, even Brady and Peyton will tell you they have room to improve and get better

Very true. The fact that he is this good and can even get better is exciting.

[HGRekks]

He's saying that Luck IS pro-ready, but he still has a high ceiling. The point he was making is that people look at Griffin and say "Yeah, but he has a higher ceiling" based on his tools and the fact that he hasn't reached his potential in a pro style offense. He's saying that Luck still has that high ceiling as well, and that there are areas he can grow in. So he's saying that Luck isn't a high floor - low ceiling prospect, he's a high floor - high ceiling prospect. Essentially, he's arguing against the idea that Griffin is a better overall prospect and Luck is just "safer" to pick.

And I agree.

[UndecidedFrog]

So when you assume that all QBs have the same potential ceiling to be the best QB in the league, and then look at where they are, you will notice some are at lower floors.

[vinatierifan4]

This kind of reminds me of peyton telling irsay "if you don't take me im gonna kick your butt for the next 15 years." even though luck didn't say anything hah

[Captain Americolt]

I remember the same thing being said about Peyton. His scouting report said he was very mature and nearly a finished product, how much better will he get?

Obviously these scouts missed something because Peyton got a trillion times better in the nfl. Whereas scouts said Leaf had more potential... He probably did but I think one of the biggest factors in deciding how good a player will be is based on his maturity. Will he dedicate himself to learn or will he get lazy over the years and rely on his god given talent? Peyton and Andrew are both very mature, as well as Robert

[GoColts8818]

This qb coach also said if the colts pass on luck they will regret it for years to come. All the guy is saying is he won't be Peyton manning or his equal day one and I think most here already knew that.

[alawai]

No one is a finished product, you and I yet mere stardard issue are far from a finished product. The coroner's office and morticians work with finished procducts!

[schwamm]

This qb coach also said if the colts pass on luck they will regret it for years to come. All the guy is saying is he won't be Peyton manning or his equal day one and I think most here already knew that.

I read it to mean that everyone is touting RG3 for his potential. Luck is already really good, but his coach is implying that as good as he is, he hasn't come close to reaching his potential. Draft him and get really good now, and watch him continue to grow and improve for years to come.

Edited April 3, 2012 by Maureen
maked profanity

[John Dee]

I can't wait to see what Luck will do with "legit" players at the skill positions and not having 3 TE's as is primary targets.

RG3 had Wright and Terrance Williams (ranked 2nd or 3rd WR in the 13 draft)

Baylor was loaded on O.

[Balzer40]

This qb coach also said if the colts pass on luck they will regret it for years to come. All the guy is saying is he won't be Peyton manning or his equal day one and I think most here already knew that.

I have been saying this since all this ridiculous RG3 hype fired up. Picking RG3 over Luck would be a mistake of epic proportions and I honestly think Irsay knows this and is just playing with the media.

[UndecidedFrog]

I can't wait to see what Luck will do with "legit" players at the skill positions and not having 3 TE's as is primary targets.

RG3 had Wright and Terrance Williams (ranked 2nd or 3rd WR in the 13 draft)

Baylor was loaded on O.

If you want to see Luck with legit WRs, just look at tape of his 2010 season. Even though Chris Owusu was out most of that season, Luck had #8 Ryan Whalen (6th round pick, now with the Bengals) and #89 Doug Baldwin (UDFA, now with the Seahawks) as legit WR targets.

This past season, Luck had #81 Chris Owusu, and #17 Griff Whalen as WRs, and both are projected to go UDFA.

[Malakai432]

He's saying that Luck IS pro-ready, but he still has a high ceiling. The point he was making is that people look at Griffin and say "Yeah, but he has a higher ceiling" based on his tools and the fact that he hasn't reached his potential in a pro style offense. He's saying that Luck still has that high ceiling as well, and that there are areas he can grow in. So he's saying that Luck isn't a high floor - low ceiling prospect, he's a high floor - high ceiling prospect. Essentially, he's arguing against the idea that Griffin is a better overall prospect and Luck is just "safer" to pick.

And I agree.

That's what I was thinking. I never really understood why some say this guy has a little room for improvement. The guy can still improve in basically every single aspect even though he is the most NFL ready QB in this years draft. April 26th can't come fast enough.

[Tark The Shark]

I don't understand the finished product vs the more potential conversation either. Both of these guys have a lot of upside. They are both really good college QBs, and both had offenses that suited their skill set. I would personally prefer Luck because he seems to be more accurate than RG3 and knows how to run his own offense like Peyton.

[UndecidedFrog]

I don't understand the finished product vs the more potential conversation either.

You are correct to question that argument. It is specious.

It is the last resort of people who cannot admit that there is a better prospect than their favored prospect. Knowing their prospect is lacking in some skill set, that player now has more "potential" which then gets interpreted as a "ceiling". They fail to understand that their player starts at a lower floor, and the ceiling only looks that much higher up, compared to a prospect that starts from a higher floor.

The fact is that all prospects have the same ceiling, the ceiling is the potential to become the best player in the league. Most players never reach that ceiling.

However, the fact is that different players all start at different places (floors). NFL teams know this and will value prospects according to where they are now much more than where they can be later (which may or may not actualize).

[oldunclemark]

I think we need the draft to get here so we can fill out our roster and see what we have..

At this point...I just want Luck to be better than what we had last year...(which I'm convinced he is)

...and he can go up from there

[UndecidedFrog]

I think we need the draft to get here so we can fill out our roster and see what we have..

At this point...I just want Luck to be better than what we had last year...(which I'm convinced he is)

...and he can go up from there

I think Luck is already much, much better than the combination of Collins/Painter/Orlovsky.

[Tark The Shark]

You are correct to question that argument. It is specious.

It is the last resort of people who cannot admit that there is a better prospect than their favored prospect. Knowing their prospect is lacking in some skill set, that player now has more "potential" which then gets interpreted as a "ceiling". They fail to understand that their player starts at a lower floor, and the ceiling only looks that much higher up, compared to a prospect that starts from a higher floor.

The fact is that all prospects have the same ceiling, the ceiling is the potential to become the best player in the league. Most players never reach that ceiling.

However, the fact is that different players all start at different places (floors). NFL teams know this and will value prospects according to where they are now much more than where they can be later (which may or may not actualize).

I know that I used the comparison of Luck vs RG3 with Manning vs Leaf. and everything that I heard talked about RG3 having more upside and Luck being the finished product. It didn't make a whole lot of sense to me, but I thought it was fitting because Irsay kept saying it was like 1998 all over again. I also believe that each player has a similar ceiling and that they all have different floors.

[coltmb]

I think you are missing the point to the whole article. His coach is cutting him down. People are saying RGIII has a higher ceiling and Luck has learned as much as he can. He is just saying this is complete crap and Luck isn't going to just cap out on learning and RGIII is going to pass him up with knowelde/skill.

If anything this article is taking a ^chiz^ at RGIII.

[GoGoColts]

You could argue that almost every QB in the NFL is far from a finished product. Heck, even Brady and Peyton will tell you they have room to improve and get better

yup

[braveheartcolt]

More chicken feed to keep people taking. As the OP said, what else is his coach going to say.

Forget how Luck will be with 'legit' weapons, what will he be like against 'legit' defenses?

And wasn't Manning released because he was a 'finished' product?

[Warhorse]

Peyton was said to have already reached his potential when he came out of Tennessee and it was Leaf that had all the potential for growth. Funny, actually.

[UndecidedFrog]

Peyton was said to have already reached his potential when he came out of Tennessee and it was Leaf that had all the potential for growth. Funny, actually.

You will note that the prospect who ranks lower and is considered inferior (at the time) is almost always the one who is said to have higher ceilings.

Funny how that works.

[Kenny]

Peyton was said to have already reached his potential when he came out of Tennessee and it was Leaf that had all the potential for growth. Funny, actually.

Sounds a lot like our current draft dilemma.

[El Poonerator]

I hate how every "expert" is trying to show similarties and differences amoung Luck and Manning. Luck will never be Manning, but his potential to be a great QB is very high. There will never be another Johnny U or a Bart Starr, but I'd say with certainty that both teams had great QBs follow. News flash, Luck and Manning are not the same person! Quit comparing and just focus on what they both do well.

[KaylaD]

Eventually the draft will be here and we will I think get Luck and Redskins RG3. Then we can watch and see who does the best. I think Luck will be absolutely fine. I for one get sick of hearing criticism on him. He will be a rookie so I don't know why, but it seems people expect him to be perfect. Of course he still has lots to learn and things to get accustomed to. His arm strength questioned bothers me too. He has plenty of arm strength and the brains to back it up. He can run if he needs to but is accurate with passing and has the brains needed to run the offense. He will continue to get better. I have no doubt in my mind he is determined to succeed at the NFL level. All his accomplishments thus far with his career and with his classes give me faith that he will be successful at a professional level. He just to me seems like the type of guy who does not settle for less then his own best. He admits when he makes mistakes and says he needs to be better at things. I don't know what else you could ask for out of your rookie.

[Superman]

The author completely omitted Luck's experience calling plays and operating under a pro-offense so long and so effectively. This is what puts him head-n-shoulders above the rest, including Griffin. Of course he's got work to do, he's a rookie. But this kid is ready spaghetti.

Good thread OP though. Thanks for posting, Dan.

I think the point was that he will continue to get better, as opposed to having reached his ceiling.

The intangibles are there, which everyone agrees with. The comments in this article point to the fact that the physical attributes are there as well, and maybe even moreso than he's getting credit for.

[southwest1]

Just once, I wish a well known sports journalist like Dan Patrick would write a story on all the pundits colossal failures in the NFL that were deemed potential number 1 draft picks. "Potential" gets more coaching staffs fired than any other component in the art of evaluating talent largely because their is no definite way to measure work ethic & locker room chemistry. Can you say former Oakland Raiders QB Jamarcus Russell?

Too many NFL insiders get obsessed with pointless statistics & athletic ability without comprehending high football I.Q., how a player responds when a play falls apart, can this player rally the troops & make them fight through a large touchdown deficit?, how does this player respond to a season ending injury?...Can they support their backup completely without being bitter or resentful? If you throw a pick, can you display selective amnesia, clear your mind, scan the pre & post snap pictures & move the ball effectively down the field once you get back on the field again? Are you okay with being constructively criticized when you royally mess up by your offensive coordinator & head coach?

Trust me, Andrew Luck will be just fine. He has been around professional football his entire life, he respects Peyton Manning but won't be crippled by #18's Hall of Fame comparisons, & he can shake a poor offensive series quite easily & exude quiet confidence in the huddle naturally.

[Superman]

You are correct to question that argument. It is specious.

It is the last resort of people who cannot admit that there is a better prospect than their favored prospect. Knowing their prospect is lacking in some skill set, that player now has more "potential" which then gets interpreted as a "ceiling". They fail to understand that their player starts at a lower floor, and the ceiling only looks that much higher up, compared to a prospect that starts from a higher floor.

The fact is that all prospects have the same ceiling, the ceiling is the potential to become the best player in the league. Most players never reach that ceiling.

However, the fact is that different players all start at different places (floors). NFL teams know this and will value prospects according to where they are now much more than where they can be later (which may or may not actualize).

I don't agree with the bolded. It's a very nice and tidy argument, but it's too black and white.

Staying with the quarterback position, for instance, you can compare a prospect who is limited in his athleticism but can make all the throws to a prospect who throws just as well, but is super athletic. You can actually argue that the more athletic player has a higher ceiling because there's more to his game than his ability to throw the ball. The ability to run isn't necessary to be the best quarterback in the league, but if you take a quarterback like Brees or Brady or Manning and give them the athleticism of Michael Vick, you have a better player. They may not ever use that running ability, but the fact that they can makes them a more dangerous weapon. But every quarterback prospect doesn't have that kind of athleticism. So, all things being equal, the more athletic player has a higher ceiling.

For a running back, a player with great size and decent speed might actually have a higher ceiling than a smaller, faster back. A pass rusher with great size and technique might have a higher ceiling than another pass rusher who relies only on his athleticism. So greater athleticism isn't necessarily a silver bullet. I think Austin Collie has a higher ceiling than Pierre Garcon, and will have a better career. I'm only pointing out that there are several variables to take into consideration, which is why I don't think it's as black and white as you make it out to be.

If your idea of a ceiling is strictly relative to the other players in the NFL, then yes, best in the league is the best you can be. But I don't think that's what anyone is talking about when they say "ceiling." I think the idea of an individual player's ceiling is specific to how good that player can potentially be, as a consensus. If the consensus is that the player will probably wind up being a good rotational player at his position, but never one of the best, he has a lower ceiling than a player who is regarded as capable of being top five at his position.

JMO.

[UndecidedFrog]

I don't agree with the bolded. It's a very nice and tidy argument, but it's too black and white.

Staying with the quarterback position, for instance, you can compare a prospect who is limited in his athleticism but can make all the throws to a prospect who throws just as well, but is super athletic. You can actually argue that the more athletic player has a higher ceiling because there's more to his game than his ability to throw the ball. The ability to run isn't necessary to be the best quarterback in the league, but if you take a quarterback like Brees or Brady or Manning and give them the athleticism of Michael Vick, you have a better player. They may not ever use that running ability, but the fact that they can makes them a more dangerous weapon. But every quarterback prospect doesn't have that kind of athleticism. So, all things being equal, the more athletic player has a higher ceiling.

For a running back, a player with great size and decent speed might actually have a higher ceiling than a smaller, faster back. A pass rusher with great size and technique might have a higher ceiling than another pass rusher who relies only on his athleticism. So greater athleticism isn't necessarily a silver bullet. I think Austin Collie has a higher ceiling than Pierre Garcon, and will have a better career. I'm only pointing out that there are several variables to take into consideration, which is why I don't think it's as black and white as you make it out to be.

If your idea of a ceiling is strictly relative to the other players in the NFL, then yes, best in the league is the best you can be. But I don't think that's what anyone is talking about when they say "ceiling." I think the idea of an individual player's ceiling is specific to how good that player can potentially be, as a consensus. If the consensus is that the player will probably wind up being a good rotational player at his position, but never one of the best, he has a lower ceiling than a player who is regarded as capable of being top five at his position.

JMO.

You are free to disagree as much as you like.

You argument is based on the presumption of the difference between natural ability with which we are born, versus acquired ability, with which we learn.

My argument is based on the principle that no matter where you are on the order of attaining perfection, you will necessarily fall short, because perfection, although is a worthy goal, is not a goal in itself, but a journey.

All QBs can have the goal to be the best ever (even if that is not precisely defined), and as such, that is their common theoretical ceiling. No QB can hope to achieve more than that goal. If you standardize all QBs with this common ceiling, naturally, their existing abilities (natural or attained) will fall short of that goal, and can be measured accordingly. These are their floors, or where they are as of this point in time.

This is what I am calling attention to...their current floors.

How they improve going forward is uncertain, and many variables come into play. However, it is always good to note the floor before judging if the ceiling is higher. IMO, the ceiling only looks higher because the floor is so much lower.

[Superman]

You are free to disagree as much as you like.

You argument is based on the presumption of the difference between natural ability with which we are born, versus acquired ability, with which we learn.

My argument is based on the principle that no matter where you are on the order of attaining perfection, you will necessarily fall short, because perfection, although is a worthy goal, is not a goal in itself, but a journey.

All QBs can have the goal to be the best ever (even if that is not precisely defined), and as such, that is their common theoretical ceiling. No QB can hope to achieve more than that goal. If you standardize all QBs with this common ceiling, naturally, their existing abilities (natural or attained) will fall short of that goal, and can be measured accordingly. These are their floors, or where they are as of this point in time.

This is what I am calling attention to...their current floors.

How they improve going forward is uncertain, and many variables come into play. However, it is always good to note the floor before judging if the ceiling is higher. IMO, the ceiling only looks higher because the floor is so much lower.

I agree with you that certain players have a higher likelihood to be a productive pro, or as you call it, a higher floor. So you take a so-called "raw talent" with a ton of athletic ability, but he might never develop the technical skill to be proficient. However, if he does, he has the potential to be better than a technically skilled player who isn't as good an athlete. Which why it might be said that he has a higher ceiling.

And the idea that every player can strive to be the best is based on a relative comparison. The best can change. You can technically be better than the best, and then you're the new best. That's not really a ceiling. That's more of a personal ambition. The concept of perfection is so abstract that I really don't think it applies to a football prospect, or any other athlete. But you can be better than everyone else.

As it pertains to Luck vs. Griffin, there are a lot of preconceived notions and stereotypes regarding both players that are hard-wired into a lot of people. As those notions are dispelled (for instance, the thought that because Griffin is really fast that he's not a good pocket quarterback), oftentimes we go too far in the opposite direction (and now Griffin is being called better in the pocket than Luck). That's where people get all this "ceiling" nonsense from. The hyper-analysis lends to these extreme viewpoints.