An Andrew Luck Post for Consideration.....

[w87r]

1 hour ago, NewColtsFan said:

Yes....    so far, so good.   I’m very pleased.  The responses have exceeded my expectations.   Your recommendations really polished things up.   
 

The community has really stepped up and the day is still young!

This was all you NCF. I had nothing to do with it.

 

Glad this turned out well. Was a little worried at first, when you brought it up, but it's been great.

 

 

You are a major contributor to the forum, always have been. Happy your writing skills are getting the recognition they deserve. Keep up the solid work. 

[chad72]

1 hour ago, shasta519 said:

 

Irsay was definitely ahead of his time. I think he saw the inevitable rule changes that would favor the offense (especially QBs and skill position players). In fact, I recall him lobbying for them in the mid 2000s. 

BA would have made a big difference. The offense would have likely been better. I mean...Carson Palmer was 29-9 in his first 3 seasons with BA...until he fell off in his late 30s...right around the time Luck was entering his prime.

 

But the real difference would have been on defense. Whether it was Bowles...or Bettcher (Colts OLB coach in 2012)...ARI was constantly top 5 in defense during BA's tenure.

 

Even when Bowles left for the NYJ HC position...here is how Bettcher finished from 2015-2017: #2, #2 and #3. 

 

Again...hate the "what if"...but keeping BA was definitely the right play. And some people even said it at the time...despite how insensitive it appeared. But I am not even sure how Irsay could have managed it. Not only was he Wally-Pipping a cancer survivor...he was doing so with that HC's good friend...who had just come out of retirement because that HC asked him to. Difficult situation...but I think it would have had a huge impact on last decade.

 

There are ways to handle difficult situations. Have a conversation with Pagano and ask him if he would take a break. Or ask if Arians would forego a chance at becoming a head coach to be the highest paid OC in the league. However, it starts with a willingness to make the tough and difficult call. There were a lot of good offensive minds in the league that would have gotten more out of Luck and our offense, but we went with Pep Hamilton and Chudzinski who weren't truly innovative minds in hindsight. It took us till Frank Reich to get a team that was willing to make the extra investment in analytics, Irsay would have always opened his checkbook to that concept, he just needed to be sold. 

[NewColtsFan]

15 minutes ago, Tsarquise said:

What world do you live in? Andrew Luck gets tons of respect. Most hold him as one of the best Colts QB's of all time and one of the greatest "what if" stories in the NFL. The general consensus among Colts fans and NFL fans in general (At least the ones I have talked to in person and online such as forums, twitter and reddit) is complete absolvement for most of his failings and short comings; most blame the Colts and more specifically, Ryan Grigson. You will get straight downvoted for spewing almost any Andrew Luck criticism on reddit, for what it is worth; don't believe me? Try it. 

 

What is the appropriate amount of respect that he deserves? To be held as the greatest Colts QB of all time? To be labeled the biggest "what if" story (Which he already is.) Or to be labeled as on of the great Colts QB's, which he is. He played for only 5 and half seasons in the NFL when he was being depended on as a franchise QB that  many expected would play, maybe, at least 15 years or so, but definitely more than 5 years. 

 

This is a player who's mere presence in the draft was the catalyst for the Colts -- a team, at the time, with one of the winningest records that last decade -- to jettison an entire winning regime. That is respect in and of itself, and also, why so many people are rubbed the wrong away by his abrupt retirement. The guy he replaced was pretty good, and now his legacy is shared with a other team. 

 

Some even think he was better than Manning. I would say Manning gets more criticism than Andrew Luck (maybe).

 

Andrew Luck gets TONS of respect.  

 

 

A MINORITY of people call him soft because he ultimately decided that he could not deal with the possibility of injury and the possible rehabilitation it takes to recover; a possible outcome that every NFL player faces. The injuries are a part of football. Injuries are not unique to Andrew Luck. And, yet after dealing with his injuries and rehabilitation, he decided to quit. It is that simple. That is why some may call him soft. It is not ridiculous. You are ignoring his ultimate decision to quit due to not wanting to deal with injuries and rehabilitation. 

 

I do not really think his socioeconomic background is of any importance or pertinence in regards to the discussion about his decision to retire, but it was mentioned in your post and I know what and who's post prompted you to mention this, so I will address it. Andrew Luck definitely did not come from a working class family -- once again, not that it matters -- and was definitely rich when retired, so it makes sense for one to take the financial stability he currently had at the time of retirement, and the relatively well off family that he came from. Being set for life, definitely adds less motivation to "work". And you citing that Luck is seemingly not interested in the greatest of material things adds to that point. If you already have so much money, money is not much of a motivation, especially when you don't need, relative to people who live sybaritic lifestyles, much money. 

Then there are the people talking about him sacrificing his body for the team and his fans, as if he is some selfless diety akin to dying for others sins. It is his job. He is a football player. It is the career path he chose. He signed a contract. He made a commitment.

He was being greatly compensated with millions of dollars. He wasn't sacrificing his health for his team or for me or for you. Whatever he sacrificed, it was for himself, his pride, and his legacy. And ultimately he chose not to make that sacrifice.

 

Andrew Luck was a great player who held the ball too long and played with no sense of self preservation. His style of play had a role in his injuries, and his abrupt and relatively early retirement was disappointing to every passionate Colts fan (and Luck fan) and has had a huge impact on the Colts organization. It sucked. 

 

Good for Luck and his personal life, but bad luck for the Colts and every Colts fan. 

 

I was never a Luck fan, per se, I rooted for him cause he was the Colts' guy, just like I rooted for Rivers, but Manning and that era is what got me to be the diehard Colts fan that I am today. And after passionately watching that era for over a decade and witnessing how that era ended (partly due to Luck), then recently seeing how the Luck era ended (once again, partly due to Luck) I can't help but feel peeved by the outcome and partially at Luck. But, more importantly, when I hear the narrative that completely absolves Luck from the outcome and exclusively blames the Colts to the point where the Colts incompetence exclusively killed the career of Luck as if he did not make a volitional decision to quit playing, it really irks me, because that narrative is not accurate; it is far more nuanced, and I am willing to bet others feel the same. 

 

I am sure we can all agree, as Colts fans, that we wish Luck continued to play or would come back. 

 

Luck was a great QB. 

 

 

I don’t think you read my post very closely, but you’re entitled to your opinion.   We can agree to disagree.  
 

As to who floated these criticisms,  it’s more than one person.   No need to identify them and I didn’t.   The WHO doesn’t matter as much as the WHAT and I addressed that in my post. 

[Tsarquise]

7 minutes ago, NewColtsFan said:

I don’t think you read my post very closely, but you’re entitled to your opinion.   We can agree to disagree.  
 

As to who floated these criticisms,  it’s more than one person.   No need to identify them and I didn’t.   The WHO doesn’t matter as much as the WHAT and I addressed that in my post. 

I did not identify them, either; it's of no importance. Never said it was. 

 

And, yeah, to put it shortly, I disagree with you. 

 

The vast majority of fans give Luck respect and defend his decision to retire. Your sentiments reflect the majority of Colts and NFL fans. It is a very popular opinion.

 

Your post was an attempt to garner (more) empathy for Andrew Luck because you saw a few people show resentment to one of your favorite players.  

 

 

[Thebrashandthebold]

41 minutes ago, Myles said:

He was a winner.  53 wins 33 losses. 

I agree that he may have been a bit over-rated, but he was very good.  Top 5 QB in the league.   Not top 3 though.  

2018 he showed what he could do on a decent team.   67+ completion %.   4600 yards, 39 TD's 15 INT's.

And where did they end up? As I recall they started 1-5 but got hot and finished strong when a spot in the playoffs and winning the wild card round with the Texans but losing badly to a KC team in the Divisional Round. That was his best season by some people's metrics and I would disagree but he took the Colts nowhere in the playoffs as usual.

[w87r]

3 minutes ago, Tsarquise said:

I did not identify them, either; it's of no importance. Never said it was. 

 

And, yeah, to put it shortly, I disagree with you. 

 

The vast majority of fans give Luck respect and defend his decision to retire. Your sentiments reflect the majority of Colts and NFL fans. It is a very popular opinion.

 

Your post was an attempt to garner (more) empathy for Andrew Luck because you saw a few people show resentment to one of your favorite players.  

 

 

That post make you feel better?

 

 

So you've stated your opinion on what the "attempt" of his thread was suppose to be, now tell us what is the "attempt" behind your post?

[NewColtsFan]

1 minute ago, Tsarquise said:

I did not identify them, either; it's of no importance. Never said it was. 

 

And, yeah, to put it shortly, I disagree with you. 

 

The vast majority of fans give Luck respect and defend his decision to retire. Your sentiments reflect the majority of Colts and NFL fans. It is a very popular opinion.

 

Your post was an attempt to garner (more) empathy for Andrew Luck because you saw a few people show resentment to one of your favorite players.  

 

 

You know after Saturday night, it’s become pretty obvious I could say to you “have a nice day” and you’d find a way to take resentment over that.    I can’t help you. 
 

Go over my post again...   no where did I say these views were a majority opinion.  Didn’t hint it in any way.   I literally said these were new views that had recently surfaced and that I wanted to nip them in the bud before they gained wider acceptance.   So your two attempts to mischaracterize my words show how hard you’re working to twist what I say.  
 

I’m a pretty direct guy.  I say what I mean, and mean what I say.   If I say “X”,  I mean “X”.    You don’t have to come along to claim you know what I actually really mean.    I speak my mind.   You just don’t happen to agree with it.   OK.   That’s your right.  We disagree.   And today is Monday. 

[pgt_rob]

Nice writing NCF. I always look forward to your posts on the forum. You make great contributions here. I just kinda feel bad for Luck. I feel like the coaching staff and the GM let him down. Granted, Luck did everything in his power to put this team on his back, which he most definitely did. But I feel like we shouldn't have done that. There were so many mistakes made with this team GM wise and drafting wise but Luck kept playing through like a champ without making excuses. I wish we were better for Luck at the time. If only we had this current staff and roster before Luck was beat bloody and hung to dry...

[NewColtsFan]

47 minutes ago, w87r said:

This was all you NCF. I had nothing to do with it.

 

Glad this turned out well. Was a little worried at first, when you brought it up, but it's been great.

 

 

You are a major contributor to the forum, always have been. Happy your writing skills are getting the recognition they deserve. Keep up the solid work. 

Your wise counsel got me to re-think my approach.   To tone down and soften my rhetoric.   Without that advice my approach might not have been as well received.  A good neutral set of eyes is always helpful to any writer, and I especially appreciate it.   
 

Thanks again...     

[RollerColt]

@NewColtsFan

 

I’ve always enjoyed your perspectives. To be honest if I see a thread where you’ve posted, I always read to see what you have to say. It’s what I love about this forum. Geographically we have a lot of different people from different locations, and it’s great to have your west coast views. If anyone knows Luck, it’s certainly you. 
 

Keep on posting here, and stay safe brother. 

[NewColtsFan]

27 minutes ago, RollerColt said:

@NewColtsFan

 

I’ve always enjoyed your perspectives. To be honest if I see a thread where you’ve posted, I always read to see what you have to say. It’s what I love about this forum. Geographically we have a lot of different people from different locations, and it’s great to have your west coast views. If anyone knows Luck, it’s certainly you. 
 

Keep on posting here, and stay safe brother. 

You’re incredibly kind and generous with your praise.  I really appreciate it.  I hope I continue to live up to your opinion.   I don’t always succeed but I do try....

 

Thanks again....    

[John Hammonds]

Props to @NewColtsFan for a fantastic post.  Very well written, and very on point.  I always respect your opinion, even if I don't always like some of your personal criticism posts, because you state those opinions directly, in black and white, without nuance or confusion.  It's always Good Stuff.  And I always feel that if NCF likes one of my posts, it had to have been poignant and on-point enough for you to do that.  I thought your post was really good.

 

Also want to send out props to @shasta519 for his response.  Yeah, it wasn't simply "it's Grigson's fault".  There was plenty of blame to go around.  Some to the quality of the players.  Some to the quality of the coaching.  Some to how late it was finally drafting decent offensive linemen.  And, yes, some of the blame has to go to Luck himself, tying on the Superman cape, and doing heroic and physically risky things that any quarterback with a thought towards longevity of career would never do.  He doesn't escape his part of the blame.  There was plenty to go around.  And as you said, it's a tragic story.

 

Good stuff guys!

[Hoose]

14 hours ago, NewColtsFan said:

Apologies in advance, this will be long.   Can't be helped.

 

Since he retired, I have publicly stated I thought Andrew Luck mishandled his own retirement about as badly as possible.  His need for privacy led to him mishandle the end of his career.   So any hate that has boiled up I figure he brought upon himself.   When there are anti-Luck threads,  I mostly stay out of them.   And when I do join in, it's to make one post to set the record straight on some issue,  and then I leave the discussion.  

 

But in the past week or so, a new school of thought has surfaced that has caught my attention.   That Andrew Luck is soft, weak, lacked toughness, was privileged,  didn't work hard enough,  wasn't a good teammate,  and that he was a millionaire before he became a Colt so he had little incentive to stay in the game.   One of the things you learn as you get older is all people see the same thing differently.  What's obvious to one person is a mystery to another.   That's life.

 

But these new views that have surfaced, are, IMO,  so false,  so misinformed,  so 180 degrees opposite of reality,  that I thought I'd come here and nip them in the bud before they have a chance to grow and become accepted wisdom.

 

For starters:   About Luck's so-called lack of toughness....    anyone remember that for the first 4-5 years of his career,  Andrew Luck was the most hit quarterback in the entire NFL?   We used to talk about it here all the time.   The combination of sacks and hits was the highest for Luck, and I don't think there was a close second in that time.   There are plenty of videos on YouTube showing Luck getting blasted.   He typically got right back up and congratulated the defender on a good hit.

 

Anyone remember Luck being on the sidelines of the game in Tennessee in 2015, when he got patted on the chest by a teammate and Luck winced badly in pain?  Shoulder injury.   Later, the same year Luck suffered a torn abdominal muscle and kidney on a tough hit vs. Denver.   He was peeing blood.   He missed half the season.   The hits were beginning to take a toll.   

 

Anyone remember in 2016 when he played a good portion of that year with a sleeve on his left wrist?    More playing in pain.   He underwent surgery after that season for the shoulder injury from the previous season.    The guy played in bad pain for his team for years.

 

Do people remember the effort that Luck put in to trying to re-learn how to throw with his newly constructed shoulder?   In 2017,  he tried every approach, conventional and unconventional, including going to California to work with a baseball throwing coach, and to Europe to work with a shoulder specialist.   And for good measure, that was when the rumors started here about Luck and drugs which never turned into anything.   If you knew Luck at all,  you'd know how funny that idea really is.  He really is a Boy Scout.

 

Do people remember Luck playing the 2018 season, where at the start he clearly wasn't close to 100 percent.   He played and risked humiliating himself for the good of the team.   He played his way into better throwing condition.   He couldn't throw a Hail Mary early in the season on the last play vs. Philly in wk3,  but his arm got stronger during the course of the season and we went to the playoffs in Frank's first year.   Turned into Luck's best year.   Again, he's not even close to 100 percent,  but he plays for the good of the team.

 

And the idea that Luck was a millionaire before he was a Colt is supported by nothing.   His father was a career backup during the years when those guys weren't making millions.  Where did this money come from?   He wound earning roughly $100 Million in his career.   I don't think Daddy's money was ever an issue.  The moment Luck signed his rookie contract, he was financially set for Life.   When he signed his second contract, he was set for several lifetimes.   Luck earned his own money, he doesn't need anyone else's.

 

As for his retirement,  did it ever occur to anyone that Luck might've been ready to retire long before he did?  The first 6-7 months of 2019?   That perhaps the team encouraged him to take his time and see if his latest injury -- a mysterious lower leg injury, would get better?   People complain that Luck quit on the team right before the season started and how unforgivable that is.   Luck as a QB and a person, is driven to do the right thing.   He did few commercial endorsements in his career, turning most of them down.   He formed his own book club  for adults AND kids.   This is the guy who still has a flip-phone.  A guy who drives a Honda Accord.   A guy who bikes around Indy and lives in a downtown condo.   He gladly signs autographs to all who ask.   He's not a guy who's living the millionaire lifestyle. 

 

Luck not only doesn't throw teammates under the bus,  he takes the hits, the bullets, the bad publicity when the team does poorly.  He was a model teammate.  He's still friendly with all his teammates.   Luck was a first in, last out type of guy.   Never criticized by teammates or coaches or front office.    So, it strikes me as not inconceivable that the team knew all year long what was going on with Luck, encouraged him to take his time knowing that if Luck retired,  they were going to go with Brissett.  That doesn't seem unreasonable to consider.   A model teammate does not quit on his team just before the season.   Unless there's more to the story. 

 

The idea that Luck is soft, lacked toughness,  wasn't devoted to the game,  or was privileged is just wildly off base and has no actual evidence to support it.   At his retirement announcement, Luck said he had been in pain for four straight years.  Four.  Straight.  Years.  And more than just the normal football wear and tear.  Terrible debilitating pain.   That's why a Future Hall of Famer walks away early.   Not because of some wrongly perceived lack of any quality.

 

Apologies this post is so long.   But there's a great deal of misinformation out there to correct.   Thanks for reading.

 

Didn't have the chance to comment until now. 

I've been an Andrew Luck fan since his Stanford days. I grew up watching the Indians/Cardinal in Palo Alto, and am a die hard Stanford fan despite the tough times they are going through right now in football. 

I agree with the narrative in this thread that AL was anything but soft; anything but a bad teammate; in fact, he was a first class, standup guy who played through a great deal of physical adversity.

And NCF, you may be right on the money with the idea that the Colts simply stretched out the time from when Luck came to them with his retirement plans. Why wouldn't they? His retirement would be a disaster for the team. 

But despite all my appreciation and respect for Luck, his timing was just awful, and the Colts continue to pay the price today, as we all know. 

I suspect the truth is somewhere in between; he was contemplating retirement for quite awhile, the Colts were aware of it, but he surprised them with the decision when he did. 

I don't blame AL; he gave it all for his team and probably is still paying the price with his health. I just hated his timing; if you're going to walk away, give the team time to adjust and move forward. For a team oriented guy like Luck to do what he did suggests he was majorly, seriously stressed. I will believe, in the end, that he just became overwhelmed with the situation and had to walk away. Tough for the team and its fans like us; no doubt what he felt he had to do for his health and his future. 

 

And as for your contribution to this board, NCF, I truly appreciate your writing and opinion. I don't always agree with it, but I respect it and look forward to reading your thoughts. Lets keep it going on this Board. Its a great forum and a great escape!

[NewColtsFan]

24 minutes ago, Hoose said:

Didn't have the chance to comment until now. 

I've been an Andrew Luck fan since his Stanford days. I grew up watching the Indians/Cardinal in Palo Alto, and am a die hard Stanford fan despite the tough times they are going through right now in football. 

I agree with the narrative in this thread that AL was anything but soft; anything but a bad teammate; in fact, he was a first class, standup guy who played through a great deal of physical adversity.

And NCF, you may be right on the money with the idea that the Colts simply stretched out the time from when Luck came to them with his retirement plans. Why wouldn't they? His retirement would be a disaster for the team. 

But despite all my appreciation and respect for Luck, his timing was just awful, and the Colts continue to pay the price today, as we all know. 

I suspect the truth is somewhere in between; he was contemplating retirement for quite awhile, the Colts were aware of it, but he surprised them with the decision when he did. 

I don't blame AL; he gave it all for his team and probably is still paying the price with his health. I just hated his timing; if you're going to walk away, give the team time to adjust and move forward. For a team oriented guy like Luck to do what he did suggests he was majorly, seriously stressed. I will believe, in the end, that he just became overwhelmed with the situation and had to walk away. Tough for the team and its fans like us; no doubt what he felt he had to do for his health and his future. 

 

And as for your contribution to this board, NCF, I truly appreciate your writing and opinion. I don't always agree with it, but I respect it and look forward to reading your thoughts. Lets keep it going on this Board. Its a great forum and a great escape!

If you grew up watching Stanford when they were the Indians, you’re indeed a long-timer.   When did you start following Stanford?

 

For me, it was the late 60’s, the Plunkett  years.   I just turned 64 this weekend, so it’s been over 50 years.   How about you!

[NFLfan]

19 minutes ago, NewColtsFan said:

I just turned 64 this weekend, so it’s been over 50 years.   How about you!

 

Happy birthday, NCF!  

 

I'm enjoying the thread. Great job. 

[WolverineColtsFan]

Luck was a great QB and he was tough at one point in his career, but in the end he lost his desire to go all in and he quit on the team.  All the rest is window dressing.  I feel no ill will towards him, each man has to make the decisions that are best for he and his family.  But it wasn't, to sum up the excellent post by @NewColtsFan, some sort of noble effort on Luck's part.

 

And it's because he lost that desire to go all in for the game, that is why I would not want him back as the Colts QB.  Because I think once that desire is gone it cannot be acquired again.

[2006Coltsbestever]

Had Luck played just 10 seasons and won a SB he would have been a Hall of Famer, in the 4 seasons he did play very good to great (2012-2014, 2018) he put up Hall of Fame type numbers with the wins included. He had absolutely no run game from 2012-2014 and still got us to an AFC Title Game. Nobody gave us a chance to win at Denver in the 2014 Divisional Round, we beat Peyton and Von Miller. We were 8.5 point underdogs going into that game.

[Tsarquise]

5 hours ago, NewColtsFan said:

You know after Saturday night, it’s become pretty obvious I could say to you “have a nice day” and you’d find a way to take resentment over that.    I can’t help you. 
 

Go over my post again...   no where did I say these views were a majority opinion.  Didn’t hint it in any way.   I literally said these were new views that had recently surfaced and that I wanted to nip them in the bud before they gained wider acceptance.   So your two attempts to mischaracterize my words show how hard you’re working to twist what I say.  
 

I’m a pretty direct guy.  I say what I mean, and mean what I say.   If I say “X”,  I mean “X”.    You don’t have to come along to claim you know what I actually really mean.    I speak my mind.   You just don’t happen to agree with it.   OK.   That’s your right.  We disagree.   And today is Monday. 

Did you know my initial post quoted someone else other than you? The poster stated their false view that Luck did not get enough respect, which was seemingly affected by your initial post that highlighted a seemingly minority view of a lack of respect and empathy for Luck, which prompted me to create a reminder of the fact that your sentiments are spread, repeated and spewed constantly. The perceived flaming views and sentiments that you are trying to extinguish in fear of spreading are not new; they have just been talked about in more "hushed" tones for fear of getting attacked by Luck stans and apologists. 

 

I am aware of your motive of trying to nip the sentiment of resentment towards Luck's retirement in the bud in fear of the opinions of the minority spreading, and I am completely opposed to it. Sorry? I guess? It has nothing to do with you, NewColtsFan. 

 

I don't have a personal vendetta against you. You're far from the first person who holds this opinion about Luck that I have debated with and vociferously opposed.  You are some person posting on the internet; I do not even know you. I even liked one of your posts recently, if I remember correctly. And I am sure I have liked many of your other posts in the past. Sometimes I find your posts annoying, full of condescension and unwarranted vitriol, sprinkled with a bit of narcissism, but sometimes I find your posts full of common sense in threads full of irrationality. You're not my absolute favorite poster, but you are definitely entertaining, and make good posts at times. I certainly take notice in a sea of countless posts. My opposition to your post has NOTHING to do with you, and has everything to do with your sentiment about the subject matter and your motive behind the post. 

 

I  disagree with your gesture of trying to control the narrative and uphold the echo chamber. The nuance of the subject matter needs to be talked about MORE. I disagree with Luck needing more empathy and sympathy than he already gets, because he gets plenty, and people who hold your point of view usually drown out, attack, and try to silence anyone who criticizes Luck or holds him accountable (Kind of like what you're doing now.) I believe he plays a role and should receive due criticism for it. Like I said, most NFL fans and Colts fans completely absolve Luck and blame the Colts and Ryan Grigson exclusively, when it is more nuanced than that; that type of false, nonsensical, narrative drives me crazy, and what you're doing is reinforcing it. 

 

Sorry that I am disturbing your echo chamber, I guess? 

 

 

[2006Coltsbestever]

@NewColtsFan, Happy Birthday. I turn 50 this year and have been watching football since I was like 7, so that is 43 years of watching. 1st SB I remember was when Dallas smoked Denver (77 season). I didn't become a Colts fan until the move in 1984 though.

[CR91]

@Tsarquise

 

There are a lot more that ridicule Andrew for his decision to retire instead of praising him for what he put himself through to put the team on his back with little to no support.

[2006Coltsbestever]

15 minutes ago, CR91 said:

@Tsarquise

 

There are a lot more that ridicule Andrew for his decision to retire instead of praising him for what he put himself through to put the team on his back with little to no support.

I didn't like that he retired 2 weeks before the season but he had some very good to great seasons here. That injury he had vs Denver was life threatening in reality. Lacerated Kidney and peeing blood is no joke.

[Tsarquise]

50 minutes ago, CR91 said:

@Tsarquise

 

There are a lot more that ridicule Andrew for his decision to retire instead of praising him for what he put himself through to put the team on his back with little to no support.

I disagree, I see more of the opposite, and the responses and sentiments here back that up and are similar on every social media platform I have discussed this on.  

 

 

[JediXMan]

Another Luck post the man retired two seasons ago. I respect him as a competitor and person but the timing of his retirement will always linger in my head.

 

[NewColtsFan]

2 hours ago, Tsarquise said:

Did you know my initial post quoted someone else other than you? The poster stated their false view that Luck did not get enough respect, which was seemingly affected by your initial post that highlighted a seemingly minority view of a lack of respect and empathy for Luck, which prompted me to create a reminder of the fact that your sentiments are spread, repeated and spewed constantly. The perceived flaming views and sentiments that you are trying to extinguish in fear of spreading are not new; they have just been talked about in more "hushed" tones for fear of getting attacked by Luck stans and apologists. 

 

I am aware of your motive of trying to nip the sentiment of resentment towards Luck's retirement in the bud in fear of the opinions of the minority spreading, and I am completely opposed to it. Sorry? I guess? It has nothing to do with you, NewColtsFan. 

 

I don't have a personal vendetta against you. You're far from the first person who holds this opinion about Luck that I have debated with and vociferously opposed.  You are some person posting on the internet; I do not even know you. I even liked one of your posts recently, if I remember correctly. And I am sure I have liked many of your other posts in the past. Sometimes I find your posts annoying, full of condescension and unwarranted vitriol, sprinkled with a bit of narcissism, but sometimes I find your posts full of common sense in threads full of irrationality. You're not my absolute favorite poster, but you are definitely entertaining, and make good posts at times. I certainly take notice in a sea of countless posts. My opposition to your post has NOTHING to do with you, and has everything to do with your sentiment about the subject matter and your motive behind the post. 

 

I  disagree with your gesture of trying to control the narrative and uphold the echo chamber. The nuance of the subject matter needs to be talked about MORE. I disagree with Luck needing more empathy and sympathy than he already gets, because he gets plenty, and people who hold your point of view usually drown out, attack, and try to silence anyone who criticizes Luck or holds him accountable (Kind of like what you're doing now.) I believe he plays a role and should receive due criticism for it. Like I said, most NFL fans and Colts fans completely absolve Luck and blame the Colts and Ryan Grigson exclusively, when it is more nuanced than that; that type of false, nonsensical, narrative drives me crazy, and what you're doing is reinforcing it. 

 

Sorry that I am disturbing your echo chamber, I guess? 

 

 

 

Ahhh....     my new best friend,  a member of my Fan Club, is back for more!

 

And I see you continue to tell me what I'm doing even after I tell you that's not what I'm doing. 

 

So, this response will be long.   Mods, I tried to be very careful here,  I think I've stepped carefully without stepping on landmines and getting into trouble.

 

First,  you give me way, WAY too much credit for thinking that I can sway opinion here.   That's not how I approach writing a post.   There is one poster here,  in my judgement, who has the power to sway opinion on that scope and I'm not him.   This post of mine may be very popular,  but I, as a poster, am an incredibly polarizing figure here.   Sometimes for better, but mostly for worse.   So my ability to change hearts and minds is -- at best -- limited.

 

Second,  did you still not read the first real paragraph of my post?   The one where I blame Luck for the way he handled his own retirement?   Where I said he brought on all the anger he's received here by how he handled the end of his career?  Did you not see that?    And I went on to note that I deliberately AVOID going into the numerous anti-Luck threads we've had here the last 17 months and on the few occasions where I have gone into to a thread,  it's to make one post to set the record straight on some issue, and then I leave again.   I don't hang around.   If I'm so determined to change and control the perception of my favorite player,  wouldn't I jump into all anti-Luck threads here?    Wouldn't I?   But I don't.   Those threads often have a Lord of the Flies feel to them.  People don't want to read my views on my favorite player.   They're angry and they want to vent.   Trying to defend Luck in those settings would be a waste of everyone's time. 

 

Third,  I came to write the post that started this thread Late Saturday night, early Sunday morning, when you and two other posters took turns treating me as your personal pinata,  with passive aggressive attacks like you continued to write today.  You know, where you tell me what I good writer I am, and then launch into all my flaws as a human being.   Those are always fun!    The vast majority of the comments that I referenced are new.   I'm guessing 7-10 days old.   But others date a little further back.  But the bottom line,  it IS a new school of thought.   And this website has a long history of posters writing things and readers agreeing.  And more readers join in and they agree too.   Only to eventually have another poster come along and state the facts,  and the facts say not only is the original premise wrong,  but the opposite is true.   An idea can be popular without being true.   As I said in my post,  my goal was to stop this before any unchecked momentum built up a head of steam.  I had no idea how popular my post would be, if at all.   Look at the posts in this thread from @w87r to me.   I consulted with him yesterday about what he thought and how best to express myself.   He says today that he was concerned about the topic.  A topic of Andrew Luck is a potential flash point.   There's a segment of our community that has been mad at him since Late August of 2019, and we didn't know how my post would be received?   Clearly I'm happy with the reaction,  but I had no idea it would go this way.   I hoped it would,  but I didn't know if I'd get my wish.   And that's how I publicly responded.   That said,  I don't hold enough sway here to change that many hearts and minds.

 

Fourth,  you can say all you want that this is not personal.   Sorry, but that dog won't hunt.   Nobody writes the grocery list of negative comments about a person that you have to me Saturday night and now today without it being personal.   If you think otherwise,  I think you're either kidding yourself,  or deflecting to save yourself.  

 

Fifth...   you finish off your next to last paragraph with this dandy sentence...   quote:   "My opposition to your post has NOTHING to do with you, and has everything to do with your sentiment about the subject matter and your motive behind the post."     Since you admit that you do not know me,  you should know this...  You don't know my motives.   I'm not trying to rescue the reputation of my favorite player.   I defended Grigson when I thought it was warranted.   I defended Pagano when I thought it was warranted,  and other players and coaches when I thought it was appropriate.   I'm a member of the media.  Retired now, and I try and get my "stories",  my posts,  as right as I can make them.   I like to be as accurate as I can.   I try to state my opinion as clearly as I can when I'm writing an opinion.   I'm not always successful,  but I do try.   So, when I tell you that I'm trying to clear the record as best as I can on Andrew Luck and I tried to include as many facts as I could,  THAT is my intention.   To get the story on Luck as right as I can.  And I would've written the exact same thing even if Luck wasn't my favorite player.   And by the way,  there are a number of really good posts in this thread that added more facts on Luck that I either had forgotten,  or didn't include because my post was long as it is.   I'm interested in getting a story right.   In getting facts right.    If you disagree -- fine, I'm OK with that.   Just respond with facts of your own, and not your opinion.    Otherwise....  I can't help you.

 

[crazycolt1]

Some take this a little too serious. 

Over thinking is hazardous to your mental health. 

[Tsarquise]

57 minutes ago, NewColtsFan said:

 

Ahhh....     my new best friend,  a member of my Fan Club, is back for more!

 

And I see you continue to tell me what I'm doing even after I tell you that's not what I'm doing. 

 

So, this response will be long.   Mods, I tried to be very careful here,  I think I've stepped carefully without stepping on landmines and getting into trouble.

 

First,  you give me way, WAY too much credit for thinking that I can sway opinion here.   That's not how I approach writing a post.   There is one poster here,  in my judgement, who has the power to sway opinion on that scope and I'm not him.   This post of mine may be very popular,  but I, as a poster, am an incredibly polarizing figure here.   Sometimes for better, but mostly for worse.   So my ability to change hearts and minds is -- at best -- limited.

 

Second,  did you still not read the first real paragraph of my post?   The one where I blame Luck for the way he handled his own retirement?   Where I said he brought on all the anger he's received here by how he handled the end of his career?  Did you not see that?    And I went on to note that I deliberately AVOID going into the numerous anti-Luck threads we've had here the last 17 months and on the few occasions where I have gone into to a thread,  it's to make one post to set the record straight on some issue, and then I leave again.   I don't hang around.   If I'm so determined to change and control the perception of my favorite player,  wouldn't I jump into all anti-Luck threads here?    Wouldn't I?   But I don't.   Those threads often have a Lord of the Flies feel to them.  People don't want to read my views on my favorite player.   They're angry and they want to vent.   Trying to defend Luck in those settings would be a waste of everyone's time. 

 

Third,  I came to write the post that started this thread Late Saturday night, early Sunday morning, when you and two other posters took turns treating me as your personal pinata,  with passive aggressive attacks like you continued to write today.  You know, where you tell me what I good writer I am, and then launch into all my flaws as a human being.   Those are always fun!    The vast majority of the comments that I referenced are new.   I'm guessing 7-10 days old.   But others date a little further back.  But the bottom line,  it IS a new school of thought.   And this website has a long history of posters writing things and readers agreeing.  And more readers join in and they agree too.   Only to eventually have another poster come along and state the facts,  and the facts say not only is the original premise wrong,  but the opposite is true.   An idea can be popular without being true.   As I said in my post,  my goal was to stop this before any unchecked momentum built up a head of steam.  I had no idea how popular my post would be, if at all.   Look at the posts in this thread from @w87r to me.   I consulted with him yesterday about what he thought and how best to express myself.   He says today that he was concerned about the topic.  A topic of Andrew Luck is a potential flash point.   There's a segment of our community that has been mad at him since Late August of 2019, and we didn't know how my post would be received?   Clearly I'm happy with the reaction,  but I had no idea it would go this way.   I hoped it would,  but I didn't know if I'd get my wish.   And that's how I publicly responded.   That said,  I don't hold enough sway here to change that many hearts and minds.

 

Fourth,  you can say all you want that this is not personal.   Sorry, but that dog won't hunt.   Nobody writes the grocery list of negative comments about a person that you have to me Saturday night and now today without it being personal.   If you think otherwise,  I think you're either kidding yourself,  or deflecting to save yourself.  

 

Fifth...   you finish off your next to last paragraph with this dandy sentence...   quote:   "My opposition to your post has NOTHING to do with you, and has everything to do with your sentiment about the subject matter and your motive behind the post."     Since you admit that you do not know me,  you should know this...  You don't know my motives.   I'm not trying to rescue the reputation of my favorite player.   I defended Grigson when I thought it was warranted.   I defended Pagano when I thought it was warranted,  and other players and coaches when I thought it was appropriate.   I'm a member of the media.  Retired now, and I try and get my "stories",  my posts,  as right as I can make them.   I like to be as accurate as I can.   I try to state my opinion as clearly as I can when I'm writing an opinion.   I'm not always successful,  but I do try.   So, when I tell you that I'm trying to clear the record as best as I can on Andrew Luck and I tried to include as many facts as I could,  THAT is my intention.   To get the story on Luck as right as I can.  And I would've written the exact same thing even if Luck wasn't my favorite player.   And by the way,  there are a number of really good posts in this thread that added more facts on Luck that I either had forgotten,  or didn't include because my post was long as it is.   I'm interested in getting a story right.   In getting facts right.    If you disagree -- fine, I'm OK with that.   Just respond with facts of your own, and not your opinion.    Otherwise....  I can't help you.

 

You literally said the following:

 

"literally said these were new views that had recently surfaced and that I wanted to nip them in the bud before they gained wider acceptance."

 

Is that not an attempt at swaying opinion?

 

So I do know your motives, uh, because... you stated them....

 

Why is "Saturday night" (lol I didn't even remember when it was.)  still on your mind? Pretty sure that all I said was that your posts are condescending, you play arbiter, and take the forum too seriously, which is true. I didn't say anything that bad, geez.

 

This is is a very opinion based subject, but the fact is that he quit because of not wanting to deal with injuries and didn't want to face them and rehab anymore, and to some, that makes him soft. It makes sense; it is understandable to hold that position. His passion for football obviously didn't outweigh that. 

 

But (drinks the kool-aide) Yeah, yeah, Andrew Luck is great, he is not soft. Great career, great guy. Toughest player to ever play. I appreciate all that he sacrificed! 

 

Amazing post, NCF! You're such a great writer!

[NewColtsFan]

53 minutes ago, Tsarquise said:

You literally said the following:

 

"literally said these were new views that had recently surfaced and that I wanted to nip them in the bud before they gained wider acceptance."

 

Is that not an attempt at swaying opinion?

 

So I do know your motives, uh, because... you stated them....

 

Why is "Saturday night" (lol I didn't even remember when it was.)  still on your mind? Pretty sure that all I said was that your posts are condescending, you play arbiter, and take the forum too seriously, which is true. I didn't say anything that bad, geez.

 

This is is a very opinion based subject, but the fact is that he quit because of not wanting to deal with injuries and didn't want to face them and rehab anymore, and to some, that makes him soft. It makes sense; it is understandable to hold that position. His passion for football obviously didn't outweigh that. 

 

But (drinks the kool-aide) Yeah, yeah, Andrew Luck is great, he is not soft. Great career, great guy. Toughest player to ever play. I appreciate all that he sacrificed! 

 

Amazing post, NCF! You're such a great writer!

Ahh....   more sarcasm.   A nice retreat.  I love people who insult people and then tell the person they’re too sensitive.   I’ve got plenty more to say, but I can sense this is well past the Sell By date.   So this is ending. 

 

Last thought, nice out of context use of a quote that was surrounded by far more information that would put things in proper context.    Nice cherry pick. 
 

I said it repeatedly Saturday night and I’m saying it again now.   Block me.  Ignore me.   You’ve been cruising for a fight, itching for one.   This IS personal for you and I’m done with it.    Good luck to you. 

[John Hammonds]

12 hours ago, NewColtsFan said:

If you grew up watching Stanford when they were the Indians, you’re indeed a long-timer.   When did you start following Stanford?

 

For me, it was the late 60’s, the Plunkett  years.   I just turned 64 this weekend, so it’s been over 50 years.   How about you!

Happy birthday @NewColtsFan!  I hope you are enjoying your retirement.  I'm 10 years behind you.  I can see the finish line from here, but it's still a long, hard way away!

[Myles]

9 hours ago, CR91 said:

@Tsarquise

 

There are a lot more that ridicule Andrew for his decision to retire instead of praising him for what he put himself through to put the team on his back with little to no support.

I kind of see the opposite.  

I am on both sides.   I'm a Luck fan and don't blame him for retiring with his load of money.   I'd probably do the same thing.   However I don't like how he waited till the season was about to start to do it.   I thought that was a bad move. 

I would love to see him come back and take over this team.  

[Fluke_33]

Another fine thread devolves into something unnecessary 

[Nesjan3]

I dont think many people attack him personally. The hards facts are retiring 10 days before the season or whatever it was set the franchise backwards bigtime. Thats why people are mad, or were, still are doesnt matter. It doesnt look like he is coming back. People will have their opinions. Great guy, handled his retirement very badly and had reprucutions for everyone involved.

[w87r]

2 hours ago, Fluke_33 said:

Another fine thread devolves into something unnecessary 

Just how some people are.

 

 

 

Just have to brush them off and move on.

 

Good job handling it NCF.

 

 

Some posters just try to bait you to get into arguments with them.

[Hoose]

22 hours ago, NewColtsFan said:

If you grew up watching Stanford when they were the Indians, you’re indeed a long-timer.   When did you start following Stanford?

 

For me, it was the late 60’s, the Plunkett  years.   I just turned 64 this weekend, so it’s been over 50 years.   How about you!

Same. I remember Plunkett's first game, I believe in 1967, where they blew out San Jose State 68-21 or something like that. Randy Vataha caught a boatload of TD passes that day. Fun times. I'm one year ahead of you, NCF, so we were probably in the stands together at some point. There used to be a family plan where two adults and three kids could come in on one pass. We'd hang outside the entrance to the stadium and wait for a family to come through with just one or two kids, beg like crazy to let us join them, and waltz in for free. Great memories. 

Here's hoping for a great year for our Colts and Stanford gangs. I'm keeping the faith!

 

P.S. Went to Jordan Jr. High and Paly High School. 

[NannyMcafee]

Here we go again... 

 

Id rather have the Manning vs Brady debate. 

[Four2itus]

Get a room.

[jmac_48]

@NewColtsFan

Thanks for what you said, how you said it.

I have been harboring some anger and resentment toward Andrew, seeing it laid out in black and white like you have has finally gotten me through my grief therapy.

Although I still have "what if" regret, I think I am no longer angry with Andrew Luck one of my favorite players ever...

and that's from a kid that's been a Colts fan since the 50's. 

Thanks again!

[esmort]

 .... 

[Lucky Colts Fan]

4 minutes ago, esmort said:

 .... 

 

 ... 

[Lucky Colts Fan]

18 hours ago, Tsarquise said:

You literally said the following:

 

"literally said these were new views that had recently surfaced and that I wanted to nip them in the bud before they gained wider acceptance."

 

Is that not an attempt at swaying opinion?

 

So I do know your motives, uh, because... you stated them....

 

Why is "Saturday night" (lol I didn't even remember when it was.)  still on your mind? Pretty sure that all I said was that your posts are condescending, you play arbiter, and take the forum too seriously, which is true. I didn't say anything that bad, geez.

 

This is is a very opinion based subject, but the fact is that he quit because of not wanting to deal with injuries and didn't want to face them and rehab anymore, and to some, that makes him soft. It makes sense; it is understandable to hold that position. His passion for football obviously didn't outweigh that. 

 

But (drinks the kool-aide) Yeah, yeah, Andrew Luck is great, he is not soft. Great career, great guy. Toughest player to ever play. I appreciate all that he sacrificed! 

 

Amazing post, NCF! You're such a great writer!

[RollerColt]

6 minutes ago, Lucky Colts Fan said:

 

 ... 

 

2 minutes ago, Lucky Colts Fan said:

this place sometimes I tell ya.