Colts have most underrated wr corp in nfl

[CurBeatElite]

On 6/29/2021 at 11:30 AM, Thebrashandthebold said:

Would those receivers you mentioned have been as good as they were playing with Luck? Manning made people around him better. Luck never did that with the possible exception of TY Hilton.

 

I tend to disagree here.  Reggie had one of his 3 best seasons in Luck's rookie year, so Luck was obviously capable of having WRs put up big numbers.  Luck took the team from 2-14 to 11-5 and had an incredible amount of comebacks as a rookie (well, really throughout his career).  Aside from sometimes starting out slow (early interceptions), it was pretty common for Luck to put the team on his back and lead them to victory while he had one of (if not the) worst OLs in the league and subpar talent around him compared to Peyton (as @NewColtsFanpointed out).  Luck made Donnie Avery look very good at times, for example.  Eric Ebron had by far his best year when he had Luck at QB (not like he was playing with a slouch in Stafford or with Big Ben before/after Indy, but his best year reception/yards/td wise all came with Luck, so hard to argue that Luck didn't make him look better).  Coby Fleener and Dwayne Allen both had their best years with Luck at the helm..

 

IMO, it isn't really fair to say Luck would never have been as good as Peyton.  His stats the first few years suggested he was on pace to break most NFL passing records if he was able to stay healthy (I think Mahommes is the only QB in league history to get off to a hotter start than Luck did and Mahommes was coming into a team picking in the mid-20's, not the worst team in the league).  Obviously, you can't really make an argument that Luck is better than Peyton as he didn't have the longevity, didn't have the SB rings, etc... but Luck was well on his way to being an elite, HOF caliber player before injuries took a toll.

 

Aside from lacking talent that Peyton had (not just at WR/TE/RB but maybe most important being OL), Luck came into the league with a brand new GM (who by all accounts created a pretty toxic environment).  Peyton came into the league with a HOF GM.  Luck came into the league with a first year head coach (who was very defensive minded), Peyton came into the league with Mora a coach who had a ton of experience (not a HOF coach, but a good coach who had plenty of experience).  For that, I blame Irsay - knowing we were going to take a QB #1 overall after finishing 2-14, it is my opinion that Irsay should have brought in an experienced HC and/or GM (my preference would have been both) rather than sort of experimenting with a young GM who had no experience running a franchise and a first year HC.  Aside from that, Luck had his offensive coordinator change almost every year he played.  As @NewColtsFanpointed out, Manning had a lot of consistency with Tom Moore around almost his whole career and with Howard Mudd helping the OL pretty much his whole career.  

 

Luck and Peyton are far different QBs.  Luck was much more mobile than Peyton ever was and had a stronger arm than Peyton.  Peyton relied (especially as his career went on) on WRs running crisp routes and being in the spot they were supposed to be to catch the ball when Peyton put it there.  Luck extended a lot of plays and made WRs look better many times by getting the ball to them on broken down plays.  Peyton played under Moore who had a precise offense.. Luck started with Arians' 'no risk it no biscuit' O and then switched to others seemingly every year throughout his career.  Impossible to say Luck was better than Peyton, especially over the course of their careers because Luck dealt with injuries early and often in his short career... but also impossible to say that Luck didn't start out on his way to a HOF career (had he stayed healthy, no saying he would have been definitively better than Peyton, but also hard not to think he would have at least came close to catching up to some of Peyton's stats).

 

On 6/29/2021 at 1:22 PM, EastStreet said:

It's all subjective, and all opinion. I do agree Marv was probably better, but I wouldn't say it's because of route running. Height would be my differentiator. But I also know TY's numbers would have been easier better with PM (putting him on par with Marv's stats). And you can say Marv might have helped PM's stats, but you'd be intellectually dishonest IMO if you think Luck was on the same level as PM, so the benefit  clearly goes to Marv having a better QB.

 

OK, that's fine and dandy that Marv has the QB benefit.  Fact of the matter is, if TY and Marv were on the same team, TY wouldn't be the #1 on the team (he'd be behind Marv).  If TY, Marv and Reggie were all on the same team, TY would be behind Marv (#1), Reggie (#2) as a slot WR.  

 

Marv was arguably the best route runner in NFL history.  A good chunk of DBs from his era said he was by far the best they had to face.   I have never heard anyone throw TY's name out as a top route runner of all time or of his generation (not even on the colts.com forum, but especially not from opponents, commentators or others with less bias than those of us on here).  Marv was listed at 6'0" 185 lbs.  TY is listed at 5'10" 183 lbs... they're both fairly small WRs and I don't think height had a lot to do with being the differential factor of their careers.  Look at TY and Marv's best years ever and then look at the stats of Luck and Peyton the same years... TY in 2016 had 91 receptions, 1448 yards, 6 TDs (this was by far his best year and it doesn't touch any of Marv's top 4 or 5 years)... Marv in 2002 had 143 receptions, 1,722 yards, 11 TDs.... Luck in 2016 threw for 63.5%, 4,240 yards, 7.8 avg yards per attempt, 31 TDs, 13 INTs (not counting his rushing stats)... Peyton in 2002 threw for 66.3%, 4,200 yards, 7.1 y/a, 27 TDs, 19 INTs.  Luck was slightly below Peyton in completion percent and slightly better than him in yards, y/a, TDs and threw 6 less INTs -- they were pretty darn close stats wise those years, and the league was more tailored to WRs in 2016 than it was in 2002, by far.  TY and Marv were obviously the main targets on the Colts' offense in those respective seasons... see my stats above, Marv produced week-in and week-out... TY had a few monster games, but was effectively taken out of 7 games in his best year... Marv was getting more defensive attention and DBs could maul WRs in 2002 and he was unstoppable, on nearly 50% of the games he played in during his best year, TY was able to be stopped.  That's not a height thing.

 

23 hours ago, NewColtsFan said:

I said at that time and still think to this day….

 

That Luck had Hall of Fame talent….   But you have to have some help along the way…..  things have to go right for you.   It’s not that I didn’t think Luck would be great — I absolutely did.   Just not as great as Peyton.  That’s a pretty high bar to clear. 

 

As I said earlier, it would be very hard for Luck to be better than Peyton... though, I think Luck was on pace to be a sure-fire HOFer if not for injuries.  He had some darn good numbers and was one of the best rushing QBs in the league when he was in there.  My guess is, if he played the same amount of years as Peyton, he would have surpassed or been very close to surpassing several of Peyton's stat lines (granted, an easier era to pass in)... but who knows.

[EastStreet]

4 hours ago, CurBeatElite said:

 

I tend to disagree here.  Reggie had one of his 3 best seasons in Luck's rookie year, so Luck was obviously capable of having WRs put up big numbers.  Luck took the team from 2-14 to 11-5 and had an incredible amount of comebacks as a rookie (well, really throughout his career).  Aside from sometimes starting out slow (early interceptions), it was pretty common for Luck to put the team on his back and lead them to victory while he had one of (if not the) worst OLs in the league and subpar talent around him compared to Peyton (as @NewColtsFanpointed out).  Luck made Donnie Avery look very good at times, for example.  Eric Ebron had by far his best year when he had Luck at QB (not like he was playing with a slouch in Stafford or with Big Ben before/after Indy, but his best year reception/yards/td wise all came with Luck, so hard to argue that Luck didn't make him look better).  Coby Fleener and Dwayne Allen both had their best years with Luck at the helm..

Reggie had 1300+ with with Manning, when Marvin was still playing. Reggie had 1300+ with Luck, and he was the center piece.

Reggie and Marvin both had 1300+ in 2006. 

4 hours ago, CurBeatElite said:

 

IMO, it isn't really fair to say Luck would never have been as good as Peyton.  His stats the first few years suggested he was on pace to break most NFL passing records if he was able to stay healthy (I think Mahommes is the only QB in league history to get off to a hotter start than Luck did and Mahommes was coming into a team picking in the mid-20's, not the worst team in the league).  Obviously, you can't really make an argument that Luck is better than Peyton as he didn't have the longevity, didn't have the SB rings, etc... but Luck was well on his way to being an elite, HOF caliber player before injuries took a toll.

 

Aside from lacking talent that Peyton had (not just at WR/TE/RB but maybe most important being OL), Luck came into the league with a brand new GM (who by all accounts created a pretty toxic environment).  Peyton came into the league with a HOF GM.  Luck came into the league with a first year head coach (who was very defensive minded), Peyton came into the league with Mora a coach who had a ton of experience (not a HOF coach, but a good coach who had plenty of experience).  For that, I blame Irsay - knowing we were going to take a QB #1 overall after finishing 2-14, it is my opinion that Irsay should have brought in an experienced HC and/or GM (my preference would have been both) rather than sort of experimenting with a young GM who had no experience running a franchise and a first year HC.  Aside from that, Luck had his offensive coordinator change almost every year he played.  As @NewColtsFanpointed out, Manning had a lot of consistency with Tom Moore around almost his whole career and with Howard Mudd helping the OL pretty much his whole career.  

 

Luck and Peyton are far different QBs.  Luck was much more mobile than Peyton ever was and had a stronger arm than Peyton.  Peyton relied (especially as his career went on) on WRs running crisp routes and being in the spot they were supposed to be to catch the ball when Peyton put it there.  Luck extended a lot of plays and made WRs look better many times by getting the ball to them on broken down plays.  Peyton played under Moore who had a precise offense.. Luck started with Arians' 'no risk it no biscuit' O and then switched to others seemingly every year throughout his career.  Impossible to say Luck was better than Peyton, especially over the course of their careers because Luck dealt with injuries early and often in his short career... but also impossible to say that Luck didn't start out on his way to a HOF career (had he stayed healthy, no saying he would have been definitively better than Peyton, but also hard not to think he would have at least came close to catching up to some of Peyton's stats).

 

 

OK, that's fine and dandy that Marv has the QB benefit.  Fact of the matter is, if TY and Marv were on the same team, TY wouldn't be the #1 on the team (he'd be behind Marv).  If TY, Marv and Reggie were all on the same team, TY would be behind Marv (#1), Reggie (#2) as a slot WR.  

 

Marv was arguably the best route runner in NFL history.  A good chunk of DBs from his era said he was by far the best they had to face.   I have never heard anyone throw TY's name out as a top route runner of all time or of his generation (not even on the colts.com forum, but especially not from opponents, commentators or others with less bias than those of us on here).  Marv was listed at 6'0" 185 lbs.  TY is listed at 5'10" 183 lbs... they're both fairly small WRs and I don't think height had a lot to do with being the differential factor of their careers.  Look at TY and Marv's best years ever and then look at the stats of Luck and Peyton the same years... TY in 2016 had 91 receptions, 1448 yards, 6 TDs (this was by far his best year and it doesn't touch any of Marv's top 4 or 5 years)... Marv in 2002 had 143 receptions, 1,722 yards, 11 TDs.... Luck in 2016 threw for 63.5%, 4,240 yards, 7.8 avg yards per attempt, 31 TDs, 13 INTs (not counting his rushing stats)... Peyton in 2002 threw for 66.3%, 4,200 yards, 7.1 y/a, 27 TDs, 19 INTs.  Luck was slightly below Peyton in completion percent and slightly better than him in yards, y/a, TDs and threw 6 less INTs -- they were pretty darn close stats wise those years, and the league was more tailored to WRs in 2016 than it was in 2002, by far.  TY and Marv were obviously the main targets on the Colts' offense in those respective seasons... see my stats above, Marv produced week-in and week-out... TY had a few monster games, but was effectively taken out of 7 games in his best year... Marv was getting more defensive attention and DBs could maul WRs in 2002 and he was unstoppable, on nearly 50% of the games he played in during his best year, TY was able to be stopped.  That's not a height thing.

 

 

As I said earlier, it would be very hard for Luck to be better than Peyton... though, I think Luck was on pace to be a sure-fire HOFer if not for injuries.  He had some darn good numbers and was one of the best rushing QBs in the league when he was in there.  My guess is, if he played the same amount of years as Peyton, he would have surpassed or been very close to surpassing several of Peyton's stat lines (granted, an easier era to pass in)... but who knows.

You seem to want to give Luck the benefit of the doubt in every area, so I doubt me publishing stats, or stats driven logic, will add any benefit to the conversation. I'll just leave it at this. I see Manning as elite, one of the all time greats. Most experts agree with that.  He didn't always have a great team around him, and he put the team on his back plenty. He led the league 3 or 4 times in both game winning drives and 4Q comebacks. Luck never did that. Luck was good/great. It's just opinion, but I think most agree.

[NewColtsFan]

21 minutes ago, EastStreet said:

 

You seem to want to give Luck the benefit of the doubt in every area, so I doubt me publishing stats, or stats driven logic, will add any benefit to the conversation. I'll just leave it at this. I see Manning as elite, one of the all time greats. Most experts agree with that.  He didn't always have a great team around him, and he put the team on his back plenty. He led the league 3 or 4 times in both game winning drives and 4Q comebacks. Luck never did that. Luck was good/great. It's just opinion, but I think most agree.

 

Poppycock.    Nonsense.    And especially for a guy who says he uses "stats driven logic".

 

Here are some stats cut and pasted straight from Luck's wikipedia page.    You don't even seem to be awåre of any of them.

 

Records and achievements[edit]

**Most passing yards in a single game by a rookie quarterback: 433 (vs Miami Dolphins) (11/4/12)[140]

**Most passing yards by a rookie in a single season (4,374)[59]

**Most game-winning drives by a rookie quarterback (7)[141]

**Most passing yards for a quarterback through his first 2 seasons (8,196)[142]

**Most passing yards for a quarterback through his first 3 seasons (12,688)[90]

**Most passing yards for a quarterback through his first 5 postseason games (1,703)[143]

**Most consecutive 350-yard passing games on the road (5)[86]

**Most pass attempts per game, career: (38.3)[144]

**Fifth highest passing yards total in a playoff game (443) (Wild-Card game against the Kansas City Chiefs on January 4, 2014).[74]

**First quarterback to throw for more than 350 yards in five consecutive road games[145]

**First quarterback to throw for 370 yards or more, 4 touchdowns, and have a completion percentage 70 percent or above in consecutive games[80]

**Third player to throw for 3,000 yards in the first nine games, alongside Peyton Manning and Drew Brees (twice)[146]

[Nickster]

12 hours ago, NewColtsFan said:

 

Poppycock.    Nonsense.    And especially for a guy who says he uses "stats driven logic".

 

Here are some stats cut and pasted straight from Luck's wikipedia page.    You don't even seem to be awåre of any of them.

 

Records and achievements[edit]

**Most passing yards in a single game by a rookie quarterback: 433 (vs Miami Dolphins) (11/4/12)[140]

**Most passing yards by a rookie in a single season (4,374)[59]

**Most game-winning drives by a rookie quarterback (7)[141]

**Most passing yards for a quarterback through his first 2 seasons (8,196)[142]

**Most passing yards for a quarterback through his first 3 seasons (12,688)[90]

**Most passing yards for a quarterback through his first 5 postseason games (1,703)[143]

**Most consecutive 350-yard passing games on the road (5)[86]

**Most pass attempts per game, career: (38.3)[144]

**Fifth highest passing yards total in a playoff game (443) (Wild-Card game against the Kansas City Chiefs on January 4, 2014).[74]

**First quarterback to throw for more than 350 yards in five consecutive road games[145]

**First quarterback to throw for 370 yards or more, 4 touchdowns, and have a completion percentage 70 percent or above in consecutive games[80]

**Third player to throw for 3,000 yards in the first nine games, alongside Peyton Manning and Drew Brees (twice)[146]

Poppycock.  That’s awesome.  And I completely agree.  Andy’s INts we’re high, but So we’re Manning’s from until year 6.

 

East uses Stats when it fits his agenda and other stuff when it doesn’t.  Manning’s offensive rosters were waaaayyyyyyyy better than Andy’s.

 

You can’t possibly use stats to explain everything .  There are so many layers of context. Andy carried what I consider to be bad to average rosters.

Stats tell A story, seasons results tell a story, and context frames these stories.  It is a quantitative as well as qualitative story.

 

what I try to do is imagine role reversal which is impossible to quantify with numbers only.  For instance, Manning Brady debate.  Reverse the roles.  How good would Manning be on NES team.  How would Manning have done with the crap Luck had around him?  How would Andy have done with th pe stability and talent Manning had?

 

East tries to treat football like basebal.  Baseball is about as close to a completely quantifiable sport as there is.  There are exclusively one one matchups and the numbers each season tell almost the entire story .  Batting lineup protection adds some context but not much.

 

football has probably the least objective influence on judgement .  I don’t know and don’t really care and honestly don’t know if it’s true or not, but I renemeber dad saying Archie Manning was good even though his team sucked when I was a kid.  And when I was growing up the Saints were the poster franchise for sucking.

 

there is a trenedous amount of context that has To be used all the time grading ball players.  A WR can be beating the pants off his defender all season long and have a bad QB or the line  can suck and the WRs stats look pedestrian.  A qB can only look so good.

 

id say Manning was better.  His reading and release were a marvel to watch, but he was  also great at patiently waiting for guys to one open.  Andy was fearless and morel talented physically IMo.  He made throws Manning couldn’t but he wasn’t near as accurate.

 

Manning’s balll skills were next level though.  Puts him clearly over Andy IMo.  But I absolurlwy see the counter argument.  What if Andy had Peytons talent?  Wish we could have seen it.

 

[CurBeatElite]

1 hour ago, EastStreet said:

Reggie had 1300+ with with Manning, when Marvin was still playing. Reggie had 1300+ with Luck, and he was the center piece.

Reggie and Marvin both had 1300+ in 2006. 

You seem to want to give Luck the benefit of the doubt in every area, so I doubt me publishing stats, or stats driven logic, will add any benefit to the conversation. I'll just leave it at this. I see Manning as elite, one of the all time greats. Most experts agree with that.  He didn't always have a great team around him, and he put the team on his back plenty. He led the league 3 or 4 times in both game winning drives and 4Q comebacks. Luck never did that. Luck was good/great. It's just opinion, but I think most agree.

 

The argument here is about TY vs. Marvin.   So, I'm not sure what you're getting at by saying Marv and Reggie both had 1300 yards in 2006.. not sure why that matters? If you want to talk about stats driven logic, you're losing me here with this as your main argument.  That year, no other person on the Colts had >400 yards (Ben Utecht was 3rd on the team with 377 yards, Dallas Clark played 12 games and had 367 yards to be 3rd on the team, and Addai's 325 yards made him the only other to have >300 yards that year).  Peyton threw for 4,397 yards with 61.8% of the yards going to Marv and Reggie (with Marv having 56 more yards than Reggie).  In 2014, Luck threw for 4,761 yards (~400 yards more than Peyton in 2006)  with TY having 1,345 yards, Reggie (coming off injury) 779 yards, Fleener had 774 yards, Moncrief & Nicks both over 400 yards, Dwayne Allen at 395 yards, and Ahmad Bradshaw at 300 yards.  Are you saying Luck was better at spreading the ball around than Peyton?  Are you saying TY had trouble being the focal point of the offense?

 

Doesn't really matter.. the post I replied to was suggesting WRs weren't as good with Luck as they were with Peyton.  Reggie's best year of his career was in 2007, the year which Marv got hurt and missed 11+ games (he had 104 receptions, 1,510 yards, 10 TDs)... his next best year was 2010 (the year after Marv retired, he went for 111, 1,355, 6 TDs) ... both of those years, Peyton was a polished veteran and Reggie was the focal point of the receiving offense.  His 3rd best year was 2012, he went for 106 receptions, 1,355 yards, 5 TDs and missed a start and a portion of another game due to injury (nearly identical to stats in Peyton's most prolific year for the Colts in terms of completions and yardage which was 2010)... his 2012 stats were in Luck's rookie year -- Peyton was nowhere near as good as Luck comparing rookie Peyton vs. rookie Andrew.

 

I'm not saying Luck is better than Peyton over a career, nor did I ever say that.   I said Luck had a better start to his career than Peyton (Luck took a 2-14 team to an 11-5 team, Peyton started out 3-13)... Luck had the most passing yards in NFL history as a rookie, over his first two seasons, and over his first three seasons -- it is pretty fair to say, if Luck stayed healthy for as long as Peyton did, he was on pace to having a record setting career.  He didn't, and therefore, I don't think anyone will say Luck had a better career than Peyton.  It is hard to call Luck elite as well, I agree, but that is mainly a reflection of his injuries and his shortened career -- that said, he was still an all-star QB the years he was healthy and if not elite, he was right there in the mix.

 

Luck set the single season Colts passing yards record (surpassing Peyton) during his time here.... and guess what, TY's very best season in terms of yards is still behind Reggie's best season and behind 3 of Marv's seasons.  TY's very best season in terms of receptions would rank behind 6 of Marv's seasons and 4 of Reggie's seasons.  TD wise, TY's best season would be tied with Marv's 10th best season and tied with Reggie's 5th best season.  

 

You are the one cherry picking stats here in a 'stats logic' argument.  Fact of the matter is, Luck threw for >4,200 yards 4 times and >3,800 yards another season.  His numbers when he played in Indy were pretty similar to Peyton's (though Luck did surpass Peyton's single season yardage record), albeit for a shorter duration.  During that time, when TY was the focal point of the offense, he was able to be taken out of games.  When Marv was the focal point of the offense, in a much less WR league, he was unstoppable.

 

As I said before... if TY and Marv were on the same team in their primes, Marv would be the #1 WR 100% of the time.  If TY were on the same team as Marv and Reggie while all during their prime, Marv would be #1, Reg would be #2, TY would be #3... 100% of the time.

 

Marv and Reggie are HOF WRs.  TY is a good/very good WR when he is healthy, which he has struggled with over the course of his career (kinda like Luck), but he's not an elite #1 like Marv or Reggie and over his 9 year career, there is only one season where you can make a decent argument for him being a very good #1 (elite in yards, very good in receptions, average or below average in TDs in his best year).

 

 

 

39 minutes ago, NewColtsFan said:

 

Poppycock.    Nonsense.    And especially for a guy who says he uses "stats driven logic".

 

Here are some stats cut and pasted straight from Luck's wikipedia page.    You don't even seem to be awåre of any of them.

 

Records and achievements[edit]

**Most passing yards in a single game by a rookie quarterback: 433 (vs Miami Dolphins) (11/4/12)[140]

**Most passing yards by a rookie in a single season (4,374)[59]

**Most game-winning drives by a rookie quarterback (7)[141]

**Most passing yards for a quarterback through his first 2 seasons (8,196)[142]

**Most passing yards for a quarterback through his first 3 seasons (12,688)[90]

**Most passing yards for a quarterback through his first 5 postseason games (1,703)[143]

**Most consecutive 350-yard passing games on the road (5)[86]

**Most pass attempts per game, career: (38.3)[144]

**Fifth highest passing yards total in a playoff game (443) (Wild-Card game against the Kansas City Chiefs on January 4, 2014).[74]

**First quarterback to throw for more than 350 yards in five consecutive road games[145]

**First quarterback to throw for 370 yards or more, 4 touchdowns, and have a completion percentage 70 percent or above in consecutive games[80]

**Third player to throw for 3,000 yards in the first nine games, alongside Peyton Manning and Drew Brees (twice)[146]

 

Again, not saying Luck was a better QB than Peyton... but in some ways Luck and Peyton are a similar analogy to TY and Marv.

 

Luck, like TY, struggled with health issues throughout his career.  Luck, like TY, won't make it to the NFL HOF.  Peyton, like Marv, was healthy the vast majority of his career until a bad injury near the end.  Peyton, like Marv, is a HOFer.

 

The only differences are, if you match up Luck's best years vs. Manning's best years in Indy -- Luck comes pretty close (Luck surpassed Peyton's yardage record, Luck usually threw for less INTs, in 6 seasons where he played >50% of the games, Luck threw for >30 TDs 3 times, with one being 40 TDs.. in 13 seasons in Indy Peyton threw for 40+ TDs one time and >30 on 6 occassions, so while Luck threw for 30+ TDs 50% of the time, Peyton was slightly below that.. Luck was a far superior rushing QB to Peyton.. etc.).  If you match up TY's best year to Marvin, he isn't even close in any category.  If you match TY's other 2-3 very good years, he isn't close to Marvin or Reggie.  

[Thebrashandthebold]

2 hours ago, CurBeatElite said:

 

The argument here is about TY vs. Marvin.   So, I'm not sure what you're getting at by saying Marv and Reggie both had 1300 yards in 2006.. not sure why that matters? If you want to talk about stats driven logic, you're losing me here with this as your main argument.  That year, no other person on the Colts had >400 yards (Ben Utecht was 3rd on the team with 377 yards, Dallas Clark played 12 games and had 367 yards to be 3rd on the team, and Addai's 325 yards made him the only other to have >300 yards that year).  Peyton threw for 4,397 yards with 61.8% of the yards going to Marv and Reggie (with Marv having 56 more yards than Reggie).  In 2014, Luck threw for 4,761 yards (~400 yards more than Peyton in 2006)  with TY having 1,345 yards, Reggie (coming off injury) 779 yards, Fleener had 774 yards, Moncrief & Nicks both over 400 yards, Dwayne Allen at 395 yards, and Ahmad Bradshaw at 300 yards.  Are you saying Luck was better at spreading the ball around than Peyton?  Are you saying TY had trouble being the focal point of the offense?

 

Doesn't really matter.. the post I replied to was suggesting WRs weren't as good with Luck as they were with Peyton.  Reggie's best year of his career was in 2007, the year which Marv got hurt and missed 11+ games (he had 104 receptions, 1,510 yards, 10 TDs)... his next best year was 2010 (the year after Marv retired, he went for 111, 1,355, 6 TDs) ... both of those years, Peyton was a polished veteran and Reggie was the focal point of the receiving offense.  His 3rd best year was 2012, he went for 106 receptions, 1,355 yards, 5 TDs and missed a start and a portion of another game due to injury (nearly identical to stats in Peyton's most prolific year for the Colts in terms of completions and yardage which was 2010)... his 2012 stats were in Luck's rookie year -- Peyton was nowhere near as good as Luck comparing rookie Peyton vs. rookie Andrew.

 

I'm not saying Luck is better than Peyton over a career, nor did I ever say that.   I said Luck had a better start to his career than Peyton (Luck took a 2-14 team to an 11-5 team, Peyton started out 3-13)... Luck had the most passing yards in NFL history as a rookie, over his first two seasons, and over his first three seasons -- it is pretty fair to say, if Luck stayed healthy for as long as Peyton did, he was on pace to having a record setting career.  He didn't, and therefore, I don't think anyone will say Luck had a better career than Peyton.  It is hard to call Luck elite as well, I agree, but that is mainly a reflection of his injuries and his shortened career -- that said, he was still an all-star QB the years he was healthy and if not elite, he was right there in the mix.

 

Luck set the single season Colts passing yards record (surpassing Peyton) during his time here.... and guess what, TY's very best season in terms of yards is still behind Reggie's best season and behind 3 of Marv's seasons.  TY's very best season in terms of receptions would rank behind 6 of Marv's seasons and 4 of Reggie's seasons.  TD wise, TY's best season would be tied with Marv's 10th best season and tied with Reggie's 5th best season.  

 

You are the one cherry picking stats here in a 'stats logic' argument.  Fact of the matter is, Luck threw for >4,200 yards 4 times and >3,800 yards another season.  His numbers when he played in Indy were pretty similar to Peyton's (though Luck did surpass Peyton's single season yardage record), albeit for a shorter duration.  During that time, when TY was the focal point of the offense, he was able to be taken out of games.  When Marv was the focal point of the offense, in a much less WR league, he was unstoppable.

 

As I said before... if TY and Marv were on the same team in their primes, Marv would be the #1 WR 100% of the time.  If TY were on the same team as Marv and Reggie while all during their prime, Marv would be #1, Reg would be #2, TY would be #3... 100% of the time.

 

Marv and Reggie are HOF WRs.  TY is a good/very good WR when he is healthy, which he has struggled with over the course of his career (kinda like Luck), but he's not an elite #1 like Marv or Reggie and over his 9 year career, there is only one season where you can make a decent argument for him being a very good #1 (elite in yards, very good in receptions, average or below average in TDs in his best year).

 

 

 

 

Again, not saying Luck was a better QB than Peyton... but in some ways Luck and Peyton are a similar analogy to TY and Marv.

 

Luck, like TY, struggled with health issues throughout his career.  Luck, like TY, won't make it to the NFL HOF.  Peyton, like Marv, was healthy the vast majority of his career until a bad injury near the end.  Peyton, like Marv, is a HOFer.

 

The only differences are, if you match up Luck's best years vs. Manning's best years in Indy -- Luck comes pretty close (Luck surpassed Peyton's yardage record, Luck usually threw for less INTs, in 6 seasons where he played >50% of the games, Luck threw for >30 TDs 3 times, with one being 40 TDs.. in 13 seasons in Indy Peyton threw for 40+ TDs one time and >30 on 6 occassions, so while Luck threw for 30+ TDs 50% of the time, Peyton was slightly below that.. Luck was a far superior rushing QB to Peyton.. etc.).  If you match up TY's best year to Marvin, he isn't even close in any category.  If you match TY's other 2-3 very good years, he isn't close to Marvin or Reggie.  

I was never a fan of Luck and I said on many occasions after watching him play that his career would be short because he was arrogant enough to think he was invulnerable. He helped end his own career with his macho approach to the game. Manning used to have receivers turn around and the ball was there. Peyton threw it before they even looked back. Luck didn't do that and he was very poor at distributing the ball and checking down to a secondary receiver. He locked on to one (usually TY) and that is where it went or he was sacked. No offensive line could protect any QB that took that long to get rid of the ball. I can't believe anyone still mentions Luck and HOF together. He was never going to get there and that was clear immediately. The fact is that with Luck the Colts got to the AFC finals once and were blown out. Many of his injuries came from off the field adventures. I know he is a Stanford graduate but when it came to football, Luck had an amazingly low IQ.

[NFLfan]

52 minutes ago, Thebrashandthebold said:

I was never a fan of Luck and I said on many occasions after watching him play that his career would be short because he was arrogant enough to think he was invulnerable. He helped end his own career with his macho approach to the game. Manning used to have receivers turn around and the ball was there. Peyton threw it before they even looked back. Luck didn't do that and he was very poor at distributing the ball and checking down to a secondary receiver. He locked on to one (usually TY) and that is where it went or he was sacked. No offensive line could protect any QB that took that long to get rid of the ball. I can't believe anyone still mentions Luck and HOF together. He was never going to get there and that was clear immediately. The fact is that with Luck the Colts got to the AFC finals once and were blown out. Many of his injuries came from off the field adventures. I know he is a Stanford graduate but when it came to football, Luck had an amazingly low IQ.

 

(Shaking my head) You don't sound objective at all. All these comments are not backed up by facts. 

• "he was arrogant to think he was invulnerable"
• "his macho approach to the game"
• "no offensive line could protect any QB that took that long to get rid of the ball" -- Aaron Rodgers holds on to the ball; his OL has protected him
• "Luck had an amazingly low IQ"

Luck's team getting blown out in AFCCG? You don't recall those times when Manning's teams were blown out by inferior teams in the playoffs? Jets? No, it was not solely the defense's or the coaching's fault.

 

Manning was great and among the best ever. No one disputes that. But to put down Luck the way you have without acknowledging any of his successes makes you sound like a disgruntled fan.

 

(Yeah, @w87r  I am no fan of Kirk Cousins, but I will give him some credit.)

[The Fish]

1 hour ago, Thebrashandthebold said:

I was never a fan of Luck and I said on many occasions after watching him play that his career would be short because he was arrogant enough to think he was invulnerable. He helped end his own career with his macho approach to the game. Manning used to have receivers turn around and the ball was there. Peyton threw it before they even looked back. Luck didn't do that and he was very poor at distributing the ball and checking down to a secondary receiver. He locked on to one (usually TY) and that is where it went or he was sacked. No offensive line could protect any QB that took that long to get rid of the ball. I can't believe anyone still mentions Luck and HOF together. He was never going to get there and that was clear immediately. The fact is that with Luck the Colts got to the AFC finals once and were blown out. Many of his injuries came from off the field adventures. I know he is a Stanford graduate but when it came to football, Luck had an amazingly low IQ.

 

You could have made some of these points without exaggerating the issues or acknowledge that he played hard. Also, what Manning did.. ok. That hit he took in Tennessee that's the real issue here, wasn't even a bad play. Dude just got him wrong, running Luck out of bounds. HE GOT FRIGGIN DRILLED FREQUENTLY BEING A TOTAL BAD * HANGING OUT IN THE POCKET LOOKING TO MAKE PLAYS. That's what you want in a QB, unless he get's hurt. He took so many hits and shrugged em' off, it's kinda hard to hold some of the injury drama against him- imo. It's in no small part why he was the best prospect of an era. Tough as nails for a time.

 

I recall going around with Superman a few years ago about whether it's fair to call Luck injury prone- I think it was, but I didn't necessarily find it an indictment of his game or him personally (beyond the Snowboarding debacle). The team on several levels should have been more careful about putting him in situations where "hero ball" was what it was going to take to compete. 

[EastStreet]

22 hours ago, NewColtsFan said:

 

Poppycock.    Nonsense.    And especially for a guy who says he uses "stats driven logic".

 

Here are some stats cut and pasted straight from Luck's wikipedia page.    You don't even seem to be awåre of any of them.

 

Records and achievements[edit]

**Most passing yards in a single game by a rookie quarterback: 433 (vs Miami Dolphins) (11/4/12)[140]

**Most passing yards by a rookie in a single season (4,374)[59]

**Most game-winning drives by a rookie quarterback (7)[141]

**Most passing yards for a quarterback through his first 2 seasons (8,196)[142]

**Most passing yards for a quarterback through his first 3 seasons (12,688)[90]

**Most passing yards for a quarterback through his first 5 postseason games (1,703)[143]

**Most consecutive 350-yard passing games on the road (5)[86]

**Most pass attempts per game, career: (38.3)[144]

**Fifth highest passing yards total in a playoff game (443) (Wild-Card game against the Kansas City Chiefs on January 4, 2014).[74]

**First quarterback to throw for more than 350 yards in five consecutive road games[145]

**First quarterback to throw for 370 yards or more, 4 touchdowns, and have a completion percentage 70 percent or above in consecutive games[80]

**Third player to throw for 3,000 yards in the first nine games, alongside Peyton Manning and Drew Brees (twice)[146]

 

I specifically said, led the league. He did not lead the league. He led the stat as in the "rookie" category.

Huge difference. So, "poppycock" back at you.

 

[CurBeatElite]

6 hours ago, Thebrashandthebold said:

I was never a fan of Luck and I said on many occasions after watching him play that his career would be short because he was arrogant enough to think he was invulnerable. He helped end his own career with his macho approach to the game. Manning used to have receivers turn around and the ball was there. Peyton threw it before they even looked back. Luck didn't do that and he was very poor at distributing the ball and checking down to a secondary receiver. He locked on to one (usually TY) and that is where it went or he was sacked. No offensive line could protect any QB that took that long to get rid of the ball. I can't believe anyone still mentions Luck and HOF together. He was never going to get there and that was clear immediately. The fact is that with Luck the Colts got to the AFC finals once and were blown out. Many of his injuries came from off the field adventures. I know he is a Stanford graduate but when it came to football, Luck had an amazingly low IQ.

 

Look back at some of Luck's games.. he was literally running for his life after the ball got snapped and extended a lot of plays (and yea, he got crushed a bunch).  It doesn't matter.  Luck and Peyton's careers are both over.  Peyton on 99.9% of plays was able to sit back for 2.5 seconds and hit his read, when he didn't have it, he went down like a cow in a thunder storm and just got touched by a blitzer.   Luck never had that, he was getting running away from pressure before he had time to set up.

[CurBeatElite]

1 minute ago, EastStreet said:

 

I specifically said, led the league. He did not lead the league. He led the stat as in the "rookie" category.

Huge difference. So, "poppycock" back at you.

 

 

There is a dispute there.  Luck lead the league that year and as a rookie.  Somehow they confused him for a rookie QB and not a QB.  

[EastStreet]

9 hours ago, CurBeatElite said:

 

The argument here is about TY vs. Marvin.   So, I'm not sure what you're getting at by saying Marv and Reggie both had 1300 yards in 2006.. not sure why that matters? If you want to talk about stats driven logic, you're losing me here with this as your main argument.  That year, no other person on the Colts had >400 yards (Ben Utecht was 3rd on the team with 377 yards, Dallas Clark played 12 games and had 367 yards to be 3rd on the team, and Addai's 325 yards made him the only other to have >300 yards that year).  Peyton threw for 4,397 yards with 61.8% of the yards going to Marv and Reggie (with Marv having 56 more yards than Reggie).  In 2014, Luck threw for 4,761 yards (~400 yards more than Peyton in 2006)  with TY having 1,345 yards, Reggie (coming off injury) 779 yards, Fleener had 774 yards, Moncrief & Nicks both over 400 yards, Dwayne Allen at 395 yards, and Ahmad Bradshaw at 300 yards.  Are you saying Luck was better at spreading the ball around than Peyton?  Are you saying TY had trouble being the focal point of the offense?

 

Doesn't really matter.. the post I replied to was suggesting WRs weren't as good with Luck as they were with Peyton.  Reggie's best year of his career was in 2007, the year which Marv got hurt and missed 11+ games (he had 104 receptions, 1,510 yards, 10 TDs)... his next best year was 2010 (the year after Marv retired, he went for 111, 1,355, 6 TDs) ... both of those years, Peyton was a polished veteran and Reggie was the focal point of the receiving offense.  His 3rd best year was 2012, he went for 106 receptions, 1,355 yards, 5 TDs and missed a start and a portion of another game due to injury (nearly identical to stats in Peyton's most prolific year for the Colts in terms of completions and yardage which was 2010)... his 2012 stats were in Luck's rookie year -- Peyton was nowhere near as good as Luck comparing rookie Peyton vs. rookie Andrew.

 

I'm not saying Luck is better than Peyton over a career, nor did I ever say that.   I said Luck had a better start to his career than Peyton (Luck took a 2-14 team to an 11-5 team, Peyton started out 3-13)... Luck had the most passing yards in NFL history as a rookie, over his first two seasons, and over his first three seasons -- it is pretty fair to say, if Luck stayed healthy for as long as Peyton did, he was on pace to having a record setting career.  He didn't, and therefore, I don't think anyone will say Luck had a better career than Peyton.  It is hard to call Luck elite as well, I agree, but that is mainly a reflection of his injuries and his shortened career -- that said, he was still an all-star QB the years he was healthy and if not elite, he was right there in the mix.

 

Luck set the single season Colts passing yards record (surpassing Peyton) during his time here.... and guess what, TY's very best season in terms of yards is still behind Reggie's best season and behind 3 of Marv's seasons.  TY's very best season in terms of receptions would rank behind 6 of Marv's seasons and 4 of Reggie's seasons.  TD wise, TY's best season would be tied with Marv's 10th best season and tied with Reggie's 5th best season.  

 

You are the one cherry picking stats here in a 'stats logic' argument.  Fact of the matter is, Luck threw for >4,200 yards 4 times and >3,800 yards another season.  His numbers when he played in Indy were pretty similar to Peyton's (though Luck did surpass Peyton's single season yardage record), albeit for a shorter duration.  During that time, when TY was the focal point of the offense, he was able to be taken out of games.  When Marv was the focal point of the offense, in a much less WR league, he was unstoppable.

 

As I said before... if TY and Marv were on the same team in their primes, Marv would be the #1 WR 100% of the time.  If TY were on the same team as Marv and Reggie while all during their prime, Marv would be #1, Reg would be #2, TY would be #3... 100% of the time.

 

Marv and Reggie are HOF WRs.  TY is a good/very good WR when he is healthy, which he has struggled with over the course of his career (kinda like Luck), but he's not an elite #1 like Marv or Reggie and over his 9 year career, there is only one season where you can make a decent argument for him being a very good #1 (elite in yards, very good in receptions, average or below average in TDs in his best year).

 

 

You keep saying that you're not saying Luck is better than Manning, but your arguments sound different. They both had similar YPG and YPC. The difference is that PM simply was more accurate, through a better ball, and was better at reading Ds. This is pretty evident by the 5% difference in completion %, 7pt difference in passer rating, and even bigger delta in QBR (which is flawed, but easily the best QB performance metric out there). Luck never had a 70 QBR or better. Only 9 or PM's years actually had QBR as a rating, but 8 of those 9 he was higher than 70, scoring in the 80s twice, and leading the league twice. And also, let's not forget that PM's years, vs Lucks years, were not as QB friendly. 

 

At the end of the day, the overwhelming majority of people, analysts, etc., see Manning as an all time elite. They never really talked about Luck like that. Anyway, I personally see Manning as on-another-level. And because I see him like that, I assume he would have made TY better. TY has a 70 YPG avg, Marvin a 76 YPG avg. And like I've said, I think Marvin is better too, but TY's YPG would have likely been on par with Marvin had he had PM. It's only 6 yard delta, and that's about half a reception per game given PM's YPC avg.

[CurBeatElite]

26 minutes ago, EastStreet said:

 

You keep saying that you're not saying Luck is better than Manning, but your arguments sound different. They both had similar YPG and YPC. The difference is that PM simply was more accurate, through a better ball, and was better at reading Ds. This is pretty evident by the 5% difference in completion %, 7pt difference in passer rating, and even bigger delta in QBR (which is flawed, but easily the best QB performance metric out there). Luck never had a 70 QBR or better. Only 9 or PM's years actually had QBR as a rating, but 8 of those 9 he was higher than 70, scoring in the 80s twice, and leading the league twice. And also, let's not forget that PM's years, vs Lucks years, were not as QB friendly. 

 

At the end of the day, the overwhelming majority of people, analysts, etc., see Manning as an all time elite. They never really talked about Luck like that. Anyway, I personally see Manning as on-another-level. And because I see him like that, I assume he would have made TY better. TY has a 70 YPG avg, Marvin a 76 YPG avg. And like I've said, I think Marvin is better too, but TY's YPG would have likely been on par with Marvin had he had PM. It's only 6 yard delta, and that's about half a reception per game given PM's YPC avg.

 

I don't like to call people names, so I'll avoid calling you a nitwit.  The behavior you are displaying, however, is on par with that which a nitwit would display.

 

We don't need to argue anymore.  You were pulling stuff out of your wazoo to say that TY is/was a better WR than Marv, quite simply, he is not.  

 

You're going way too far out of your way to get away from the fact that Marv is/was/always will be better than TY.  You can say TY would have been better than he was if he had Peyton the whole way... you can't debate that he would be 2nd to Marv in their prime and 3rd to Marv and Reggie (2nd to Marv) in their prime.  

So let's stop arguing.  You went out of your way to prove my initial point.  That was a huge waste of time.  I will be a lot simpler and more straightforward in the future if you want to say my logic are not 'stats based', not that this thread proves you to be a bozo.   It just shows that you are capable of portraying the exact behavior that a bozo would portray if he were to try to argue against a logical person.

 

Thanks for proving me right.  Marv is by far greater than TY.  End of discussion.

[EastStreet]

56 minutes ago, CurBeatElite said:

 

There is a dispute there.  Luck lead the league that year and as a rookie.  Somehow they confused him for a rookie QB and not a QB.  

Romo led the league in 4Q comebacks in 2012 with 5. 

Luck and Ryan both had 4

[CurBeatElite]

2 minutes ago, EastStreet said:

Romo led the league in 4Q comebacks in 2012 with 5. 

Luck and Ryan both had 4

Luck had 7 comeback wins.

[Thebrashandthebold]

1 hour ago, CurBeatElite said:

 

Look back at some of Luck's games.. he was literally running for his life after the ball got snapped and extended a lot of plays (and yea, he got crushed a bunch).  It doesn't matter.  Luck and Peyton's careers are both over.  Peyton on 99.9% of plays was able to sit back for 2.5 seconds and hit his read, when he didn't have it, he went down like a cow in a thunder storm and just got touched by a blitzer.   Luck never had that, he was getting running away from pressure before he had time to set up.

That is not true. The line for Peyton wasn't so hot but he got rid of the ball very quickly and in less than 2.5 seconds. Luck had no ability to do that and that is why he was pounded. 

[EastStreet]

4 minutes ago, CurBeatElite said:

 

I don't like to call people names, so I'll avoid calling you a *.  The behavior you are displaying, however, is on par with that which a * would display.

 

We don't need to argue anymore.  You were pulling stuff out of your wazoo to say that TY is/was a better WR than Marv, quite simply, he is not.  

 

You're going way too far out of your way to get away from the fact that Marv is/was/always will be better than TY.  You can say TY would have been better than he was if he had Peyton the whole way... you can't debate that he would be 2nd to Marv in their prime and 3rd to Marv and Reggie (2nd to Marv) in their prime.  

So let's stop arguing.  You went out of your way to prove my initial point.  That was a huge waste of time.  I will be a lot simpler and more straightforward in the future if you want to say my logic are not 'stats based', not that this thread proves you to be a *.   It just shows that you are capable of portraying the exact behavior that a * would portray if he were to try to argue against a logical person.

 

Thanks for proving me right.  Marv is by far greater than TY.  End of discussion.

You're getting a little emotional here...

 

It's pretty simple logic... Feel free to attack the following serial logic, instead of me personally...

 

1. PM is seen by by most as elite. NFL.com ranks him all time as #3 behind only Brady and Montana. Athlon ranks him as #2. PFN #3, I could go on. You won't find many, if at all that don't have him in the top 3 or 5. USA Today does have Luck at #95..... In short, Manning per the experts/journalist/analysts, etc, was on another level.
2. Is PM being on another level, worth and extra 6 yards per game for TY? I don't know, but probably.... And that would put him on par with Marv's YPG. Again, I think Marv was better, but that's subjective. Stats wise, they were awfully close, and Marv clearly had the better QB.... 

 

 

[EastStreet]

8 minutes ago, CurBeatElite said:

Luck had 7 comeback wins.

He had 7 game winning drives. There's a difference between that and 4Q comebacks. A game winning drive could be win you are tied. A 4Q comeback is when you are down. Either is great.

[Thebrashandthebold]

On 7/1/2021 at 12:53 PM, NFLfan said:

 

(Shaking my head) You don't sound objective at all. All these comments are not backed up by facts. 

• "he was arrogant to think he was invulnerable"
• "his macho approach to the game"
• "no offensive line could protect any QB that took that long to get rid of the ball" -- Aaron Rodgers holds on to the ball; his OL has protected him
• "Luck had an amazingly low IQ"

Luck's team getting blown out in AFCCG? You don't recall those times when Manning's teams were blown out by inferior teams in the playoffs? Jets? No, it was not solely the defense's or the coaching's fault.

 

Manning was great and among the best ever. No one disputes that. But to put down Luck the way you have without acknowledging any of his successes makes you sound like a disgruntled fan.

 

(Yeah, @w87r  I am no fan of Kirk Cousins, but I will give him some credit.)

The being arrogant is telling a defensive player "nice hit" when he was smashed. That attitude is what led to his demise. He didn't slide in the early years, he ran like a running back. The end of that was inevitable. 

 

These things are what I mean by his "macho" approach to the game. "You can't hit me hard enough to hurt me." But they really could. I am not a disgruntled fan put I took no pleasure in watching Luck play the game. I have been a Colts fan since the Johnny U days in the fifties. I was never a "Luck" fan.

 

No one held on to the ball as long as Luck did. He refused to throw it away and he couldn't find alternative receivers.

 

When Peyton's protection collapsed he went down to prevent injury. Luck just took the full brunt. That wasn't very smart.

 

Yes, Manning had blowouts but New England pounded Luck over and over again.

[EastStreet]

So just pulled both 4Q comeback (4QC) and game winning drive (GWD) for both (in terms of leading the league).

 

Manning

4QC (3 times) - 99 (6), 08 (4), 09 (7)

GWD (4 times) - 99 (7), 02 (5), 08 (6), 09 (7)

 

Luck

4QC - NA

GWD - 12 (7)

[Nickster]

29 minutes ago, EastStreet said:

So just pulled both 4Q comeback (4QC) and game winning drive (GWD) for both (in terms of leading the league).

 

Manning

4QC (3 times) - 99 (6), 08 (4), 09 (7)

GWD (4 times) - 99 (7), 02 (5), 08 (6), 09 (7)

 

Luck

4QC - NA

GWD - 12 (7)

You are persistent dude but you’re making yourself look ridiculous here.  Any of us who occasionally disagree with you then you beat your stats drum over and over and over and over and over then when someone else shows stuff like Curbeat you say and I Quote “is seen by most as”

 

good lord son.

[2006Coltsbestever]

Been reading this thread, interesting stuff. I have never done a full top 100 all-time QB's list, that would take me days to compile my thoughts and study every QB's stats and accomplishments  . I will say this, IMO Peyton Manning is a Top 3 QB of all-time based on eye test, accomplishments = SB wins (2)/League MVP's(5), longevity, and stats. I would say probably after around 75 QB's or so you start to get into the category of was he great or just very good?? Luck would make my top 100 based on the talent he brought and he did have 4 very good to great seasons = 2012/2013/2014/2018. He won 4 playoff games and set the rookie record for most passing yards. He also carried teams that basically had no run game to 11-5 records consistently. Luck is top 100 make no doubt about that. He just doesn't have the longevity, a SB win, or any League MVP's to be considered a Hall of Famer. Longevity = he didn't play long enough. There have been thousands of QB's so doing a top 100 would take a while  .

[EastStreet]

2 hours ago, Nickster said:

You are persistent dude but you’re making yourself look ridiculous here.  Any of us who occasionally disagree with you then you beat your stats drum over and over and over and over and over then when someone else shows stuff like Curbeat you say and I Quote “is seen by most as”

 

good lord son.

good lord...

 

I actually took the time to point out that I was wrong.... 

 

while @NewColtsFan bolded a portion of our conversation that included two stats (4QC and GWD), I wanted to show that Luck indeed led the league in one of those cats for one year. So he was correct kinda, on a portion of that. And I have zero problem falling on my own sword.

 

talk about willy nilly lol.

[EastStreet]

35 minutes ago, 2006Coltsbestever said:

Been reading this thread, interesting stuff. I have never done a full top 100 all-time QB's list, that would take me days to compile my thoughts and study every QB's stats and accomplishments  . I will say this, IMO Peyton Manning is a Top 3 QB of all-time based on eye test, accomplishments = SB wins (2)/League MVP's(5), longevity, and stats. I would say probably after around 75 QB's or so you start to get into the category of was he great or just very good?? Luck would make my top 100 based on the talent he brought and he did have 4 very good to great seasons = 2012/2013/2014/2018. He won 4 playoff games and set the rookie record for most passing yards. He also carried teams that basically had no run game to 11-5 records consistently. Luck is top 100 make no doubt about that. He just doesn't have the longevity, a SB win, or any League MVP's to be considered a Hall of Famer. Longevity = he didn't play long enough. There have been thousands of QB's so doing a top 100 would take a while  .

Yup, I can't see any current list that doesn't have Manning top 3. Now with Mahomes coming on, and who knows how long AR will play, but I think PM is safely in the top 5 for many many years. I'd rank Luck higher than USAT had (95th). It's requires a level of projection, but I do see him as top 50 from a pure skill perspective. 

[2006Coltsbestever]

3 minutes ago, EastStreet said:

Yup, I can't see any current list that doesn't have Manning top 3. Now with Mahomes coming on, and who knows how long AR will play, but I think PM is safely in the top 5 for many many years. I'd rank Luck higher than USAT had (95th). It's requires a level of projection, but I do see him as top 50 from a pure skill perspective. 

Yeah I would really have to look at it but in reality after around more like 50 QB's or so you could question at that point the great/very good question. I said 75 in my initial post but there have been 10's of thousands QB's. Luck could arguably be top 75 based on everything. Mahomes has the potential to be a Top 5 QB of all-time but still way too early to tell. He is off to an amazing start. I have Rodgers in my top 10 already.

[Nickster]

1 hour ago, EastStreet said:

good lord...

 

I actually took the time to point out that I was wrong.... 

 

while @NewColtsFan bolded a portion of our conversation that included two stats (4QC and GWD), I wanted to show that Luck indeed led the league in one of those cats for one year. So he was correct kinda, on a portion of that. And I have zero problem falling on my own sword.

 

talk about willy nilly lol.

All right dude cool.  I didn’t see that.  I personally enjoy the banter and there’s nothing personal and I enjoy a lot of that info you put out.  I also seem to agree a lot with you,on several things and appreciate your hard work you do on these stats thing

 

dont want to date you or nothing but appreciate you.

[EastStreet]

4 minutes ago, 2006Coltsbestever said:

Yeah I would really have to look at it but in reality after around more like 50 QB's or so you could question at that point the great/very good question. I said 75 in my initial post but there have been 10's of thousands QB's. Luck could arguably be top 75 based on everything. Mahomes has the potential to be a Top 5 QB of all-time but still way too early to tell. He is off to an amazing start. I have Rodgers in my top 10 already.

Mahomes to me is top 10 already based on what I project. He could end up being #1. AR top 10 too, but he's a bit harder to project. When I look at top 25s, top 50s, etc., Luck would make my top 50 pretty easily, but again, with some projection. He wouldn't make my top 25. 

[EastStreet]

3 minutes ago, Nickster said:

All right dude cool.  I didn’t see that.  I personally enjoy the banter and there’s nothing personal and I enjoy a lot of that info you put out.  I also seem to agree a lot with you,on several things and appreciate your hard work you do on these stats thing

 

dont want to date you or nothing but appreciate you.

I enjoy the banter too. And I enjoy you as a poster. I just think you meander too much when called out. It's all good though. Just like I go at it with others. I think @Superman and @SteelCityColt are top posters but I'm not afraid to disagree with them either. As you know, I'm a big fan of stats, but not afraid to put my hot take out there. I do label it though.

 

No worries. I'm in a committed relationship right now with a stats girl. 

[2006Coltsbestever]

3 minutes ago, EastStreet said:

Mahomes to me is top 10 already based on what I project. He could end up being #1. AR top 10 too, but he's a bit harder to project. When I look at top 25s, top 50s, etc., Luck would make my top 50 pretty easily, but again, with some projection. He wouldn't make my top 25. 

This is something I need to study more and look at everything. Doing a top 10 is easy for me as in something like:

1. Brady

2. Montana

3. Peyton

4. Unitas

5. Elway

6. Rodgers

7. Brees

8. Graham

9. Favre

10. Marino

-that is pretty solid factoring in all era's and every category you can. Mahomes is capable of being top 5 or perhaps the best ever but for me it is too early to tell. What if he gets injured in the next year or 2 and is never the same? What if he never wins another SB? For me longevity is very important and Mahomes has only been in the league for 3 years. It has been an amazing 3 years but only 3. Talent wise he along with Rodgers are top 5 material if you just base it on that. IMO too, there is no way Marino can't be top 10. He never won a SB but by stats, eye test, and talent he squeezes in. He did make a SB and he won a League MVP in 1984. Graham played way back when the game was different but he was the best for his time (before Unitas came along) and won a bunch of Championships. He is in every top 10 list you can find. 

[EastStreet]

26 minutes ago, 2006Coltsbestever said:

This is something I need to study more and look at everything. Doing a top 10 is easy for me as in something like:

1. Brady

2. Montana

3. Peyton

4. Unitas

5. Elway

6. Rodgers

7. Brees

8. Graham

9. Favre

10. Marino

-that is pretty solid factoring in all era's and every category you can. Mahomes is capable of being top 5 or perhaps the best ever but for me it is too early to tell. What if he gets injured in the next year or 2 and is never the same? What if he never wins another SB? For me longevity is very important and Mahomes has only been in the league for 3 years. It has been an amazing 3 years but only 3. Talent wise he along with Rodgers are top 5 material if you just base it on that. IMO too, there is no way Marino can't be top 10. He never won a SB but by stats, eye test, and talent he squeezes in. He did make a SB and he won a League MVP in 1984. Graham played way back when the game was different but he was the best for his time (before Unitas came along) and won a bunch of Championships. He is in every top 10 list you can find. 

For me it's mind bending and mind aching just trying to do a top 12. Eras were different, and were more QB friendly as the years go on.

 

For me.....

1A and 1B.... Brady and Manning. If Manning had BB, I think he'd have been better than Brady stat wise, and maybe longevity.... , but it's a subjective projection. 

3A and 3B.... Montana and Marino... 

4A, B, and C... Staubach, Elway, Unitas

8A, B, C, D, and E..... Brees, Graham, Rodgers, Star, and Favre

 

Of course, Chad Kelly would have been better than them all had he got his chance....

[2006Coltsbestever]

21 minutes ago, EastStreet said:

For me it's mind bending and mind aching just trying to do a top 12. Eras were different, and were more QB friendly as the years go on.

 

For me.....

1A and 1B.... Brady and Manning. If Manning had BB, I think he'd have been better than Brady stat wise, and maybe longevity.... , but it's a subjective projection. 

3A and 3B.... Montana and Marino... 

4A, B, and C... Staubach, Elway, Unitas

8A, B, C, D, and E..... Brees, Graham, Rodgers, Star, and Favre

 

Of course, Chad Kelly would have been better than them all had he got his chance....

I had to laugh because of the Chad part. Staubach is another guy that can arguably be top 10. Steve Young as well.

[EastStreet]

1 minute ago, 2006Coltsbestever said:

I had to laugh because of the Chad part. Staubach is another guy that can arguably top 10. Steve Young as well.

Yup, Young was nails too. You can make cases for several guys. One thing though that is pretty prevalent, is most/all have Manning top 3. That's big. And I think most that watched him play agree. 

[2006Coltsbestever]

2 minutes ago, EastStreet said:

Yup, Young was nails too. You can make cases for several guys. One thing though that is pretty prevalent, is most/all have Manning top 3. That's big. And I think most that watched him play agree. 

Yeah my current top 3 are Brady, Montana, and Peyton as well. Over 95% of the lists I have seen even have this regarding media, coaches, ex football players, and fans doing lists. One guy I didn't forget about is Terry Bradshaw (winner of 4 SB's) but stats wise he didn't measure up and his defense was the best in the league for years. He is still probably top 15 because he never screwed things up winning 4 times. 

[EastStreet]

2 minutes ago, 2006Coltsbestever said:

Yeah my current top 3 are Brady, Montana, and Peyton as well. Over 95% of the lists I have seen even have this regarding media, coaches, ex football players, and fans doing lists. One guy I didn't forget about is Terry Bradshaw (winner of 4 SB's) but stats wise he didn't measure up and his defense was the best in the league for years. He is still probably top 15 because he never screwed things up winning 4 times. 

It's takes a lot of mental acrobatics to place Manning outside the top 3. Bradshaw was a baller. Top 20 absolutely. Not gifted in a lot of ways, but a dude.

[2006Coltsbestever]

10 minutes ago, EastStreet said:

It's takes a lot of mental acrobatics to place Manning outside the top 3. Bradshaw was a baller. Top 20 absolutely. Not gifted in a lot of ways, but a dude.

Yeah I have done top 20 lists before for QB's but then it really gets tough lol. I just can't see how anyone could leave Peyton out of the top 3:

 

His resume

League MVP's - 5. He has the most in NFL history. It is very tough to even win more than 1 of those in reality. As great as Drew Brees was, he never won 1. Elway and Marino only won 1.

 

SB wins - 2, that put him in with other multi SB winning QB's.

 

SB MVP's - 1, yes he even won one of those.

 

Passing TD's - Peyton ranks 3rd all-time with 539 (key stat)

 

Yards Passing - Peyton ranks 3rd all-time with 71,940 (key stat)

 

Longevity wise - he played 17 seasons (1998-2010 with the Colts) (2012-2015 with Denver). He missed only 1 season which was in 2011 due to neck surgery. So he even had great longevity. 

 

I can't see anything that someone could say to keep him out of the top 3 even if they hated him  . They could say he had several 1 and done's in the playoffs but he was 3-1 vs Brady in AFC Title Games and made 4 SB's going 2-2.

[Nickster]

7 hours ago, EastStreet said:

I enjoy the banter too. And I enjoy you as a poster. I just think you meander too much when called out. It's all good though. Just like I go at it with others. I think @Superman and @SteelCityColt are top posters but I'm not afraid to disagree with them either. As you know, I'm a big fan of stats, but not afraid to put my hot take out there. I do label it though.

 

No worries. I'm in a committed relationship right now with a stats girl. 

Lotta stream of consciousness in my game.  

[Dogg63]

8 hours ago, 2006Coltsbestever said:

there have been 10's of thousands QB's

I don't know if this site has perfect data, but it seems pretty comprehensive and goes back to 1920. They have 1028 QBs in their list.

 

https://www.pro-football-reference.com/players/qbindex.htm

 

Their Average Value (AV) ranks Luck as 95th in that list. They have him 8 spots ahead of Jeff George and 4 spots below Kirk Cousins. He's also ranked much lower than these guys: Newton, Stafford, Flacco, Dalton, Fitzmagic, Harbaugh, Archie Manning, and Tannehill.

 

As is to be expected, a lot of Colts forum folks qualify as homers. 

[Myles]

10 hours ago, EastStreet said:

g

 

while @NewColtsFan bolded a portion of our conversation that included two stats (4QC and GWD), I wanted to show that Luck indeed led the league in one of those cats for one year. So he was correct kinda, on a portion of that. And I have zero problem falling on my own sword.

 

I've always thought the 4 quarter comebacks was a silly stat.   You wouldn't have to come back if you had played better in the first 3 quarters.  

[2006Coltsbestever]

1 hour ago, Dogg63 said:

I don't know if this site has perfect data, but it seems pretty comprehensive and goes back to 1920. They have 1028 QBs in their list.

 

https://www.pro-football-reference.com/players/qbindex.htm

 

Their Average Value (AV) ranks Luck as 95th in that list. They have him 8 spots ahead of Jeff George and 4 spots below Kirk Cousins. He's also ranked much lower than these guys: Newton, Stafford, Flacco, Dalton, Fitzmagic, Harbaugh, Archie Manning, and Tannehill.

 

As is to be expected, a lot of Colts forum folks qualify as homers. 

With me it has nothing to do with being a homer. I block all bias out, I really do when I do lists. If I didn't I would just get on here and say that Peyton is the GOAT - end of discussion  . I have Peyton 3rd. Regarding Luck, I posted above that I thought Luck was top 100 so this list alone proves my point. I never said anything like he was top 50, etc.. He didn't play long enough. I will also add, and this isn't homerism talking, no way in hell is Kirk Cousins, Fitzmagic, Tannehill, Dalton, or Harbaugh have ever been better than Luck. That is freakin common sense if someone just watches football a lot. Flacco won a SB but really?? Flacco over Luck that is comical. Luck would've won a SB in 2012 with the Ravens as a rookie, I believe that. He took a 2-14 Colts team that had no run game and a bad O.Line that same year to a 11-5 team. That defense the Ravens had was great too, stats wise it was down but they still had Ray Lewis.

[Nickster]

15 hours ago, Thebrashandthebold said:

That is not true. The line for Peyton wasn't so hot but he got rid of the ball very quickly and in less than 2.5 seconds. Luck had no ability to do that and that is why he was pounded. 

Just wrong dude.  Peyton could get it out quick when necessary, but Moore’s offense was famously a downfield passing attack with many long developing plays during the first half of his career. The stretch PA play was probably the iconic play in the Manning/Moore era, and that is as slow developing as it gets.

 

andy was similar.  Until Reich he had been in long developing routes system and then in the one Reich year they got the ball out quick.

 

Release times are aligned with scheme.  So yeah Peyton had a quidk release but in his first 10 years or so.  He didn’t always release It quick.