Veteran NFL scout on Stanford QB Andrew Luck: "I don't think this kid is special in any way except his intangibles."

[Malakai432]

Iies, CGI, fake computer generated, special effects!!!!!!! They are both a conspiracy.

[Jules]

I am not sold.

RG3 will NEVER be Peyton Manning/Aaron Rodgers/Michael Vick in any aspect.

Watch more film, the secret film. The Luck fan club has the top secret film in a box for us members only if you join.

[Jay305]

I am not sold.

RG3 will NEVER be Peyton Manning/Aaron Rodgers/Michael Vick in any aspect.

Watch more film, the secret film. The Luck fan club has the top secret film in a box for us members only if you join.

No thanks Im not a fan of cults

[Jules]

No thanks Im not a fan of cults

You are aware the Colts are drafting Luck right? Unless of course before the draft he gets caught with some prostitutes or something. Not going to happen.

For some time you have not been too fond of Mr. Luck. I am not sure why since I don't think it is just QB skills based on some posts and your dislike of some of his statements like "such is life". I honestly think you don't really like him. Thats fine, maybe he grows on you. Or maybe he doesn't. Heck my father never liked Peyton either as a person. He loved him as a QB but always called him a pain in the ***. My fathers all time fave QB is Unitas.

[Jay305]

Once and if hes drafted by us heck get a fair shot with me but Im not getting my hopes up

[Jules]

Once and if hes drafted by us heck get a fair shot with me but Im not getting my hopes up

You won't get your hopes up on what? Of him doing well in the NFL? Of the Colts with him doing well? Of liking him?

I am curious. Let it all out Jay. It will be good for us to all understand exactly where you are coming from here.

[Jay305]

You won't get your hopes up on what? Of him doing well in the NFL? Of the Colts with him doing well? Of liking him?

I am curious. Let it all out Jay. It will be good for us to all understand exactly where you are coming from here.

All of thee above

[Jason_]

THIS (below) was a logical argument:

It's a pretty logical argument.

You can't say in one breath that you can't predict how a player will do in the NFL and then turn around in the next breath and say that the player is worthy of the #1 pick because he'll be better in the NFL than the other college players. The two statements are inconsistent with one another. The comment of "So then we should just pick names out of a hat on draft day?" is a reductio ad absurdum argument which highlighted the inconsistency of the two statements by showing that college players do differ in how their NFL prospects are perceived, thereby disproving the position that all players in the NFL draft are equal to one another.

This (below) was not:

So then we should just pick names out of a hat on draft day?

I completely understand the reductio ad absurdum argument as I do it all the time. However, without the actual explanation, or argument, behind the proposed "absurd conclusion" it simply becomes, well, an absurd conclusion that makes you look either lazy or illogical. That was the point I was trying to make. Some people think that the reductio ad absurdum argument is self-explanatory and they simply need to provide the absurd conclusion to prove their point and the rest will be understood. However, if you have to use the reductio ad absurdum argument then clearly your original point was not understood in the first place and therefore the actual point of the reductio ad absurdum argument is also probably going to be lost on the intended recipient.

Also,

highlighted the inconsistency of the two statements by showing that college players do differ in how their NFL prospects are perceived, thereby disproving the position that all players in the NFL draft are equal to one another.

for the record, he never said

that the player is worthy of the #1 pick because he'll be better in the NFL than the other college players

. He said:

Exactly, Luck is no better than Griffin, Tannehill, Weeden or anyone else at this point in the NFL.

Technically the statement is true though simplistically obvious. Considering none of the players have played a down in the NFL then yes, their current NFL careers are all on equal standing. That doesn't mean that their potential in the NFL is the same though. So in essence, you baited FX into saying what you wanted him to say but he didn't say it exactly the way you wanted so you slightly twisted his words, or the intent behind them, in order to use your reductio ad absurdum argument.

To add to that, drafting is not an exact science and everyone knows this. No matter what someone's perceived potential is or what their collegiate success amounts to, there is no guarantee any of that will translate into the NFL. So you can do all the due diligence that you want in order to make the best possible decision that you can but there are never any guarantees. I still don't consider Tony Ugoh as being a poor decision by Polian though most people do. He waited until the second round to draft a guy that he planned to spend a year developing behind Tarik Glenn. However, Glenn retired so Ugoh was forced into the starting lineup much sooner than anticipated so he was not able to be developed as originally planned. There is always the chance of this type of unforeseen factor to come up and affect the decisions that are made on draft day.

[Dan]

[i've cut all this down to avoid filling the page]

But the issue comes with the fact that nobody was saying he was a better NFL QB. I explained this earlier. He was arguing points nobody was making.

[Jason_]

But the issue comes with the fact that nobody was saying he was a better NFL QB. I explained this earlier. He was arguing points nobody was making.

But he was answering questions that he was being asked (referring to FX Stryker, not Jay). And plenty of people have been talking about how great Luck is going to be in the NFL. Not how great he could possibly be or what his potential is but how great he absolutely will be. Perhaps not in this thread but on this site and for the past 6 months. As I said before, someone back in Sept. or Oct. said that all great QBs next year will be #12 referring to Brady, Luck and Rodgers. Others have said very matter of factly that RG3 will be a bust.

[Dan]

But he was answering questions that he was being asked (referring to FX Stryker, not Jay). And plenty of people have been talking about how great Luck is going to be in the NFL. Not how great he could possibly be or what his potential is but how great he absolutely will be. Perhaps not in this thread but on this site and for the past 6 months. As I said before, someone back in Sept. or Oct. said that all great QBs next year will be #12 referring to Brady, Luck and Rodgers. Others have said very matter of factly that RG3 will be a bust.

Maybe his ire should have been directed to those people specifically rather than coming in and raging at people who are simply excited about the potential this guy has? It appeared to be directed at everybody who had the slightest enthusiasm, excitement and positive anticipation about Luck's future, rather than those already categorising him as elite and planning his trip to Canton.

[Jay305]

But he was answering questions that he was being asked (referring to FX Stryker, not Jay). And plenty of people have been talking about how great Luck is going to be in the NFL. Not how great he could possibly be or what his potential is but how great he absolutely will be. Perhaps not in this thread but on this site and for the past 6 months. As I said before, someone back in Sept. or Oct. said that all great QBs next year will be #12 referring to Brady, Luck and Rodgers. Others have said very matter of factly that RG3 will be a bust.

He will also win a superbowl before Matthew Stafford and some other young proven NFL qbs

[Fx Stryker]

Maybe his ire should have been directed to those people specifically rather than coming in and raging at people who are simply excited about the potential this guy has? It appeared to be directed at everybody who had the slightest enthusiasm, excitement and positive anticipation about Luck's future, rather than those already categorising him as elite and planning his trip to Canton.

Never was raging, lol. But I guess if your statement is praising him it's raging these days.

[ReMeDy]

Iies, CGI, fake computer generated, special effects!!!!!!! They are both a conspiracy.

I remember that game. Really ugly performance. The lucky bounce, the possible INT's when throwing into traffic on multiple occasions, the backwards pass, obviously nothing but spread plays, poor deep ball accuracy/chemistry, looked to scramble far too often, held the ball too long via improvisation (aka Roethlisberger style), took some vicious hits (those hits at the NFL level could be injuries) and a bad snap. Granted, it's hard to blame RGIII on all of that, but this kid to me never did look like a 1st overall pick.

Some people say RGIII does not scramble as some suggest, but you wouldn't know it watching this game!

[Malakai432]

No thanks Im not a fan of cults

Who are you a fan of?

[Dan]

I wonder if people were getting upset with those getting excited back in 98.

[Malakai432]

I remember that game. Really ugly performance. The lucky bounce, the possible INT's when throwing into traffic on multiple occasions, the backwards pass, obviously nothing but spread plays, poor deep ball accuracy/chemistry, looked to scramble far too often, held the ball too long via improvisation (aka Roethlisberger style), took some vicious hits (those hits at the NFL level could be injuries) and a bad snap. Granted, it's hard to blame RGIII on all of that, but this kid to me never did look like a 1st overall pick.

Some people say RGIII does not scramble as some suggest, but you wouldn't know it watching this game!

Well the good thing is that the Colts have settled on the right player and the guy who has always been the sure fire #1.

[Fx Stryker]

I wonder if people were getting upset with those getting excited back in 98.

I'm sure in '97 people weren't making makeshift #16 Colts jerseys for a college QB in week 6.

[Dan]

I'm sure in '97 people weren't making makeshift #16 Colts jerseys for a college QB in week 6.

And the * who did this year are, thankfully, a minority (and the reason I hope Luck changes his number)

Edited April 23, 2012 by Maureen
offensive

[Jason_]

And for the record:

• No matter what their completion percentages were, I don't believe that RG3 was a more accurate passer than Luck, but then again I think Luck's accuracy has been overstated in some cases, and in others just completely overblown...such as:

  Andrew's timing and accuracy is absurdly brilliant

  .
  I've said it before and I'll say it again, during the 2011 season, Nick Foles' timing and accuracy was significantly better than either Luck or Griffin. Overall, Luck was more accurate on a wider variety of routes than RG3 was but imo, both of their accuracy left a bit to be desired on timing and intermediate routes.
  
• Luck impressed me more in the bowl game loss to OSU than he did in any of the previous games I watched. He made more NFL type throws in that game than in previous games so that did answer some of the questions I had about him. However, I still never had the opportunity to see Luck have success throwing the ball in a game where Stanford's running game was shut down and this has always been one of my primary concerns with him.
  
• With the choice being between Luck and RG3, I would take Luck without question. Not because I think RG3 is going to be a bust but because I think he's going to have a much tougher learning curve based on the type of offense and types of throws he regularly made in college.
  

I am not sold.

RG3 will NEVER be Peyton Manning/Aaron Rodgers/Michael Vick in any aspect.

Watch more film, the secret film. The Luck fan club has the top secret film in a box for us members only if you join.

Interesting that you have a problem with Jay's signature stating that Luck will never be Manning but you turn around and say the same thing about RG3. I'm sure your intent was sarcastic or ironic but it came off more as hypocritical than anything else.

[Demon]

Jay = obvious troll or bitter Manning fanboy?

Take your pick.

[Dan]

And for the record:

• No matter what their completion percentages were, I don't believe that RG3 was a more accurate passer than Luck, but then again I think Luck's accuracy has been overstated in some cases, and in others just completely overblown...such as:
  .
  I've said it before and I'll say it again, during the 2011 season, Nick Foles' timing and accuracy was significantly better than either Luck or Griffin. Overall, Luck was more accurate on a wider variety of routes than RG3 was but imo, both of their accuracy left a bit to be desired on timing and intermediate routes.
  

Why aren't you an NFL scout? If Nick Foles is significantly more accurate and better with timing (therefore a significantly better passer) why is he touted as a 6th round pick while these two get all the attention? Are you a genius, or is there a reason nobody else agrees?

[John Dee]

http://www.jsonline....-148038285.html

Discuss

OMG... how about "we" consider the source? IE OP.

[Fx Stryker]

And the * who did this year are, thankfully, a minority (and the reason I hope Luck changes his number)

Yea, at that time it was a minority, and extremists for that matter. As the season went on more and more started rooting against their own team. You know it, and I know it. So in a way they are just the same.

[Dan]

Yea, at that time it was a minority, and extremists for that matter. As the season went on more and more started rooting against their own team. You know it, and I know it. So in a way they are just the same.

I think there's a big difference between buying a shirt of a college player in week 6, to wanting Colts to lose to Jaguars in week 17. In week 17, there was nothing to play for except a tiny bit of pride. Remember, at this point, there was no "Luck or Griffin" because the RG3 Hype Train hadn't started yet. In many fan's minds it was a case of, a victory over Jaguars that will be forgotten but make us feel slightly less terrible for a little while, versus the chance to pick the best prospect in decades. I think choosing the latter option is very different to abandoning your team in week 6.

[FireJimCaldwell]

Who are you a fan of?

He used the word CULTS not COLTS.

Which fits some 100%.

[Fx Stryker]

I think there's a big difference between buying a shirt of a college player in week 6, to wanting Colts to lose to Jaguars in week 17. In week 17, there was nothing to play for except a tiny bit of pride. Remember, at this point, there was no "Luck or Griffin" because the RG3 Hype Train hadn't started yet. In many fan's minds it was a case of, a victory over Jaguars that will be forgotten but make us feel slightly less terrible for a little while, versus the chance to pick the best prospect in decades. I think choosing the latter option is very different to abandoning your team in week 6.

I'm not just referring to week 17. It grew each week, but 17 was the worst. It may be just me, but I think TEAM pride is more important than an INDIVIDUAL prospect. So I don't see why individual over team was more important, and okay for that matter in week 17. But lately everyone seems to preach team over individual.

I guess cherry picking is alright when it benefits the individual.

[Dan]

I'm not just referring to week 17. It grew each week, but 17 was the worst. It may be just me, but I think TEAM pride is more important than an INDIVIDUAL prospect. So I don't see why individual over team was more important, and okay for that matter in week 17. But lately everyone seems to preach team over individual.

I guess cherry picking is alright when it benefits the individual.

It's more than an individual, it was what people considered to be best for the team. I don't think it's right to look down on people on either side of the win or lose debate, but either way that's a debate long ended that doesn't need to be revived.

[Jules]

I'm not just referring to week 17. It grew each week, but 17 was the worst. It may be just me, but I think TEAM pride is more important than an INDIVIDUAL prospect. So I don't see why individual over team was more important, and okay for that matter in week 17. But lately everyone seems to preach team over individual.

I guess cherry picking is alright when it benefits the individual.

Team pride? Well someone should have told them that before a few games. Like getting blown out of New Orleans for example on primetime. And various others.

By the final week or two I was just glad the season was nearing it's end for the Colts finally. First and foremost before Luck I wanted the Colts to get rid of some coaches.

[Jason_]

Why aren't you an NFL scout? If Nick Foles is significantly more accurate and better with timing (therefore a significantly better passer) why is he touted as a 6th round pick while these two get all the attention? Are you a genius, or is there a reason nobody else agrees?

Why was Tom Brady still available in the 6th round?

Why were Ryan Leaf, Jamarcus Russell, David Carr, Tim Couch etc thought of so highly that they were all top 5 picks?

Why was Arian Foster undrafted?

Why was Robert Mathis still available in the 5th round?

See, I can match your cliche'd response with one of my own. ;)

[Jason_]

Jay = obvious troll or bitter Manning fanboy?

Take your pick.

Which makes you and that post what exactly?

[Dan]

Why was Tom Brady still available in the 6th round?

Why were Ryan Leaf, Jamarcus Russell, David Carr, Tim Couch etc thought of so highly that they were all top 5 picks?

Why was Arian Foster undrafted?

Why was Robert Mathis still available in the 5th round?

See, I can match your cliche'd response with one of my own. ;)

Because they all made either dramatic improvements or unexpected regressions. Are you genuinely suggesting Nick Foles is the next Tom Brady, and is better than Luck and Griffin?

[Demon]

Which makes you and that post what exactly?

None of the above.

[Jules]

Which makes you and that post what exactly?

Honest.

[Fx Stryker]

It's more than an individual, it was what people considered to be best for the team. I don't think it's right to look down on people on either side of the win or lose debate, but either way that's a debate long ended that doesn't need to be revived.

That debate is over now. I'm not trying reviving it. It may be what people considered "best" for the team. It still favoring an individual over your current team. If doesn't work out then it wasn't the best was it?

Team pride? Well someone should have told them that before a few games. Like getting blown out of New Orleans for example on primetime. And various others.

By the final week or two I was just glad the season was nearing it's end for the Colts finally. First and foremost before Luck I wanted the Colts to get rid of some coaches.

Well no matter how prior games meant doesn't mean it's okay rooting against them. Caldwell was gone no matter what. If we beat Jacksonville he wasn't staying. You can try rationalize rooting against your team all you want. Whatever makes you feel better.

[Jason_]

Because they all made either dramatic improvements or unexpected regressions. Are you genuinely suggesting Nick Foles is the next Tom Brady, and is better than Luck and Griffin?

And Foles couldn't fall into the "unexpected regressions" then because.......?

Where did I suggest that Foles was the next Brady and that he was better than Luck and Griffin? I said he was more accurate, especially on timing routes and I do genuinely believe that. I do think Foles is a better pure passer than Luck or Griffin at this point but that doesn't mean he's a better overall QB. I do think he's a better overall QB than RG3 though.

[Jules]

That debate is over now. I'm not trying reviving it. It may be what people considered "best" for the team. It still favoring an individual over team. If doesn't work out then it wasn't the best was it?

Well no matter how prior games meant doesn't mean it's okay rooting against them. Caldwell was gone no matter what. If we beat Jacksonville he wasn't staying. You can try rationalize rooting against your team all you want. Whatever makes you feel better.

I did not even have to root against them hardly at all. I knew they were going to lose most games. I picked them to lose all but one game last season in my group. (which I won btw )

What I felt or did had no impact on anything. I was pretty optimistic they might suprise and win a few many did not think they would, like the game vs. Pittsburgh. I felt that game was actually a season changer. After that loss I felt they would keep losing. If they had won that game I felt they might have won a few soon.

[Jason_]

None of the above.

Your post not only added nothing to the discussion but also questioned another fan's fan-hood which is against the TOS and there have been numerous reminders from the mods about not doing this. So those two factors could easily, imo, classify your post as trolling.

[John Dee]

People seem to be up and down on both qbs

Luck reminds me of vegetables. He might not look as exciting as some of the other stuff on the plate but once you break it down and consider all of the vitamins and nutrients offered you realize that its the best thing for you.

And just imagine... Luck having "exactly the same #'s as Cam? Oh he did?

oh well...

[Dan]

And Foles couldn't fall into the "unexpected regressions" then because.......?

Where did I suggest that Foles was the next Brady and that he was better than Luck and Griffin? I said he was more accurate, especially on timing routes and I do genuinely believe that. I do think Foles is a better pure passer than Luck or Griffin at this point but that doesn't mean he's a better overall QB. I do think he's a better overall QB than RG3 though.

Because if you're calling it now, it would hardly class as unexpected?

I don't understand though - you're saying Foles is not only a better passer than Luck and Griffin, but significantly better. Judging by your previous post, the only positive you seem to see in Luck over others is a learning curve, Foles included. Therefore why would you not think Foles is a better QB than Luck? Genuine question.