Jump to content
Indianapolis Colts
Indianapolis Colts Fan Forum

The Big “What If”


Recommended Posts

What if, somehow, Jim Irsay had managed to successfully keep Peyton Manning and draft Andrew Luck?

 

I saw a graphic that compared how long ago every NFL team has started a rookie QB. Colts of course did it last year with Richardson. And with Luck. And with Manning.

 

Packers haven’t started a rookie QB since like the 80s.

 

Imagine if the Colts had let Luck learn from Peyton for at least a year or two, like Rodgers did with Favre.

 

Whether it was Polian, Grigson, or Ballard, let’s assume the staff could put together a team good enough for either QB to win. After all, the Grigson Colts with Luck beat the Manning Broncos. In the Playoffs.

 

But for the sake of argument, let’s say Irsay and whatever staff he chooses re-sign Manning, draft Luck, and then actually build an OLine to protect this thrice-in-a-lifetime QB passing-of-the-torch. Manning-to-Luck joining Favre-to-Rodgers and Montana-to-Young as the top-three greatest runs of QB play in the history of the NFL.

 

The careers of both Manning and Luck might have lasted longer with even more accolades. The 2010s coulda, shoulda, and woulda been the Colts decade.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Believe it or not, but this hypothetical was a pretty real scenario for a while in the spring of 2012 before we let Manning go. Quite a bit of debate happened on this very idea. 
 

In hindsight, I’d still have to say it was for the best for Peyton. I don’t think he would’ve made it to two more Super Bowls, let alone winning another one with us. Denver was stacked and primed. All they needed was a QB to guide them. We were the opposite. We needed a total rebuild.

 

As for Luck? I could see where him sitting would’ve benefited, but would he have learned to take less hits? 
 

His rookie year was phenomenal. We went 11-5 and made the playoffs. At the time, it really felt like everything was working out for both Peyton and the Colts… 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 Considering that Manning's neck issue was an issue, I don't see it.  I believe that the Colts had a genuine concern regarding it. If they didn't why not trade the Luck pick for a boatload of picks, or picks and player(s) to make another Superbowl run, or two, with Manning? In retrospect, and disregarding Luck's early retirement, I believe that the Colts were setting themselves up for the future...it is a shame how it all played out. Happy for PM that he won another SB though.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 hours ago, Lucky Colts Fan said:

What if, somehow, Jim Irsay had managed to successfully keep Peyton Manning and draft Andrew Luck?

 

I saw a graphic that compared how long ago every NFL team has started a rookie QB. Colts of course did it last year with Richardson. And with Luck. And with Manning.

 

Packers haven’t started a rookie QB since like the 80s.

 

Imagine if the Colts had let Luck learn from Peyton for at least a year or two, like Rodgers did with Favre.

 

Whether it was Polian, Grigson, or Ballard, let’s assume the staff could put together a team good enough for either QB to win. After all, the Grigson Colts with Luck beat the Manning Broncos. In the Playoffs.

 

But for the sake of argument, let’s say Irsay and whatever staff he chooses re-sign Manning, draft Luck, and then actually build an OLine to protect this thrice-in-a-lifetime QB passing-of-the-torch. Manning-to-Luck joining Favre-to-Rodgers and Montana-to-Young as the top-three greatest runs of QB play in the history of the NFL.

 

The careers of both Manning and Luck might have lasted longer with even more accolades. The 2010s coulda, shoulda, and woulda been the Colts decade.

Luck would have had more time to go Snowboarding and quit earlier.....   :worms:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
  • Thread of the Week

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • Probably just Camp body , I doubt he makes the roster.
    • I think ST is going to be his bread and butter.
    • from nfl network    Taking away half his game would fundamentally change the player the Colts drafted at No. 4 overall a year ago. Steichen's analogy, however, skirts past that fact that Curry shooting from deep does not in any way increase his injury risk. Richardson taking off can, as evidenced by him leaving three of his four starts early last season.   I don’t see it as a bad analogy. Sure, he “skirts past” the injury risk. But the injury risk is there. It’s there if the pocket collapses and he scrambles out with a spy defender crashing down. It’s always going to be there, and I’m confident they are working to reducing the risk of his running game. But I largely agree that taking away “half his game,” and at this point of his career his best half (by a long shot), would be a huge risk for this franchise as well. His running can mask any slumps in his passing development, and can help this team reach another level in the present. He was drafted to be a runner. Curry was drafted to shoot long balls. If it’s the first thing that came to Steichen’s mind, god forbid he say it…    Let. The. Boy. Runnnn  
    • Yes!   Excellent point.   Smartly said.     1000 percent agree.    🏆 
    • The only comment I’ve heard or read in the media is basically the same thing.   “We get it, but that’s a bad analogy.”     I get his point.  I think it was in artfully stated.  
  • Members

×
×
  • Create New...