Doyle Article: Comparing Manning's fist 6 games to Richardson's

[masterlock]

I found this interesting: https://www.indystar.com/story/sports/columnists/gregg-doyel/2024/09/18/colts-qb-anthony-richardson-an-outlier-defying-statistical-explanation/75249368007/

(I would've linked directly to the article but apparently, the mods too away the ability to insert a link.) 

 

Greg Doyle wrote an article in which he compared Manning's first 6 games as a Rookie to Richardson's.

 

From the article:

 

(Richardson) "Six games into his career he’s completing 55.5% of his passer (76-for-137) for 993 yards, six touchdowns and five interceptions. He’s also run for 229 yards and five touchdowns. "

 

"Six games into his NFL career, Peyton Manning was completing 53.8% of his passes (113-for-210) for 1,364 yards, six touchdowns and 14 interceptions. He’d also run six times for 33 yards and no score. Numerically speaking, Peyton Manning was terrible. And the Colts were 1-5 in 1998."

 

And lastly:

"Richardson has a similar passing philosophy to Manning circa 1998 – throwing the ball much farther downfield than quarterbacks today, the same as quarterbacks were doing in 1998 – but plays the rest of the game with no comparison to Manning. The footspeed, the willingness to run, the inferior talent around him (Manning was throwing in 1998 to Marshall Faulk and Marvin Harrison, among others)? No comparison."

 

 

[JediXMan]

Different QBs, different eras and rules.

Josh Allen rookie year is more comparable same rules and similar type QBs.

[DougDew]

When somebody whips out the stats it tells me they do not understand the situation much.  With Doyel its not surprising.

 

The issue with AR is accuracy.  Was Manning inaccurate?  How much did accuracy play a part in the stats that were used? Did Manning try to force the ball because he trusted his arm, while AR just misses a throw?  Big difference.

 

Doyel is simply trying to excuse AR and found some stats to present so it would look like he was on a no different path than Manning.

[coltsblue1844]

22 minutes ago, DougDew said:

When somebody whips out the stats it tells me they do not understand the situation much.  With Doyel its not surprising.

 

The issue with AR is accuracy.  Was Manning inaccurate?  How much did accuracy play a part in the stats that were used? Did Manning try to force the ball because he trusted his arm, while AR just misses a throw?  Big difference.

 

Doyel is simply trying to excuse AR and found some stats to present so it would look like he was on a no different path than Manning.

everyone who compares rookie Peyton to rookie Anthony... they omit that Peyton had YEARS of good tape from college, showing that he could make all of the throws, was accurate etc... Richardson has very little tape and most of it is not good.  We drafted him based on his arm and athletic ability, in the hopes that we could turn him into a good QB...maybe we will, maybe we wont... But enough comparing him to a rookie from 26 years ago, that was a Heisman finalist and had years of good tape (was labeled as a cant miss prospect, vs Richardson labeled as a raw project)

[GoColts8818]

Kravitz apparently sat down with Flacco recent and Flacco told him it took him 20 games to feel fully comfortable in the NFL.   While I understand criticism of Richardson’s flaws by anyone I just hope people keep an open mind he’s no where near a finished product yet and that’s completely normal.  

[coltsblue1844]

7 minutes ago, GoColts8818 said:

Kravitz apparently sat down with Flacco recent and Flacco told him it took him 20 games to feel fully comfortable in the NFL.   While I understand criticism of Richardson’s flaws by anyone I just hope people keep an open mind he’s no where near a finished product yet and that’s completely normal.  

I'm just hopeful that he "gets it" sooner than later...meaning we can tell if he will be the guy or not.      I also still want a new GM, DC etc... Jury is still out on Steichen, but i think changing the offense while Richardson is still learning may do more harm than good, unless the new GM wants to bring in his own coach, at least it's still early in Richardson's career in that case

[cdgacoltsfan]

2 hours ago, masterlock said:

I found this interesting: https://www.indystar.com/story/sports/columnists/gregg-doyel/2024/09/18/colts-qb-anthony-richardson-an-outlier-defying-statistical-explanation/75249368007/

(I would've linked directly to the article but apparently, the mods too away the ability to insert a link.) 

 

Greg Doyle wrote an article in which he compared Manning's first 6 games as a Rookie to Richardson's.

 

From the article:

 

(Richardson) "Six games into his career he’s completing 55.5% of his passer (76-for-137) for 993 yards, six touchdowns and five interceptions. He’s also run for 229 yards and five touchdowns. "

 

"Six games into his NFL career, Peyton Manning was completing 53.8% of his passes (113-for-210) for 1,364 yards, six touchdowns and 14 interceptions. He’d also run six times for 33 yards and no score. Numerically speaking, Peyton Manning was terrible. And the Colts were 1-5 in 1998."

 

And lastly:

"Richardson has a similar passing philosophy to Manning circa 1998 – throwing the ball much farther downfield than quarterbacks today, the same as quarterbacks were doing in 1998 – but plays the rest of the game with no comparison to Manning. The footspeed, the willingness to run, the inferior talent around him (Manning was throwing in 1998 to Marshall Faulk and Marvin Harrison, among others)? No comparison."

 

 

Oh ..this won't sit well with our resident forum GMs. It's been a bad week for them ..they learn Cross is leading the league in tackles, the OL is ranked #1 and now this.....Get ready for some serious spinning.

[Moosejawcolt]

2 hours ago, masterlock said:

I found this interesting: https://www.indystar.com/story/sports/columnists/gregg-doyel/2024/09/18/colts-qb-anthony-richardson-an-outlier-defying-statistical-explanation/75249368007/

(I would've linked directly to the article but apparently, the mods too away the ability to insert a link.) 

 

Greg Doyle wrote an article in which he compared Manning's first 6 games as a Rookie to Richardson's.

 

From the article:

 

(Richardson) "Six games into his career he’s completing 55.5% of his passer (76-for-137) for 993 yards, six touchdowns and five interceptions. He’s also run for 229 yards and five touchdowns. "

 

"Six games into his NFL career, Peyton Manning was completing 53.8% of his passes (113-for-210) for 1,364 yards, six touchdowns and 14 interceptions. He’d also run six times for 33 yards and no score. Numerically speaking, Peyton Manning was terrible. And the Colts were 1-5 in 1998."

 

And lastly:

"Richardson has a similar passing philosophy to Manning circa 1998 – throwing the ball much farther downfield than quarterbacks today, the same as quarterbacks were doing in 1998 – but plays the rest of the game with no comparison to Manning. The footspeed, the willingness to run, the inferior talent around him (Manning was throwing in 1998 to Marshall Faulk and Marvin Harrison, among others)? No comparison."

 

 

This is where stats don't matter. Based on his college tape, the team expected Manning to improve. They gave Manning the year , as they felt he could handle the pressure. Those stats you mentioned were not going to be the floor for Manning. One could argue that the stats Richardson has so far accumulated could be his ceiling.  This is coming from a huge Richardon fan. That being said, let's give him the year and judge him after 17 games.

[twfish]

I just don’t think Richardson has been able to find a solid groove yet. He’s obviously had some incredible throws but he needs a game against a bad defense where he can sit in the pocket and pick a team apart to get his confidence up and in a true rhythm. That will go a long way for him IMHO

[Indianapolis-Colts-Fan]

My issues with the team have very little to do with Richardson. I’d love to see him ball out. But it’s the rest of the team that has me concerned. They’re supposed to be middle of the pack at least and what they’ve put in the field has me concerned. A great QB can make a team look a lot better than it is. AR isn’t there yet. But I still want him starting. 

[masterlock]

17 minutes ago, Moosejawcolt said:

This is where stats don't matter. Based on his college tape, the team expected Manning to improve. They gave Manning the year , as they felt he could handle the pressure. Those stats you mentioned were not going to be the floor for Manning. One could argue that the stats Richardson has so far accumulated could be his ceiling.  This is coming from a huge Richardon fan. That being said, let's give him the year and judge him after 17 games.

Yes, you COULD argue that--if you believed in the power of small sample sizes.  😉

[Superman]

38 minutes ago, GoColts8818 said:

Kravitz apparently sat down with Flacco recent and Flacco told him it took him 20 games to feel fully comfortable in the NFL.   While I understand criticism of Richardson’s flaws by anyone I just hope people keep an open mind he’s no where near a finished product yet and that’s completely normal.  

 

Which is the point of the comparison to begin with. Young QBs need time, more than six games. Seems like a simple concept.

[RollerColt]

3 minutes ago, Superman said:

 

Which is the point of the comparison to begin with. Young QBs need time, more than six games. Seems like a simple concept.

Agreed. 
 

The entire point is that even the greats needed years to develop. Tom Brady has talked at length at how he disagrees with the modern process of tossing rookie QBs into the fire and just trying to have them “figure it out”. 

[GoColts8818]

17 minutes ago, Superman said:

 

Which is the point of the comparison to begin with. Young QBs need time, more than six games. Seems like a simple concept.

I didn’t say anything about comparison.  I just sighted an example of how long it took Flacco as a real example not saying it will take Richardson that long or shorter.  My point was your later point.  

[Superman]

19 minutes ago, GoColts8818 said:

I didn’t say anything about comparison.  I just sighted an example of how long it took Flacco as a real example not saying it will take Richardson that long or shorter.  My point was your later point.  

 

I mean the comparison being made in the article/thread. And that's probably not the right word, it's just an example to illustrate the point that you're making -- it takes more than six games for a QB to figure out how to do their job.