- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
Andrew luck overrated?
Posted on 1/28/12 at 7:16 pm
Posted on 1/28/12 at 7:16 pm
I don't understand how he is regarded as such a sure thing. What makes him any more of a sure thing than cam newton, Jamarcus Russell, Sam Bradford, Ryan leaf, or any other highly drafted QB? Stanford played Oregon, USC, OSU and then a bunch of mediocre teams.
great prospect? Ok I'll go with that. But sure thing? Nobody is a sure thing.
great prospect? Ok I'll go with that. But sure thing? Nobody is a sure thing.
This post was edited on 1/28/12 at 7:17 pm
12
Posted on 1/28/12 at 7:18 pm to motorbreath
Posted on 1/28/12 at 7:19 pm to motorbreath
quote:
motorbreath
Posted on 1/28/12 at 7:20 pm to motorbreath
Posted on 1/28/12 at 7:21 pm to locotiger
quote:
Exactly my sentiment every time I hear he is the next Peyton manning.
Posted on 1/28/12 at 7:21 pm to Sir Saint
He's absolutely overrated in the best prospect ever to come out sense of the word.
However, to compare him to someone like Jamarcus is laughable.
However, to compare him to someone like Jamarcus is laughable.
Posted on 1/28/12 at 7:24 pm to motorbreath
He is an ideal prospect, pretty simple. He measures well in every regard as a QB. I am really fricking exciting to see him in the League.
Is he a sure thing? No. However, it will be shocking if he bombs.
At this point, it is quite possible to see Luck as a top 15 QB. There are 14 good QBs in the NFL right now, IMO. It would not surprise me to see Luck there within a season.
Luck is so developed as a QB at such a young age. It is really spectactular. Once again, it does not mean he is sure thing, but he is the closest thing we have seen to a sure thing in a while. I actually expect a decent number of picks next year for him, but I think he can complete over 62% of his passes, which would be a great start.
FWIW, I will be dreading the imminent, countless threads saying Cam >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Luck and Tebow >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Luck.
Is he a sure thing? No. However, it will be shocking if he bombs.
At this point, it is quite possible to see Luck as a top 15 QB. There are 14 good QBs in the NFL right now, IMO. It would not surprise me to see Luck there within a season.
Luck is so developed as a QB at such a young age. It is really spectactular. Once again, it does not mean he is sure thing, but he is the closest thing we have seen to a sure thing in a while. I actually expect a decent number of picks next year for him, but I think he can complete over 62% of his passes, which would be a great start.
FWIW, I will be dreading the imminent, countless threads saying Cam >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Luck and Tebow >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Luck.
Posted on 1/28/12 at 7:24 pm to FootballNostradamus
Im not comparing him to Jamarcus Russell per say but every highly regarded prospect prior to them ever taking a snap in the NFL.
Posted on 1/28/12 at 7:25 pm to motorbreath
quote:
Exactly my sentiment every time I hear he is the next Peyton manning.
Luck is actually a marginally better prospect.
Of course, Manning is the greatest QB ever IMO.
ETA: I should clarify. That does mean I expect Luck to be the GOAT. It just means that Luck is higher touted at the time of the draft.
This post was edited on 1/28/12 at 7:29 pm
Posted on 1/28/12 at 7:27 pm to Vicks Kennel Club
quote:
Of course, Manning is the greatest QB ever IMO.
Ah, shite.
Posted on 1/28/12 at 7:27 pm to motorbreath
:csb:
Posted on 1/28/12 at 7:43 pm to motorbreath
If he doesn't become the next 'Brady/Manning/Brees' of this next generation of QBs, then he won't live up to the hype. It will be interesting to see how his career progresses. Sad thing is that if he has a Matt Ryan/Dovovan McNabb/Tono Romo (very good, but not elite) type career, it will be a failure to many people.
Posted on 1/28/12 at 7:46 pm to ehidal1
Andrew Luck reminds me more of Aaron Rodgers than John Elway, but really there are only marginal differences between the two.
Posted on 1/28/12 at 8:18 pm to motorbreath
As a guy who actually followed Stanford much the last years, the OP could not be more wrong. Luck had literally no talent hardly around him to pass to.
What makes Luck special is his brain. He ran the most complex Offense in CFB last year. Stanford asked him to do the most complex things only the elite of the NFL do. Combine that with a great arm/much accuracy/ tall and a very good runner/incredible team leader/VERY humble guy- always putting team first/ect...
And it is no surprise NFL scouts are calling him the most NFL ready in a generation. Also, Stanford University insiders tell me had not Luck been on the team this year Stanford probably wouldn't of had a winning season.
Best ever? Who knows...
Sure thing? Who knows...
Most NFL ready QB in a Generation? Seems so...
More NFL ready then P. Manning and J. Elway were at this point? Very True...
What makes Luck special is his brain. He ran the most complex Offense in CFB last year. Stanford asked him to do the most complex things only the elite of the NFL do. Combine that with a great arm/much accuracy/ tall and a very good runner/incredible team leader/VERY humble guy- always putting team first/ect...
And it is no surprise NFL scouts are calling him the most NFL ready in a generation. Also, Stanford University insiders tell me had not Luck been on the team this year Stanford probably wouldn't of had a winning season.
Best ever? Who knows...
Sure thing? Who knows...
Most NFL ready QB in a Generation? Seems so...
More NFL ready then P. Manning and J. Elway were at this point? Very True...
Posted on 1/28/12 at 8:18 pm to motorbreath
It's just that his "floor" is high, making his bust potential very low that's all. Guys like Newton for example probably had a higher ceiling than him but it was doubtful whether or not that would be achieved, and his bust potential was pretty high.
Posted on 1/28/12 at 8:25 pm to motorbreath
quote:
I don't understand how he is regarded as such a sure thing
Sure he gets a lot of hype (IMO, it is deserved), but I've never heard ANYONE say it was a sure thing.
quote:
What makes him any more of a sure thing than cam newton, Jamarcus Russell
If you can't tell the difference between Luck and Russell coming out of college, you have no place starting a thread like this.
quote:
Stanford played Oregon, USC, OSU and then a bunch of mediocre teams.
What confrences QBs come from have NO correlation to how well the do in the pros.
Posted on 1/28/12 at 8:52 pm to DucksflyinPAC
quote:
As a guy who actually followed Stanford much the last years, the OP could not be more wrong. Luck had literally no talent hardly around him to pass to.
He's had arguably the best tight ends in the nation the past two years. It's impossible to understate how much of an impact someone like Fleener has on the defense. I wouldn't say he's better than Clemson's Dwayne Allen, but he gets vertical down the seam better than anyone.
quote:
Stanford asked him to do the most complex things only the elite of the NFL do.
No they didn't, and I'm very familiar with Stanford's offense. One of the biggest components of a Harbaugh offense is in its simplicity. It's one of the reasons Alex Smith adjusted so well this season.
An example of the simplistic nature of a Harbaugh offense is in the way Harbaugh builds hot routes into each pass play. Instead of sight-adjustments where a receiver and quarterback must both read blitz and adjust their routes/throw accordingly, Harbaugh gives the quarterback a set blitz beater each play.
Smart football has a good article on this if you want to read up on it.
Harbaugh's Simplistic Offense
quote:
Also, Stanford University insiders tell me had not Luck been on the team this year Stanford probably wouldn't of had a winning season.
Smart propaganda on their part to build Luck's draft hype. The statement itself, however, is ridiculous. Stanford had a top running attack this season and a decent defense. They could have been a 6-6 team in the Pac 12 with Jordan Jefferson at quarterback.
quote:
More NFL ready then P. Manning and J. Elway were at this point? Very True...
Eh, Elway and Manning were both just as ready to play in the NFL as it was at the time when they entered the league. They're also more physically advanced than Luck is.
My thing with Luck is how dominant Stanford's rushing attack has been during his career. You can make just about any quarterback look good when you're rushing for 200+ each game. Not until junior year was Stanford really relying on Luck to win games for them. Until then he was throwing 15-20 times off the best playaction game in the league and was more of a game manager. I'm going to be very curious to see how he does at a place like Indy that has no rushing attack for him to lean on.
I do agree that he's extremely advanced mentally and this will help him at the next level. He reminds me of Matt Ryan in the sense when it comes to young quarterbacks who excel at getting their teams into the correct sets at the line of scrimmage. Like Ryan, however, he doesn't boast elite physical tools. He's got solid arm strength and he throws a better deep ball than Ryan, but he's got nowhere near a cannon.
Again, not saying Luck is anywhere near a scrub, but this "greatest prospect ever" talk is just nonsense.
Posted on 1/28/12 at 9:46 pm to FootballNostradamus
quote:
He's had arguably the best tight ends in the nation the past two years. It's impossible to understate how much of an impact someone like Fleener has on the defense. I wouldn't say he's better than Clemson's Dwayne Allen, but he gets vertical down the seam better than anyone.
I am not debating Stanford's TE quality. I already know they have good TE's, however they all were not healthy last year and well anyone that follows Stanford knows they literally had no talent at WR last year with Owusu getting knocked out all season. Thus RB's and TE's is all he had to pass to meaning no talent at WR. When National media say, "luck had no talent around him to pass to", they are referring to WR's as that position is the main targets of a QB. They do use their TE's a lot, only because they had no good WR's.
quote:
Stanford asked him to do the most complex things only the elite of the NFL do. No they didn't, and I'm very familiar with Stanford's offense. One of the biggest components of a Harbaugh offense is in its simplicity. It's one of the reasons Alex Smith adjusted so well this season. An example of the simplistic nature of a Harbaugh offense is in the way Harbaugh builds hot routes into each pass play. Instead of sight-adjustments where a receiver and quarterback must both read blitz and adjust their routes/throw accordingly, Harbaugh gives the quarterback a set blitz beater each play.
Did you even go to a Stanford game last year? And have you ever spoken with Stanford Athletic Staff about them? I have done both.
Stanford may of had more plays in their playbook then any other program.
And FYI, Head Coach Shaw was the brains behind Stanford's Offense not only last year as HC, but the year before as OC. That is why Stanford people were not worried after losing Harbaugh last year as Shaw was the actual brains behind their Offense. And if you saw any of Coach Shaws press Conferences last year you would know that he himself said as much about how Complex their (coach Shaw's) Offense is and how Luck was asked to do what no other CFB QB does. They were Complex in the sense of # of plays their playbook and in how much they asked Luck to do within it as a QB. (all the checks/reads/adjustments/formation shifts- Luck was asked to do at the line of scrimmage)If you think otherwise then you are disagreeing with Stanford's own Head Coach. Something tells me you did not even watch much Stanford CFB this year as ESPN went overboard on making all these points. Herby for instance would not shut up about those two talking points:(not much talent around luck to pass to, and how no QB had a more complex task ahead of him as a QB in what Stanford asked him to do). I encourage you to go to Stanford websites, or ESPN's PAC-12 's blog/Stanford Blog, and learn up as they routinely make the same points as I did. If you are debating these things then you are disagreeing with Stanford Staff and are only making straw men arguments with me for the sake of arguing.
quote:
Eh, Elway and Manning were both just as ready to play in the NFL as it was at the time when they entered the league.
Elway would disagree with you. So too would many NFL scouts who have said as much. Perhaps you consider yourself more knowledgeable then Elway and numerous NFL scouts and NFL general managers?
Posted on 1/28/12 at 9:59 pm to DucksflyinPAC
CAM is way better than Luck
Posted on 1/28/12 at 10:17 pm to DucksflyinPAC
quote:
I am not debating Stanford's TE quality. I already know they have good TE's, however they all were not healthy last year and well anyone that follows Stanford knows they literally had no talent at WR last year with Owusu getting knocked out all season. Thus RB's and TE's is all he had to pass to meaning no talent at WR. When National media say, "luck had no talent around him to pass to", they are referring to WR's as that position is the main targets of a QB. They do use their TE's a lot, only because they had no good WR's.
I don't care what the media is referring to when they say he has no talent around him. It's untrue and ignorant. It's like saying Brady has no one to throw to because Hernandez and Gronk are tight ends.
Stephan Taylor also is an NFL-caliber running back who is one of the best pass catching running backs in the nation. Again, there's no doubting that Luck had more than enough talent around him to catch the ball.
quote:
Did you even go to a Stanford game last year? And have you ever spoken with Stanford Athletic Staff about them? I have done both.
Nah I didn't go to a Stanford game this year. I have, however, seen Harbaugh twice at coaching clinics and spoke with him briefly at one. I also have access to the All-22 film of two Stanford games this year, and I can tell you the concepts they run aren't outer-worldy in complication. Now there's no way for me to tell from the film how much Luck does at the line of scrimmage (and again, I mentioned how impressed I was with his pre-snap work so I'm not discounting him) but they run a pretty standard offense.
I think you need some reading comprehension bro. I noted repeatedly how impressive Luck's presnap involvement was. However, what I'm trying to say is Stanford runs basic route concepts from numerous personnel packages from various formations with intricate shits and motions.
Also, I know plenty about David Shaw. He definitely had a big impact on Stanford's passing attack, but the biggest addition to Stanford's offensive staff during Harbaugh's tenure was the Greg Roman hire in 2009. His zone blocking principles are what developed the dominant rushing attack we've seen from Stanford lately. I'm still not completely sold on Shaw. I think he'll do well at Stanford but Harbaugh and Roman are as elite at their positions as any in the country.
quote:
Elway would disagree with you. So too would many NFL scouts who have said as much. Perhaps you consider yourself more knowledgeable then Elway and numerous NFL scouts and NFL general managers?
When was the last time an announcer said "yea he's not better than me"? None of them are going to come out and say they're the GOAT. Also, it's just today's day and age to always laud the current thing as the GOAT. We see it with Tiger over Jack. We see it with Federer over Borg, Sampras and Lavar. The 2005 USC team is GOAT before they even win the National Championship. We love hyperboles nowadays, that's all.
Again, Luck's a damn good prospect but it's not absurd to have a couple concerns about him.
Page 1 of 2
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News