PDA

View Full Version : Why is Luck the Consensus #1?



flippy
01-04-2012, 12:53 AM
I've seen Luck a few times and haven't been all that impressed. He looks like a good QB, but not the greatest QB to come out ever. Has the media hype gone overboard?

If my team had the #1 pick, I'd want RG3. I've only seen him a few times, but this kid is lightning in a bottle. He's gotta be the most athletic QB I've seen in college. But on top of it, he's got a great arm, even when he's on the move and feet aren't set.

Now I get there might be a few things in Luck's favor like 1. He takes snaps from under center, 2. He's got better mechanics, 3. He's got better size, and 4. He's worked with Harbaugh and went to Staford so he's probably ready to play right now.

But in RG3, I see a guy with a big accurate arm who's probably a better athlete than Michael Vick.

So I can't help but wonder why would anyone take Luck over RG3? Is his 6'1" height the main reason?

Is it the stigma against athletic QBs? And everyone still has this image of a pocket passer like Peyton or Brady or Marino vs a guy like Cam Newton or RG3?

I'm just curious why Luck is the sure thing. But RG3 has the better arm and is the better athlete. RG3 looks to me like a faster Vick, with Brady's deep ball, Rivers' throwing motion, and Doug Flutie's smallish size.

hawaiiansteel
01-04-2012, 02:26 AM
every time I've seen Luck play he's looked like the best college QB in this year's draft.

I watched him in the Fiesta bowl and Andrew Luck completed 27 of 31 passes for 347 yards and two touchdowns with one interception against Oklahoma State...

feltdizz
01-04-2012, 09:31 AM
every time I've seen Luck play he's looked like the best college QB in this year's draft.

I watched him in the Fiesta bowl and Andrew Luck completed 27 of 31 passes for 347 yards and two touchdowns with one interception against Oklahoma State...
OK State isn't known for their awesome defense...

I think the OT sequence defined Luck IMO. How do you have the best QB in football, some say the best QB in the last 20 years and you don't let him pass in OT?

Stanford has about 4 TE's over 6'5" tall and also has 3 power RB's. I haven't seen Luck make any throws that make me go "wow, this kid has it all"

I think he will be another Andy Dalton... that isn't a bad thing but he isn't going to be the QB everyone has hyped him up to be.

He also had an INT in 6 straight games. I just don't see what everyone else is seeing when I watch him.

I think Luck is the consensus #1 because the talking heads have to crown a QB every few years. Remember when Quinn was the best thing ever until Jamarcus Russell had a good bowl vs him?

Eich
01-04-2012, 09:36 AM
I've only watched Luck a few times and he looked good but I wasn't blown away. I also wonder why he's considered a guaranteed lock to be successful in the NFL. Passing in the NFL is an order of magnitude more difficult than in college. There are a LOT of QBs that people thought would be great in the NFL and they didn't pan out.

feltdizz
01-04-2012, 09:44 AM
I've only watched Luck a few times and he looked good but I wasn't blown away. I also wonder why he's considered a guaranteed lock to be successful in the NFL. Passing in the NFL is an order of magnitude more difficult than in college. There are a LOT of QBs that people thought would be great in the NFL and they didn't pan out.


I remember when people were big on Matt Ryan and I watched a game to see if he was any good and he threw a 50 yard bomb to the right corner of the endzone while running to his left.

After the game I felt like Ryan was legit or would have a decent NFL career. I've watched Luck throw a pick 6 against Duke, USC and get owned by Oregon.

I've seen him put together some solid drives but I haven't seen him throw guys open or thread defenders. Most of his passes have been 10 yard drags and 12 yard passes to TE's.

flippy
01-04-2012, 09:55 AM
If RG3 was 6'5" he'd be the no brainer #1.

But I'm a highlight watcher more than following any specific players through every game they play, so maybe there's something that I'm missing. Heck I miss a ton on the games I watch week in and week out.

Oviedo
01-04-2012, 10:01 AM
Luck is #1 because he fits the pro style QB stereotype in terms of size and throwing ability plus he comes out of a pass oriented offense. In other words he looks like a college version of Peyton Manning. He has also performed at a high enough level without really bad games to appear to be consistent at what he does. He also comes from a perceived good pedigree with a father who was a pro QB so he grew up as an "insider" with insider knowledge.

Bottomline: He is the safe pick at QB and when you have the #1 pick you have huge pressure to be risk adverse.

feltdizz
01-04-2012, 10:02 AM
If RG3 was 6'5" he'd be the no brainer #1.

But I'm a highlight watcher more than following any specific players through every game they play, so maybe there's something that I'm missing. Heck I miss a ton on the games I watch week in and week out.

If RGIII had Luck's size it wouldn't even be close.

feltdizz
01-04-2012, 10:07 AM
Luck is #1 because he fits the pro style QB stereotype in terms of size and throwing ability plus he comes out of a pass oriented offense. In other words he looks like a college version of Peyton Manning. He has also performed at a high enough level without really bad games to appear to be consistent at what he does. He also comes from a perceived good pedigree with a father who was a pro QB so he grew up as an "insider" with insider knowledge.

Bottomline: He is the safe pick at QB and when you have the #1 pick you have huge pressure to be risk adverse.

Stanford is a passing offense? They look like a power run offense to me. They only have 1 WR and he was hurt half the year. Luck got him lit up in the bowl game again too....

That's one area of concern I have with Luck... he hasn't shown me he can throw a WR open in tight spaces because he rarely throws to WR's.

ramblinjim
01-04-2012, 10:38 AM
I don't watch a great deal of college football so this may not be relevant but something could also be said that he played at Stanford. The guys that play for Stanford have to be able to get IN to Stanford and stay eligible at Stanford. I'm guessing that not just any player can do that. So the guys he's throwing to, has blocking for him, runs the ball, and plays defense on his team may well be smart guys that are getting the absolute most out of their physical abilities yet would not even make the team at Alabama or LSU.

Some have said that if Luck was playing in the SEC he'd be average but he'd also be playing with SEC talent. I'm guessing he doesn't have that at Stanford.

RuthlessBurgher
01-04-2012, 10:42 AM
Luck is #1 because he fits the pro style QB stereotype in terms of size and throwing ability plus he comes out of a pass oriented offense. In other words he looks like a college version of Peyton Manning. He has also performed at a high enough level without really bad games to appear to be consistent at what he does. He also comes from a perceived good pedigree with a father who was a pro QB so he grew up as an "insider" with insider knowledge.

Bottomline: He is the safe pick at QB and when you have the #1 pick you have huge pressure to be risk adverse.

Stanford is a passing offense? They look like a power run offense to me. They only have 1 WR and he was hurt half the year. Luck got him lit up in the bowl game again too....

That's one area of concern I have with Luck... he hasn't shown me he can throw a WR open in tight spaces because he rarely throws to WR's.

It's a "pro-style" offense as opposed to, say, the run-and-shoot style run by Keenam at Houston or the goofy offense you have to create for someone like Tim Tebow, so his adjustment to the pro game shouldn't be too severe.

steeler_fan_in_t.o.
01-04-2012, 11:30 AM
I don't think that Luck has a higher ceiling, just a greater chance of hitting it. RG3 will have to be adjusted to the NFL game whereas Luck's style is already there.

Just as important is their floors. I would think that Luck's floor is somewhere around a Matt Hasselbeck, whereas the floor on RG3 is probably more like Vince Young.

feltdizz
01-04-2012, 11:39 AM
I don't watch a great deal of college football so this may not be relevant but something could also be said that he played at Stanford. The guys that play for Stanford have to be able to get IN to Stanford and stay eligible at Stanford. I'm guessing that not just any player can do that. So the guys he's throwing to, has blocking for him, runs the ball, and plays defense on his team may well be smart guys that are getting the absolute most out of their physical abilities yet would not even make the team at Alabama or LSU.

Some have said that if Luck was playing in the SEC he'd be average but he'd also be playing with SEC talent. I'm guessing he doesn't have that at Stanford.

Stanford has some great athletes. Big, strong, talented guys with brains... now I don't think they have SEC talent due to academics but they have big solid football players.

I guess that could be part of the reason they don't stretch the field with blazing WR's but they have some NFL players on their team besides Luck.

feltdizz
01-04-2012, 11:42 AM
Luck is #1 because he fits the pro style QB stereotype in terms of size and throwing ability plus he comes out of a pass oriented offense. In other words he looks like a college version of Peyton Manning. He has also performed at a high enough level without really bad games to appear to be consistent at what he does. He also comes from a perceived good pedigree with a father who was a pro QB so he grew up as an "insider" with insider knowledge.

Bottomline: He is the safe pick at QB and when you have the #1 pick you have huge pressure to be risk adverse.

Stanford is a passing offense? They look like a power run offense to me. They only have 1 WR and he was hurt half the year. Luck got him lit up in the bowl game again too....

That's one area of concern I have with Luck... he hasn't shown me he can throw a WR open in tight spaces because he rarely throws to WR's.

It's a "pro-style" offense as opposed to, say, the run-and-shoot style run by Keenam at Houston or the goofy offense you have to create for someone like Tim Tebow, so his adjustment to the pro game shouldn't be too severe.

I get the pro offense but it doesn't scream pass oriented to me. It's run, run, run play action pass to the TE's.

The transition will be easy for Luck but I'm curious to see if he can throw downfield to WR's.

papillon
01-04-2012, 11:56 AM
To be a quarterback in the NFL you need to be a quarterback that might be an athlete (Marino, Ben, Elway, Montana, etc.) and not an athlete that is trying to be a quarterback (Russell, Young, George, Leaf, Kordell, Vick, etc). The NFL has chewed up and spit out great athletes that wanted to be quarterbacks, but didn't have the necessary quarterbacking skill set.

I have never seen RGIII play, but judging by Flippy's description he has a slight build, is lightning quick and possesses a strong arm. That's Russell, Kordell, Young all wrapped into one, now, he may have a high football IQ, make quick decisions and be able to fit passes into tight spaces I have no idea, but if he can't he won't be successful in the NFL.

Luck from what I've heard and the one game I watched earlier in the year, may not be the natural athlete that RGIII is, but he's been playing in a pro-style offense, seems to make good decisions for the most part, has an NFL caliber arm and appears very comfortable in the pocket. Many of things that an NFL quarterback has to be able to do.

So, Luck may be getting more of the publicity simply because he "looks" like he's NFL ready.

Pappy

Slapstick
01-04-2012, 12:30 PM
It also has to do with history...

QBs with the same qualities as RGIII have traditionally not been successful...and by "qualities", I don't mean "black"...it has to do with the style of offense that the QB plays...

For example, we'll see how Tebow plays against the Steelers on Sunday...

Eich
01-04-2012, 12:36 PM
At least he has the right name for the job. "Luck" is what you need a lot of when selecting a franchise QB. There are a lot of first round QB busts. And then you have a guy like Brady coming out of nowhere from the 6th round and ends up one of the best in the history of the game (though I can't stand his smug attitude, pretty-boy style that cries for roughing penalties and the fact that he won 3 rings by 3 points on a team that cheated doing it and became known for the enforcement of the tuck rule).

QB scout isn't an easy job!

Captain Lemming
01-04-2012, 12:37 PM
Luck is #1 because he fits the pro style QB stereotype in terms of size and throwing ability plus he comes out of a pass oriented offense. In other words he looks like a college version of Peyton Manning. He has also performed at a high enough level without really bad games to appear to be consistent at what he does. He also comes from a perceived good pedigree with a father who was a pro QB so he grew up as an "insider" with insider knowledge.

Bottomline: He is the safe pick at QB and when you have the #1 pick you have huge pressure to be risk adverse.

This is the most "money" post in this thread.



If RG3 was 6'5" he'd be the no brainer #1.

But I'm a highlight watcher more than following any specific players through every game they play, so maybe there's something that I'm missing. Heck I miss a ton on the games I watch week in and week out.

If RGIII had Luck's size it wouldn't even be close.

Cam is that guy

Dizz we agree a lot but not this time.
Remember, EVERY EXPERT ON THE PLANET said last year that had Luck came out last year he was CLEARLY number one over Cam.

People questioned Cams passing skills and his ability to "grasp" the pro game. Cam was number one because there was thought to be no elite QBs. If Luck was there Cam drops.

It turned out to be ridiculous as Cam has excelled.

Dizz, look at OVs post and focus on the term "stereotype".

His whole post will make sense in that light.

feltdizz
01-04-2012, 12:37 PM
I don't know Pap.. I think it's more than that. Most "athletes" trying to play QB have to fight the coaches to remain a QB once in the NFL.

Russell was never an athlete he just had height and a good Sugar Bowl. Most people were concerned he would run too much just because he was black but in reality he was slow as dirt and lazy as hell.

Leaf, George and other guys weren't athletic... they just didn't have that "it" that you need to be a good NFL QB.

feltdizz
01-04-2012, 12:42 PM
Luck is #1 because he fits the pro style QB stereotype in terms of size and throwing ability plus he comes out of a pass oriented offense. In other words he looks like a college version of Peyton Manning. He has also performed at a high enough level without really bad games to appear to be consistent at what he does. He also comes from a perceived good pedigree with a father who was a pro QB so he grew up as an "insider" with insider knowledge.

Bottomline: He is the safe pick at QB and when you have the #1 pick you have huge pressure to be risk adverse.

This is the most "money" post in this thread.



If RG3 was 6'5" he'd be the no brainer #1.

But I'm a highlight watcher more than following any specific players through every game they play, so maybe there's something that I'm missing. Heck I miss a ton on the games I watch week in and week out.

If RGIII had Luck's size it wouldn't even be close.

Cam is that guy

Dizz we agree a lot but not this time.
Remember, EVERY EXPERT ON THE PLANET said last year that had Luck came out last year he was CLEARLY number one over Cam.

People questioned Cams passing skills and his ability to "grasp" the pro game. Cam was number one because there was thought to be no elite QBs. If Luck was there Cam drops.

It turned out to be ridiculous as Cam has excelled.

Dizz, look at OVs post and focus on the term "stereotype".

His whole post will make sense in that light.

Cam wasn't throwing deep bombs like RGIII... Cam was also running over the SEC and didn't show his arm until teams adjusted late in the year.

I also think character plays a part because people viewed Cam as arrogant and cocky, criminal, thief, etc...

Shoe
01-04-2012, 12:44 PM
I think it's totally legitimate to question why Luck is the supposed "best in a generation" type. It's funny, because the best comparison is the man he's going to replace, Peyton Manning. Manning was lauded for years when he came out, and I questioned why (i.e. he used to lose every year to Florida, etc.) Manning was big, had a good (not great arm), bloodlines, and perfect off-the-field. Luck brings all of that, plus his much better athleticism.

As for Griffin, one of the biggest knocks to me is his body build. He is built like a basketball player. So while I'm told he is faster than Vick and has a cannon arm (and has the intangibles), you can't ignore. He's built like those Ferraris who aren't built to take a pounding. You don't put bodies like (e.g.) Lawrence Timmons at FB. You put bodies like James Harrison at FB. Why? Because of body build. Guys like Timmons aren't built for that. Same deal here.

In the pocket, you got 6-5, 300 pounders falling all around you, hands flying around your face, etc. I don't care about no Doug Flutie's, Brees, etc. It's a leap of faith to take a little guy back there, especially when you have an oak tree like Luck available. Luck is built to stand in the pocket. RG3 and his spindly frame aren't. If I was looking for a franchise QB, from what I know right now... I wouldn't take him in the first round (or at least the top 10 picks).

Slapstick
01-04-2012, 12:46 PM
I also think character plays a part because people viewed Cam as arrogant and cocky, criminal, thief, etc...

I disagree 100%.

I don't recall seeing many reports about Cam Newton being an "arrogant, cocky, criminal, thief, etc."

Those opinions were reserved for Ryan Mallett...

aggiebones
01-04-2012, 12:47 PM
RGIII has also had a few mental gaffs (issues, not in game problems) before a handler got to him.
He has some issues. The Big12 was VERY down this year. RGIII is far more athletic than he is 'skilled'
Also, he will require ALOT of film time among other things, such as leadership qualities that others have already evaluated. He doesn't ring up as the complete package. He CAN play QB, but he is not the complete package, thus not no.1

feltdizz
01-04-2012, 01:03 PM
I also think character plays a part because people viewed Cam as arrogant and cocky, criminal, thief, etc...

I disagree 100%.

I don't recall seeing many reports about Cam Newton being an "arrogant, cocky, criminal, thief, etc."

Those opinions were reserved for Ryan Mallett...

They questioned if Cam's smile was fake or not. Would he work hard once he made money, could he read a playbook or call plays because of the Auburn system.

The Auburn pay to play, stolen laptop at Florida... they definitely questioned his character.

_SteeL_CurtaiN_
01-04-2012, 01:40 PM
I live on the west coast and have watched a lot of Andrew Luck, he is the real deal. He runs a pro set offense, not the run and gun bs. They are usually in the I with at least one TE on the field. His ability to read the opposing defenses and make the correct calls to put his team in position to win is uncanny.

Luck is a winner his wonderlic scores will be off the charts, his athleticism is under appriciated as he is not a statue passer. He is the closest to a sure bet the nfl draft has seen since Peyton Manning, IMO.

Let's not forget he played at Stanford and nearly took them to the BCS title game, it will be 50 years before they have this kind of success again.

_SteeL_CurtaiN_
01-04-2012, 01:45 PM
Luck is #1 because he fits the pro style QB stereotype in terms of size and throwing ability plus he comes out of a pass oriented offense. In other words he looks like a college version of Peyton Manning. He has also performed at a high enough level without really bad games to appear to be consistent at what he does. He also comes from a perceived good pedigree with a father who was a pro QB so he grew up as an "insider" with insider knowledge.

Bottomline: He is the safe pick at QB and when you have the #1 pick you have huge pressure to be risk adverse.

Stanford actually had a very balanced offense ,

417 passing attempts for 3623 yards
518 rushing attempts for 2738 yards

Oviedo
01-04-2012, 02:05 PM
Luck is #1 because he fits the pro style QB stereotype in terms of size and throwing ability plus he comes out of a pass oriented offense. In other words he looks like a college version of Peyton Manning. He has also performed at a high enough level without really bad games to appear to be consistent at what he does. He also comes from a perceived good pedigree with a father who was a pro QB so he grew up as an "insider" with insider knowledge.

Bottomline: He is the safe pick at QB and when you have the #1 pick you have huge pressure to be risk adverse.

Stanford actually had a very balanced offense ,

417 passing attempts for 3623 yards
518 rushing attempts for 2738 yards


I meant to say "pro style" not "pass oriented " in my initial post. My bad for not catching it although today's pro style is somewhat pass oriented.

papillon
01-04-2012, 02:27 PM
I don't know Pap.. I think it's more than that. Most "athletes" trying to play QB have to fight the coaches to remain a QB once in the NFL.

Russell was never an athlete he just had height and a good Sugar Bowl. Most people were concerned he would run too much just because he was black but in reality he was slow as dirt and lazy as hell.

Leaf, George and other guys weren't athletic... they just didn't have that "it" that you need to be a good NFL QB.

Let me clarify what I was getting at. The original question I believe is why is Luck getting all the love and not RGIII. And, my point, or lack of one, was that Luck was getting the love because he "appears" to be a more NFL ready quarterback by being a quarterback first and an athlete second. Whereas, scouts and front offices look at RGIII as an athlete first and a quarterback second probably for a few reasons. One, he's black and two, he's an incredible athlete from what I hear.

They both may be great or busts or somewhere in between, but answering Flippy's question why the Luck love and not RGIII. I think its because of style of play and college offense.

Pappy

Dee Dub
01-04-2012, 03:23 PM
I've seen Luck a few times and haven't been all that impressed. He looks like a good QB, but not the greatest QB to come out ever. Has the media hype gone overboard?

If my team had the #1 pick, I'd want RG3. I've only seen him a few times, but this kid is lightning in a bottle. He's gotta be the most athletic QB I've seen in college. But on top of it, he's got a great arm, even when he's on the move and feet aren't set.

Now I get there might be a few things in Luck's favor like 1. He takes snaps from under center, 2. He's got better mechanics, 3. He's got better size, and 4. He's worked with Harbaugh and went to Staford so he's probably ready to play right now.

But in RG3, I see a guy with a big accurate arm who's probably a better athlete than Michael Vick.

So I can't help but wonder why would anyone take Luck over RG3? Is his 6'1" height the main reason?

Is it the stigma against athletic QBs? And everyone still has this image of a pocket passer like Peyton or Brady or Marino vs a guy like Cam Newton or RG3?

I'm just curious why Luck is the sure thing. But RG3 has the better arm and is the better athlete. RG3 looks to me like a faster Vick, with Brady's deep ball, Rivers' throwing motion, and Doug Flutie's smallish size.

Well Flippy it would appear that in these games you have seen Luck play, you weren't really paying attention. Did you notice that Luck doesn't really have an elite receiver to throw too? Or that the offense they run at Stanford is a primarily run first attack? One that incorporates a 2 and 3 TE set?

When I see Luck throw the biggest things that jump out at me is how he almost always gets the ball out quickly and to a place that is in stride with the receiver. He has a strong arm and can make every throw. He has great touch, can throw on the run, is very mobile in the pocket, and has a plus ability in running. Add all this with his great size, leadership, character, and his intelligence...and I can understand the hype.

Having said all this I will add that I have been a big RG3 supporter for the past several years. He isnt going to take a back seat to many. But he isnt quite at the overall level as Andrew Luck is.

Next year watch Washington's Keith Price emulate what RG3 is this year. That kid from Compton can flat out throw the football.

Dee Dub
01-04-2012, 03:36 PM
Luck is #1 because he fits the pro style QB stereotype in terms of size and throwing ability plus he comes out of a pass oriented offense.

Not true. This offense was designed by Jim Harbaugh and it is the furthest thing from a pass oriented offense. In fact their philosophy is more of a power run game ( 3 TE sets).

flippy
01-04-2012, 03:41 PM
I'm not intending to knock Luck. He looks like a good QB to me. But I don't get what makes him a can't miss prospect.

And I get RG3 is a big risk. He's small. He's not taking snaps under center. He's not really running a pro style offense.

But the NFL game is evolving. And RG3 is jaw dropping accurate on the move.

The only play I've seen of Luck's that made my jaw drop was his phenomenal tackle after his RB fumbled. Goodell woulda probably fined him for the hit. I know Luck will be the best tackling QB in the NFL after that.

And if I owned an NFL team, I probably wouldn't pick RG3 higher than the 2nd or 3rd round because of the unknowns.

Dee Dub
01-04-2012, 03:47 PM
One other thing about Andrew Luck that is amazing that most dont even consider is that over his 3 years as a starter at Stanford he was sacked only 23 times. The past two seasons only 17 and still threw for more than 70% completion percentage. Getting rid of the ball quickly and on target?? that with every thing else he processes..is worth all the hype there is.

Dee Dub
01-04-2012, 03:53 PM
I'm not intending to knock Luck. He looks like a good QB to me. But I don't get what makes him a can't miss prospect.

And I get RG3 is a big risk. He's small. He's not taking snaps under center. He's not really running a pro style offense.

But the NFL game is evolving. And RG3 is jaw dropping accurate on the move.

The only play I've seen of Luck's that made my jaw drop was his phenomenal tackle after his RB fumbled. Goodell woulda probably fined him for the hit. I know Luck will be the best tackling QB in the NFL after that.

And if I owned an NFL team, I probably wouldn't pick RG3 higher than the 2nd or 3rd round because of the unknowns.

At the next level Andrew Luck will have an offense tailored to his strength and then you will see jaw dropping. Dont forget that RG3 plays in a spread offense.

feltdizz
01-04-2012, 04:28 PM
One other thing about Andrew Luck that is amazing that most dont even consider is that over his 3 years as a starter at Stanford he was sacked only 23 times. The past two seasons only 17 and still threw for more than 70% completion percentage. Getting rid of the ball quickly and on target?? that with every thing else he processes..is worth all the hype there is.

That isn't amazing... they run like crazy and throw to TE's all day long. When they played Oregon the sacks came easily.

They also have 2 OL declaring for the draft and both are highly rated. Stanford had a solid team all around.

feltdizz
01-04-2012, 04:30 PM
I'm not intending to knock Luck. He looks like a good QB to me. But I don't get what makes him a can't miss prospect.

And I get RG3 is a big risk. He's small. He's not taking snaps under center. He's not really running a pro style offense.

But the NFL game is evolving. And RG3 is jaw dropping accurate on the move.

The only play I've seen of Luck's that made my jaw drop was his phenomenal tackle after his RB fumbled. Goodell woulda probably fined him for the hit. I know Luck will be the best tackling QB in the NFL after that.

And if I owned an NFL team, I probably wouldn't pick RG3 higher than the 2nd or 3rd round because of the unknowns.

I agree Flippy... I would take Luck but I wouldn't trade a ton of picks to get him.

He has never made my jaw drop though... well, the first time I seen that ugly beard with no mustache but not he hasn't made any throws that made me say "wow, this guy has it all"

It's more of a "hmm, this guy will be a solid dink and dunk QB in the NFL..."

RuthlessBurgher
01-04-2012, 04:30 PM
RG3 is jaw dropping accurate

At least you didn't go full Marisa Tomei and call him dead on balls accurate. :wink:

Ghost
01-04-2012, 04:33 PM
Seen numerous mentions of RGIII being small. He's not all that tiny: 6'2"/220

Vick - 6'0/215
Brees - 6'0/205 - 210
McCoy - 6'2"/215
Sanchez - 6'2/225
Dalton - 6'2"/220

feltdizz
01-04-2012, 04:38 PM
Seen numerous mentions of RGIII being small. He's not all that tiny: 6'2"/220

Vick - 6'0/215
Brees - 6'0/205 - 210
McCoy - 6'2"/215
Sanchez - 6'2/225
Dalton - 6'2"/220

RG3 doesn't look 220... he looks 195. LOL

Ghost
01-04-2012, 04:45 PM
Seen numerous mentions of RGIII being small. He's not all that tiny: 6'2"/220

Vick - 6'0/215
Brees - 6'0/205 - 210
McCoy - 6'2"/215
Sanchez - 6'2/225
Dalton - 6'2"/220

RG3 doesn't look 220... he looks 195. LOL

Don't watch a lot of Baylor but three separte sites all had him at 220.

steeler_fan_in_t.o.
01-04-2012, 06:18 PM
Seen numerous mentions of RGIII being small. He's not all that tiny: 6'2"/220

Vick - 6'0/215
Brees - 6'0/205 - 210
McCoy - 6'2"/215
Sanchez - 6'2/225
Dalton - 6'2"/220

RG3 doesn't look 220... he looks 195. LOL

Don't watch a lot of Baylor but three separte sites all had him at 220.

At this point he is listed at whatever the school reports him at. You often find that come time for the combine there will be players measured at different heights and weights than had previously been reported.

Dee Dub
01-04-2012, 06:48 PM
One other thing about Andrew Luck that is amazing that most dont even consider is that over his 3 years as a starter at Stanford he was sacked only 23 times. The past two seasons only 17 and still threw for more than 70% completion percentage. Getting rid of the ball quickly and on target?? that with every thing else he processes..is worth all the hype there is.

That isn't amazing... they run like crazy and throw to TE's all day long. When they played Oregon the sacks came easily.

They also have 2 OL declaring for the draft and both are highly rated. Stanford had a solid team all around.

To me it is. And I would think NFL teams would think so as well since that is a rarity. A very small percentage of QB's can do that. And with Luck throwing 776 passes the past two years and only having 18 INT's to go with that completion percentage and low number of sacks is very amazing.

RG3 on the other hand has been sacked 47 times in the past two years.

fezziwig
01-04-2012, 07:33 PM
For whatever the reason Luck is getting all the love, this young man will haveloads of pressure on him when he comes into the NFL.

I believe young quarterbacks get a lot of pressure these days for one reason and that reason is named Big Ben.

Ben took the NFL by storm his first season and won a Super Bowl his second season, won another Super Bowl and made a third Super Bowl appearance. Ben has set the bar very high for all these young guys.

I also thought Cowher did the same thing when he came into the league.

fordfixer
01-04-2012, 08:06 PM
RG3 is jaw dropping accurate

At least you didn't go full Marisa Tomei and call him dead on balls accurate. :wink:
http://t3.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcTPDGI4uCqJPmVRc1nk8ZylwaEOfWk6t-EINqcxgNK41tFdxlNCXQ

hawaiiansteel
01-07-2012, 02:46 PM
January 7, 2012

Colts to pick Andrew Luck, sources say

By Chris Mortensen
ESPN


With the stunning dismissal of Bill Polian, the architect of the Colts' 11 playoff appearances, uncertainties remain over Peyton Manning's health and Jim Caldwell's future as coach, but sources say one thing is certain: Colts owner Jim Irsay plans to take Andrew Luck with the draft's first-round pick.

Sources say Irsay sees symmetry in the franchise history of draft picks and will not pass on the opportunity to complete it. In 1983, the Colts took John Elway with the No. 1 pick, only to see Irsay's father, Bob, trade the Hall of Famer.

Fifteen years later, the Colts took Manning.

Now 14 years after that, Jim Irsay wants to draft his quarterback for the next 12 to 15 years.

http://espn.go.com/nfl/draft2012/story/ ... ources-say (http://espn.go.com/nfl/draft2012/story/_/id/7435726/indianapolis-colts-draft-andrew-luck-stanford-cardinal-no-1-pick-sources-say)