Royale with Cheese Posted August 17, 2017 Posted August 17, 2017 Andrew Luck is awful in the 1st quarter. And throws too many picks. He is far behind where the Colts expected him to be at this point. This is his 1st quarter passer rating since 2013: 2013 - 82.7 2014 - 81.5 2015 - 42.2 2016 67.1 And his interception rankings: 2013 - 22nd most 2014 - 6th most 2015 - 12th most (t-3) 2016 - 13th most (t-1) It's funny because people here want a QB that plays his best in the 4th quarter, throws more picks and more TDs, and can hold up a crap defense. Well... Luck does play his best in the 4th quarter. 11 TD/2 INT in the 4th. Down but within 7 points, he's 6 TD/2 INT with a 102 rating.
HappyDays Posted August 17, 2017 Posted August 17, 2017 Luck does play his best in the 4th quarter. 11 TD/2 INT in the 4th. Down but within 7 points, he's 6 TD/2 INT with a 102 rating. I know, that's my point. I don't care how well he does in the 4th quarter because he's so bad early on that it puts his team in a hole. I'd rather have a 1st quarter superstar at QB because that's how you pull away from your opponent and control the game. And he throws too many picks for the team they have. Turnover differential is incredibly correlative to making the playoffs and he isn't doing his part.
Royale with Cheese Posted August 17, 2017 Posted August 17, 2017 I know, that's my point. I don't care how well he does in the 4th quarter because he's so bad early on that it puts his team in a hole. I'd rather have a 1st quarter superstar at QB because that's how you pull away from your opponent and control the game. And he throws too many picks for the team they have. Turnover differential is incredibly correlative to making the playoffs and he isn't doing his part. I'm the complete opposite. I'd rather have a guy come through in the 4th. You're not going to pull away from teams often with another good QB and that can score points. You generally don't beat the Brady's, Rodgers, Brees etc....in the 1st quarter. I'm a big proponent of the quote: "It's not about how you start, it's about how you finish"
aristocrat Posted August 17, 2017 Posted August 17, 2017 the problem the colts have is their awful defense. that gives people a reason for hot takes that he's a bad qb. he's a great qb on a bad team.
Sherlock Holmes Posted August 17, 2017 Posted August 17, 2017 (edited) They could be number one pick bad with Tolzien, and they wouldn't be looking for a QB. Luck missing the season could be the best thing to happen to the Bills.Trade the farm for Luck, they get the farm and number 1 pick. I know, that's my point. I don't care how well he does in the 4th quarter because he's so bad early on that it puts his team in a hole. I'd rather have a 1st quarter superstar at QB because that's how you pull away from your opponent and control the game. And he throws too many picks for the team they have. Turnover differential is incredibly correlative to making the playoffs and he isn't doing his part.Since he's so terrible we should be able to aquire him right? Edited August 17, 2017 by Sherlock Holmes
DaBillsFanSince1973 Posted August 17, 2017 Posted August 17, 2017 seems he hasn't been ready for a couple seasons now. they failed to build around him and the injuries. the kid may never get back to 2012/13/14 level?
Buffalo Boy Posted August 17, 2017 Posted August 17, 2017 Trade the farm for Luck, they get the farm and number 1 pick. Since he's so terrible we should be able to aquire him right? You're talkin' crazy but wow. Give up next years first for Luck? They get two firsts, and we get Luck....hmmm Throwing to a veteran receiving corp. providing his shoulder passes muster( pun intended)
Jasovon Posted August 17, 2017 Posted August 17, 2017 I'm the complete opposite. I'd rather have a guy come through in the 4th. You're not going to pull away from teams often with another good QB and that can score points. You generally don't beat the Brady's, Rodgers, Brees etc....in the 1st quarter. I'm a big proponent of the quote: "It's not about how you start, it's about how you finish" I think i would rather have a QB that doesn't put himself into a position where he needs to come back every game.
mannc Posted August 17, 2017 Posted August 17, 2017 the problem the colts have is their awful defense. that gives people a reason for hot takes that he's a bad qb. he's a great qb on a bad team.Then how did the Colts manage to go 5-3 without him in 2015? With a 40 year old backup, no less?
HappyDays Posted August 17, 2017 Posted August 17, 2017 Trade the farm for Luck, they get the farm and number 1 pick. Since he's so terrible we should be able to aquire him right? I didn't say he was terrible. But he also isn't elite. He's pretty firmly a top 10 guy but only because of his 4th quarter stats and game winning drives. Throughout the game as a whole he's inconsistent. Then how did the Colts manage to go 5-3 without him in 2015? With a 40 year old backup, no less? This is a great point that many people choose to ignore.
Jasovon Posted August 17, 2017 Posted August 17, 2017 I didn't say he was terrible. But he also isn't elite. He's pretty firmly a top 10 guy but only because of his 4th quarter stats and game winning drives. Throughout the game as a whole he's inconsistent. This is a great point that many people choose to ignore. I;m pretty sure that for Bills fans the grading of QBs is as follows: Elite Garbage Doesn't seem to be any grey area.
aristocrat Posted August 17, 2017 Posted August 17, 2017 Then how did the Colts manage to go 5-3 without him in 2015? With a 40 year old backup, no less? hasselback is a nice backup back then. they played and beat jax, houston, rookie winston bucs, atl(8-8), miami and rookie mariotta tenn. they didn't beat great teams. you're telling me they have had great defense with luck?
Royale with Cheese Posted August 17, 2017 Posted August 17, 2017 I think i would rather have a QB that doesn't put himself into a position where he needs to come back every game. So you would have two options. Strong starter, weak finisher. Weak starter, strong finisher. Which one would you have?
Jasovon Posted August 17, 2017 Posted August 17, 2017 So you would have two options. Strong starter, weak finisher. Weak starter, strong finisher. Which one would you have? Strong Starter every time, you will win more games where you are ahead early than you will when you are behind early. Let the other team need the 4th Quarter Comeback. This is why you need a decent defense as well as a good QB, to hold the lead the QB gives you. The Saints have an elite HoF QB and can't make the playoffs because their defense is swiss cheese.
mannc Posted August 17, 2017 Posted August 17, 2017 hasselback is a nice backup back then. they played and beat jax, houston, rookie winston bucs, atl(8-8), miami and rookie mariotta tenn. they didn't beat great teams. you're telling me they have had great defense with luck? No, I'm suggesting that Luck is not that good and/or that the Colts are not "awful" without him, as many here have said.
HappyDays Posted August 17, 2017 Posted August 17, 2017 I think i would rather have a QB that doesn't put himself into a position where he needs to come back every game. Me too. I also wonder how much of his good 4th quarter stats happen in garbage time. For reference here are his DVOA rankings: 2013 - 16th 2014 - 11th 2015 - 32nd (!!!) 2016 - 13th He's been disappointing. And if you think it's just a bad offensive line: http://www.footballoutsiders.com/stat-analysis/2017/quarterbacks-and-pressure-2016 he had just the 14th best DVOA when not facing pressure last year (when facing pressure he is 4th best).
Royale with Cheese Posted August 17, 2017 Posted August 17, 2017 (edited) Strong Starter every time, you will win more games where you are ahead early than you will when you are behind early. Let the other team need the 4th Quarter Comeback. This is why you need a decent defense as well as a good QB, to hold the lead the QB gives you. The Saints have an elite HoF QB and can't make the playoffs because their defense is swiss cheese. I think this can work against poorer teams but you're not beating the better teams in the first quarter. You don't beat the Brady, Manning, Big Ben and other franchise QB's in the first quarter. There's nothing more demoralizing than blowing leads. Legends are made in crunch time. Do you disagree with this quote? Jordan @itsMichaelJ It's not how you start, it's how you finish. 4:10 PM · Feb 3, 2 Edited August 17, 2017 by Teeflebees
dave mcbride Posted August 17, 2017 Posted August 17, 2017 Thanks and you know I totally have the same respect for you too... Let me clarify, I was in no way stating he is a bad QB, and I even said he has the potential to improve as well. But his contract IMO is awful based on what he is giving that franchise because its a cap destroying contract that will prevent the FO from really adding a great team around him. And thus far, all Luck has proven is that he can do is compile regular season stats while playing in the worst division in football during the time he has been in the NFL so far but completely regress in the playoffs against better competition. In 3 playoff years, Lucks per game averages are the following: Regular Season: 270 ypg, 7.14 ypa, Comp % 58.5%, 2.04 TD/g, 1.48 turnovers per game. QB rating of 86.6 Postseason: 304 ypg, 7.03 ypa, Comp % 56.5, 1.5 TD/g, 2.16 turnovers per game, QB rating of QB rating of 69.3 In 3 postseasons, he has never had one year where he had equal or more TD's than Interceptions. He is significantly worse in every category mostly except for yards, but that is more a measure of his mistakes forcing them into holes they had to try and fight out of. Now, factor in that those 3 seasons were also his BEST regular seasons and his play has not resembled that level much since then, and you can see why I am critical of him. He is a career 59% completion passer (lower if you add in his postseasons) with a poor career TD to turnover ratio in the regular season and an even worse one in the Postseason. He has 101 regular season total TDs in his 6 year career, to 105 Interceptions and fumbles in the regular season alone. Ratio is worse again if you add in postseason. Honestly, to me, he is a guy who has statistically benefited greatly from 2 critical factors: 1. Quantity over Quality: He is a high volume passer, so totals start too look good, even very good, given the volumes he throws at. 2. Quality of opponents: His division has been arguably the weakest in the NFL during his tenure here, especially his first 3 years where they made the playoffs. In more recent years teams like Tenn, Houston, and Jax have become tougher opponents, especially Tenn and Houston, so the division hasn't been a cake walk like it was during his 3 biggest statistical seasons to start his career. As the quality of his opponent increases, not only has the Colts record decreased, but his overall quality of play has decreased, especially in the playoffs. Until this guy becomes a more accurate passer, less turnovers, and can play at a high level agasint better opponents and in the playoffs, I will maintain the stance that he's one of the most over paid people in the league. How many more years are we going to make excuses for him? This is his 7th year. I see four glaring issues...accuracy, turnovers, consistency against better opponents, and his injury issues. That is the last place I would want a cap killing contract to be if I am a GM in the NFL...and as usual, its most often on a QB. Again, Luck can still come out and take his game to another level, I fully acknowledge his talent and potential...but up until now, he has not played close to the value of his contract IMO and I would not want to have that problem if I was the Colts. I mean I have never seen a QB with barely a 1:1 TD to INT/Fumble ratio and under 60% comp rating with a terrible post season track record get so over valued before. Part of it is that he still gets love off his draft hype that helps people over look or validate all the negatives like poor comp%, bad TD to Int/Fumble ratio, struggles against better competition and his injury issues. Good post. The one thing I'd say about that division is while it's not good, outside of the Colts the teams in it are usually pretty stacked on D (Houston, TN, and Jax). Houston and Jax in particular was stacked last year. Their offenses have been horrible, however. The accuracy has improved every year, btw, and in his last 2 healthy seasons he has averaged 7.7 and 7.8 ypa. Me too. I also wonder how much of his good 4th quarter stats happen in garbage time. For reference here are his DVOA rankings: 2013 - 16th 2014 - 11th 2015 - 32nd (!!!) 2016 - 13th He's been disappointing. And if you think it's just a bad offensive line: http://www.footballoutsiders.com/stat-analysis/2017/quarterbacks-and-pressure-2016 he had just the 14th best DVOA when not facing pressure last year (when facing pressure he is 4th best). 2015 shouldn't be included here.
Jasovon Posted August 17, 2017 Posted August 17, 2017 (edited) I think this can work against poorer teams but you're not beating the better teams in the first quarter. You don't beat the Brady, Manning, Big Ben and other franchise QB's in the first quarter. There's nothing more demoralizing than blowing leads. Legends are made in crunch time. Do you disagree with this quote? Jordan @itsMichaelJ It's not how you start, it's how you finish. 4:10 PM · Feb 3, 2 I agree finishing strongis important, however you gave me a binary choice and i went for the option that will win more games. I'd actually much rather have a QB that just plays well all game, and that is simply not Andrew Luck. Edited August 17, 2017 by Jasovon
Recommended Posts