Andrew Luck vs RG3

Page 20 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

When all is said and done when they retire, who do you think will be deemed the bette

  • Luck

  • RG3

  • Russell Wilson


Results are only viewable after voting.

preslove

Lifer
Sep 10, 2003
16,760
60
91
I definitely get that. Many place their failure to win multiple Super Bowls on Manning. Seems the QB is responsible for everything but it certainly went deeper than that.
Anyone who blames manning for that is a fucking idiot. Football fans are probably the most ignorant about how their sport works out of any sports fans. The QB isn't a god damned wizard who can make up for a shitty defense and 10 other offensive players :rolleyes:
 

smackababy

Lifer
Oct 30, 2008
27,028
75
86
Anyone who blames manning for that is a fucking idiot. Football fans are probably the most ignorant about how their sport works out of any sports fans. The QB isn't a god damned wizard who can make up for a shitty defense and 10 other offensive players :rolleyes:
I'd say UFC has the most ignorant fans, but the NFL is likely close behind.

And, it has always been the QB fault. Even if all his incompletions are due to drops, it is still his fault.
 

Linflas

Lifer
Jan 30, 2001
15,388
73
91
Having regular 10+ win seasons doesn't help when you don't make or win Super Bowls. I'd rather finish 9-7 every year and play in Super Bowls than finish 12-4 every year and not.

Many Colts fans feel Irsay squandered the Manning years and I think that's where a lot of our impatience comes from.
Gee Irsays squandering opportunities, not like they have a history of that or anything. The whole reason the Colts play in Indianapolis is the Irsay families squandering of opportunities.
 

mvbighead

Diamond Member
Apr 20, 2009
3,793
1
81
I don't know about local Colts fans being pissy (have you seen others?), but I'll give my two cents. They have had 3 years of 11-5 records and last year should've been at least 13-3. They have severely regressed this year IMO and Grigson seems unable or unwilling to address the offensive line woes. I don't blame Grigson for the Richardson trade, as it was worth a shot IMO; however, I don't believe he has done enough in FA to solidify the team, particularly on o-line (they signed a FA center who promptly retired rather than pursuing Alex Mack hard like they should have).
I disagree here. When looking at the bigger picture, we have a QB and a WR who will both need to be re-signed, likely to big number deals (especially for the QB). And when that center is looking to be the highest paid center in the league, it's completely outside of Grigson's spending pattern. He bests Polian (IMO) for being willing to sign FA, but most of the deals are extremely easy to walk away from after a year or two (little negative cap impact). If we sign Mack, and he doesn't fit the scheme or suffers serious injuries, we're stuck, and we still have to shell out money for guys like Luck, Hilton, Allen, Fleener, etc. (Fleener and Allen may or may not be of consideration, but both have been fairly big as of late.) And when it is a center, you're not looking at an impact position like QB.

Now, do I wish they had a better center? Sure, but they've gotten good play from Harrison and Holmes this year for 1/10th of the cost of Mack.

My biggest beef with Pagano is more about the inconsistency, especially on defense. I don't like Greg Manusky and wish Irsay would spend the money to bring in a top-flight defensive coordinator. I think the players on defense are adequate to be honest.

The Colts can play with the best teams in the league when they're hitting on all cylinders. They have rarely done that this year. I'm happy they're in the AFC Championship but to be fair, they beat a mediocre Bungles team and a reeling Broncos team. I am trying to keep a proper perspective on it.
Agree here. That's the thing with the Patriots, they're not mediocre nor reeling. They're on fire. But it seems like the Colts are as well. I just hope they can contain Gronk and limit the run game. Not too worried about their WR vs our CBs.

As for Manusky, he's hit or miss. Last night, was mostly a hit, but the Broncos gave us a lot of plays.
 

JEDI

Lifer
Sep 25, 2001
26,076
593
126
so if the Redskins traded their future for Luck instead of RG3, would they be in the playoffs right now w/a chance at the superbowl?
 

Linflas

Lifer
Jan 30, 2001
15,388
73
91
so if the Redskins traded their future for Luck instead of RG3, would they be in the playoffs right now w/a chance at the superbowl?
Snyder and company would have figured out a way to break him so I doubt it.
 

Muse

Lifer
Jul 11, 2001
25,730
1,504
126
Must say this one surprised me ... also made me happy. :)

Having said that although this was an impressive win Luck played pretty much to the high level I thought he would. It was the rest of the Colts team in particular the defensive line that really exceeded expectations.

Also what the hell happened to Peyton Manning? He was never a great post season QB but this game was pathetic. I think he may be done.
The commentators made the case that he hasn't been well, problems in both legs and diminished arm strength at this point in time. I wouldn't count him out, though. If he's able to play at a high level, he will return. I think the claim that he's the greatest ever isn't stupid, at his best he may well have been the greatest ever, that's what I was thinking.
 
Last edited:

purbeast0

Lifer
Sep 13, 2001
49,159
2,141
126
so if the Redskins traded their future for Luck instead of RG3, would they be in the playoffs right now w/a chance at the superbowl?
highly doubtful considering the redskins problems are far from just being quarterback play.
 

eits

Lifer
Jun 4, 2005
25,207
2
81
www.integratedssr.com
highly doubtful considering the redskins problems are far from just being quarterback play.
exactly.

first, the redskins didn't have an option for luck. the colts, many believe, decided to lose out in order to get luck in the draft because they saw his potential and, facing manning's neck issue, it posed a situation where they could definitely capitalize on the long run by losing.

even if the skins somehow ended up with luck, they probably would have squandered the hell out of him. again, the skins had an awful training staff (like i mentioned before). in fact, last week, they finally fired the head strength and conditioning coach.

people like to blame players way more than they should. the blame lies more on those who train, maintain, and coach the players than the players themselves.

with any luck, the mccloughan has seen the strengths of rg3 and will build around him, finally, and tap into his potential. based on what he's said to the press, thus far, and the moves he has made for a new training staff, and his philosophy of building around quarterbacks and protecting them, things may look up for rg3. we'll see how it all turns out... he still may be traded away or benched for cousins.

secondly, the redskins organization was a wreck. it's still a wreck, but it's repairing... they FINALLY have a gm. i'd give it about 3 years before the skins have a real team again.
 
Last edited:

glenn1

Lifer
Sep 6, 2000
25,388
1,011
126
exactly.

first, the redskins didn't have an option for luck. the colts, many believe, decided to lose out in order to get luck in the draft because they saw his potential and, facing manning's neck issue, it posed a situation where they could definitely capitalize on the long run by losing.

even if the skins somehow ended up with luck, they probably would have squandered the hell out of him. again, the skins had an awful training staff (like i mentioned before). in fact, last week, they finally fired the head strength and conditioning coach.

people like to blame players way more than they should. the blame lies more on those who train, maintain, and coach the players than the players themselves.

with any luck, the mccloughan has seen the strengths of rg3 and will build around him, finally, and tap into his potential. based on what he's said to the press, thus far, and the moves he has made for a new training staff, and his philosophy of building around quarterbacks and protecting them, things may look up for rg3. we'll see how it all turns out... he still may be traded away or benched for cousins.

secondly, the redskins organization was a wreck. it's still a wreck, but it's repairing... they FINALLY have a gm. i'd give it about 3 years before the skins have a real team again.
Agree with you about the Skins being a terrible organization. I have less faith than you in RG3 and think he'll max out at a level comparable to ButtFumble which is actually a good thing as he could be a complete flash in the pan like Josh Freeman just as easily. I have big doubts about him having "SB winning QB" potential since like we saw with Kaep other teams seem to have figured out how to play the option read guys like RG3 and neutralize them. If WAS needs to rely on Cousins then they really are up shit creek because he's an acceptable backup but definitely not someone you want as your starter every week, kinda like Matt Flynn.
 

SP33Demon

Lifer
Jun 22, 2001
27,931
128
106
The commentators made the case that he hasn't been well, problems in both legs and diminished arm strength at this point in time. I wouldn't count him out, though. If he's able to play at a high level, he will return. I think the claim that he's the greatest ever isn't stupid, at his best he may well have been the greatest ever, that's what I was thinking.
He could very well be the greatest regular season qb, but that doesn't count for much in my book. If you win a lot in the regular season but can't sustain that high level in the playoffs, who cares? Watch the latest Joe Montana commercial for what really matters. Rings. I would put Eli ahead of him in the postseason. Now if only we could combine both Mannings, then you would have the "greatest ever".
 

smackababy

Lifer
Oct 30, 2008
27,028
75
86
He could very well be the greatest regular season qb, but that doesn't count for much in my book. If you win a lot in the regular season but can't sustain that high level in the playoffs, who cares? Watch the latest Joe Montana commercial for what really matters. Rings. I would put Eli ahead of him in the postseason. Now if only we could combine both Mannings, then you would have the "greatest ever".
I think it is funny, because Manning is getting all these "omg so many TDs and yards" and crap, but Tom Brady just passed a far more important record: post season TDs. While Montana has more rings, Brady has proven to be a post season QB.
 

SP33Demon

Lifer
Jun 22, 2001
27,931
128
106
exactly.

first, the redskins didn't have an option for luck. the colts, many believe, decided to lose out in order to get luck in the draft because they saw his potential and, facing manning's neck issue, it posed a situation where they could definitely capitalize on the long run by losing.

even if the skins somehow ended up with luck, they probably would have squandered the hell out of him. again, the skins had an awful training staff (like i mentioned before). in fact, last week, they finally fired the head strength and conditioning coach.

people like to blame players way more than they should. the blame lies more on those who train, maintain, and coach the players than the players themselves.

with any luck, the mccloughan has seen the strengths of rg3 and will build around him, finally, and tap into his potential. based on what he's said to the press, thus far, and the moves he has made for a new training staff, and his philosophy of building around quarterbacks and protecting them, things may look up for rg3. we'll see how it all turns out... he still may be traded away or benched for cousins.

secondly, the redskins organization was a wreck. it's still a wreck, but it's repairing... they FINALLY have a gm. i'd give it about 3 years before the skins have a real team again.
In that draft, the Skins should have taken an offensive lineman (like Riley Reiff +6.8 this year) to help Trent at #6 pick (critics would have said that was too early for Reiff but he has turned out to be decent). Only Lichtensteiger was better than Reiff on the Skins this year, and I feel that the Skins still need someone to help Trent. Next, let's look at QBs who went after pick #39 that the Skins could have gotten. Osweiler, Russell Wilson, Nick Foles, Cousins (who the skins picked up), and Lindley. So basically the Skins had a 2/3 shot of getting either Russell Wilson or Nick Foles. Imagine if they had taken Reiff and Russell Wilson or Foles and how much better that team would be. Well, they can always get a stud OLineman in this year's draft, but they probably need more help in the secondary.
 

smackababy

Lifer
Oct 30, 2008
27,028
75
86
exactly.

first, the redskins didn't have an option for luck. .
The Redskins had the option to not bet the entire farm on a QB. They sold the future of their team for magic beans. Surprise! They didn't get a beanstalk to prosperity.

I don't actually have a problem with RG3 getting picked 2nd. He was a monster in college and looked like the second best QB in the draft (Russell Wilson was small and only had a year in a 'real' conference to show is ability, he wasn't second overall pick material). St. Louis was smart though. They knew they didn't need a QB (Bradford is pretty good) and the Redskins were willing to pay mountains of gold for a few grains of salt at that point.

And, even with that, I don't think RG3 is done. Gruden is staying in Washington (which, even if his record is poor, a very good thing) and he certainly isn't coddling RG3 or inflating his ego. He need work and Gruden isn't afraid to let him know it. He very well may end up a good player. Though, I have a strong feeling it won't be for Washington.
 

Linflas

Lifer
Jan 30, 2001
15,388
73
91
exactly.

first, the redskins didn't have an option for luck. the colts, many believe, decided to lose out in order to get luck in the draft because they saw his potential and, facing manning's neck issue, it posed a situation where they could definitely capitalize on the long run by losing.

even if the skins somehow ended up with luck, they probably would have squandered the hell out of him. again, the skins had an awful training staff (like i mentioned before). in fact, last week, they finally fired the head strength and conditioning coach.

people like to blame players way more than they should. the blame lies more on those who train, maintain, and coach the players than the players themselves.

with any luck, the mccloughan has seen the strengths of rg3 and will build around him, finally, and tap into his potential. based on what he's said to the press, thus far, and the moves he has made for a new training staff, and his philosophy of building around quarterbacks and protecting them, things may look up for rg3. we'll see how it all turns out... he still may be traded away or benched for cousins.

secondly, the redskins organization was a wreck. it's still a wreck, but it's repairing... they FINALLY have a gm. i'd give it about 3 years before the skins have a real team again.
lol they hired a guy trying to make a comeback as the GM and made the guy who caused all these GM issues his boss. The genius of Jack Kent Cooke was to be willing to spend the money to build a winning team and staying the hell out of day to day operations so long as the team performed. Unlike Snyder he had no interest in being a jock sniffer and undermining the coach's and staffs relationship with the players. Until Snyder is willing to accept that nothing will really change.
 

eits

Lifer
Jun 4, 2005
25,207
2
81
www.integratedssr.com
The Redskins had the option to not bet the entire farm on a QB. They sold the future of their team for magic beans. Surprise! They didn't get a beanstalk to prosperity.

I don't actually have a problem with RG3 getting picked 2nd. He was a monster in college and looked like the second best QB in the draft (Russell Wilson was small and only had a year in a 'real' conference to show is ability, he wasn't second overall pick material). St. Louis was smart though. They knew they didn't need a QB (Bradford is pretty good) and the Redskins were willing to pay mountains of gold for a few grains of salt at that point.

And, even with that, I don't think RG3 is done. Gruden is staying in Washington (which, even if his record is poor, a very good thing) and he certainly isn't coddling RG3 or inflating his ego. He need work and Gruden isn't afraid to let him know it. He very well may end up a good player. Though, I have a strong feeling it won't be for Washington.
gruden is an awful head coach. he needs to learn how to manage the clock, when to call time-outs to give your team a better chance to score some points in two-minute drills, and how to become a better decision-maker. he's just bad.

if he can make those changes, he's got a chance to be good. i'm hoping he has grown and understands that the quarterback, especially a franchise quarterback, isn't supposed to change his style of play for your coaching... your coaching needs to change to accentuate his style of play so the team wins (especially when that was what you were hired to do). this shouldn't be a battle of egos, this should be a team, from top to bottom, wanting to win games.
 

eits

Lifer
Jun 4, 2005
25,207
2
81
www.integratedssr.com
lol they hired a guy trying to make a comeback as the GM and made the guy who caused all these GM issues his boss. The genius of Jack Kent Cooke was to be willing to spend the money to build a winning team and staying the hell out of day to day operations so long as the team performed. Unlike Snyder he had no interest in being a jock sniffer and undermining the coach's and staffs relationship with the players. Until Snyder is willing to accept that nothing will really change.
snyder already accepted it. he said he was embarrassed and promised to stay out of the operations. that's the main reason scot mccloughan took the job, because he was promised snyder wouldn't interfere in the way he does things in order to build winning teams.
 

zinfamous

No Lifer
Jul 12, 2006
101,027
15,157
136
Sneaked? I thought I made it clear. The U's dynasty is over, the ACC is simply a weak conference. The Big 10, and performance amongst them, should be rated higher than being good in the ACC.
Indeed. Without FSU joining back in ~90 or so, the ACC really never had any claim to relevance when it comes to football (possibly exception of 1 or 2 Clemson teams). It's a large market, but with middling quality, has long been overshadowed in that region by the SEC. Just compare those legendary Duke teams of...forever, and each for very different reasons (bball vs football)

And still, that's FSU, and that's all that the ACC ever really had. None of the great Miami teams were part of the ACC. Neither, V Tech.
Even when the few pretenders thought they were something--those Mack Brown Carolina teams, once at #4, played FSU--it was a bloodbath. For what was it, 8 straight seasons, and FSU suffered only 1 loss in all of the ACC (very close goal line stop by UVA vs Warrick Dunn). That's pathetic. ...of course then there was the dismantling at the hands of the great Torry Holt and NC State in 1998 (talk about mediocre teams), that really started to unravel the FSU mystique.

I mentioned this in my comments re: Russell Wilson in one of the other football threads--I was actually happy for him to land in Wisconsin, where people would notice what he was doing. He was doing these things for 3 years in the ACC, and barely a mention on any given week in any of the sports world. One season at Wisconsin? B10 POTY, people love him.

And, our coach gets fired. :D
 
Last edited:

IndyColtsFan

Lifer
Sep 22, 2007
33,473
544
126
Gee Irsays squandering opportunities, not like they have a history of that or anything. The whole reason the Colts play in Indianapolis is the Irsay families squandering of opportunities.
I'm not sure I understand. The Maryland legislature was preparing to seize the Colts and he didn't have much choice but to move.
 

ASK THE COMMUNITY