Andrew Luck Runs 4.66 And 4.59 40 Times At Combine
by Brad Wells on Feb 26, 2012 12:01 PM EST
Email
Print
Robert Griffin's 40 time will make all the headlines today. We don't know the official time yet, but he was clocked first at 4.41, and then on his second he was 4.38. Gil Brandt of NFL.com had him at 4.34. Those times make Griffin faster than all but one of the wide receivers at the 2012 NFL Scouting Combine. Impressive, to say the least.
However, while not having as much a 'WOW' factor as Griffin's 4.38 time, Stanford quarterback Andrew Luck also ran the 40, and notched a very good time for someone his size (6'4, 230 pounds).
Andrew Luck runs a 4.66, which is impressive for his size.
— Dan Kadar (@MockingTheDraft) February 26, 2012
To give you some perspective, Cam Newton ran a 4.59 at last year's Combine. Tim Tebow had a 4.71 in 2010. Aaron Rodgers was 4.7 in 2005. Michael Vick ran a 4.25 in 2001.
Peyton Manning ran a 4.81 in 1998.
Lucks' second run on the 40 was a 4.59, which was the same speed clocked for Newton last year. At the end of the day, Matt Grecco sums it up best:
Nobody should care one bit how fast Luck runs here. It has zero to do with his draft stock.
— Matt Grecco (@mgrex03) February 26, 2012
True, but the 40 time points out an interesting truth that, in a way, flies in the face of a meme that is developing.
Fiction: Andrew Luck is a statue at quarterback, similar to Peyton Manning. He beats you with his brain, but his physical talent isn't anything to write home about.
Fiction: Robert Griffin III is a "freakish" athlete that will change the game of football. However, he can't read defenses and will get his ass handed to him in the pros if he tries to win with talent alone.
The reality is Luck is one of the better physically gifted quarterbacks we've seen in a long time. That he's big, strong, smart, and fast makes him the de fecto No. 1 overall. Conversely, RG3 can read defenses and knows how to use his talents in the right offense.
In the end, both men have all the physical and mental tools it takes to succeed. The one red flag I see for RG3 is he talks way too much. If he acts as cocky before gameday as he has in Indianapolis this week, especially if he gets taken by the Browns, some people in Pittsburgh and Baltimore might make it a point to remind him that this is a man's league, not the Big 12.
And by "remind him" I mean break his f*cking face.
121 comments
|
1 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
Love this
Said it like it is.
And also for comparison, Aaron Rodgers (a few good scrambler) had a 4.7 40 time. As did Tim Tebow. And we all know both those guys can run.
But as you said, Luck doesn’t need to run. His quick release and decision making is much more important to his draft stock.
Also didn’t know that Vick was that fast. I think RG3 is smarter, but clearly we’ve had another “Freakish” athlete in the league.
I know might not be a great analogy but – Faster, Stronger, more physically gifted Manning >> Smarter Mike Vick.
Just saying haha. But I main point was before that statement so don’t hate
I don’t think it was really an issue of intelligence that held vick back but more a lack of effort. He got a $100 mil contract without really trying, what was his motivation? Winning wasn’t important to a 22 year old kid who had never seen money like that before in his life.
That said I don’t think RG3 is really comparable to Vick, other than his elite for any position speed, RG3 is better in every other way.
Some other tidbits
George Whitfield – the quarterback guru who also trained Cam Newton before the combines – said the most impressive thing about Luck is his size. He compared him to a “hummer.” And also said he’s comparable to Newton and such (although a little smaller)
He currently has Luck doing workouts on the beach, with brooms (simulating extending defenders), beanies thrown at the feet (simulating pressure), blind drop backs, etc… unconventional methods just to get him better ready for Sundays.
He knows luck is a sharp sword, but he thinks the guy can go nuclear. He also praised Luck’s diligence, work ethic, and intelligence. Sound familiar?
Bust my ass
More
From NFL.com:
“Luck’s unofficial 4.59 matched Newton’s official best time from 2011. Luck’s 10-foot, 4-inch broad jump was just 2 inches off Newton’s 10-6, the best of last year’s QB crop.
Finally, Luck notched a 36-inch vertical, actually besting Newton’s 35-inch jump from last year."
Wow
Perhaps More Important of All
Luck didn’t need to show any of this. People could give a rats ass how well he does with these physical measurements. It was supposed to be RG3’s day.
But still Luck trained his ass off to show people something unexpected. And more importantly back his (and everyone’s claim) of how relentless he is and how he thinks he can get so much better.
Thats the most impressive thing. He’s besting freakin’ Cam Newton. This guy doesn’t quit. There is no such thing as perfection for him, since you can always go a level higher.
Thats why I’m so excited to have this guy as my new QB. If you guys aren’t either, then shame on you
Your agenda is apparent...
by (206)NightRidah on Feb 26, 2012 1:11 PM EST via mobile up reply actions
Im not hiding the fact I want Luck
So yeah I guess it is. That’s my only agenda today I guess.
Oh wait… add I want this RG3 to Colts crap to stop. Another team deserves him more. :)
The. Colts. Have. Already. Publicly. Stated. That. They. Are. Drafting. Luck.
They backed off that statement, sure, but they did make it. And even their latest statement “We haven’t decided whether we are keeping Manning or taking Luck.” Not Manning vs Luck vs RG3. Manning vs Luck.
“It was supposed to be RG3’s day.”
No, RG3’s day was yesterday when he measured out at 6’2" 3/8. Again, RG3 had no shot of overtaking Luck in the draft. But his height and his 40 time definitely have him at #2 overall, and ends the “maybe Tannehill is better” talk that a lot of people were spouting before the combine.
by an_auburn_fan on Feb 26, 2012 1:58 PM EST up reply actions
You are questioning his character on other threads...
When there isn’t a reason to. Calling him a diva…using phrases like “them”…talking about the white man running fast also…
Your agenda is clear.
by (206)NightRidah on Feb 26, 2012 2:06 PM EST via mobile up reply actions
4.59 is really impressive indeed for his size
Same 40 time as Cam Newton! Luck turns out to be faster than Tebow, Rodgers, Ponder… guys that scramble pretty well. Plus he ran over defenders at college and we’ve all seen him throw the football and read defenses. Welcome to Indy Luck!!
by SpanishColtsFan on Feb 26, 2012 12:40 PM EST via mobile reply actions
That 40 time makes me want Luck even more
4.59 is pretty fast for a non WR/DB period! Speed is important in the redzone and on QB bootlegs!
by (206)NightRidah on Feb 26, 2012 1:10 PM EST via mobile reply actions
Tom Brady ran an incredible 5.23 at the combine.
I met my girlfriend through 800LoanMart but had to return her with interest.
Well he's still impressing now
By throwing safeties on the first play in the Superbowl.
by DoItAlone on Feb 26, 2012 1:30 PM EST up reply actions 2 recs
RG3
Who gives a f*ck how fast RG3 ran the 40? Are you planning to hand it off to him on a reverse? It has nothing to do with how good he is as a QB. Nothing but pre-draft hype.
Utter rubbish
How on earth you can think RGIII is cocky from his Q&A sessions with the media is beyond me
“Oh he talks too much” – gimme a break…just how much is too much? Would you care to set word limits on answers people give? If he talks too much, he’s cocky – If he gives one word answers or one sentence answers, I suppose you’ll be saying he’s standoffish and conceited?
Everyone is subjective…but this type of subjectivity borders on the inane
by manningtoharrison on Feb 26, 2012 1:48 PM EST reply actions 4 recs
'How on earth you can think RGIII is cocky from his Q&A sessions with the media is beyond me'
Because I watched it and came to that conclusion. I also spoke to people who, unlike you, were there, and they came away with a similar vibe.
You might not agree, and yay. Good for you. don’t call the opinion ‘inane’ and then back it up with, well, nothing but your own subjectivity.
SB Nation's Indianapolis Colts blogger at Stampede Blue and editor of SB Nation Indiana.
Speaking of cocky...
“I was there, man. I got the V.I.P. passes an’ all that dope sh*t! Bow Down!”
j/k
I see great things in baseball. It's our game - the American game. It will take our people out-of-doors, fill them with oxygen, give them a larger physical stoicism. Tend to relieve us from being a nervous, dyspeptic set. Repair these losses, and be a blessing to us. ~Walt Whitman
Everything I've seen from real reporters is that every loved RG3's interview.
But hey, if you want to claim that your unnamed special contacts dislike him so you can continue to push your Luck agenda (even though we all know the Colts will draft him anyway), go ahead.
by James Broschat on Feb 27, 2012 10:19 AM EST up reply actions
Question
Why is Andrew Luck being compared to Cam Newton. I don’t think there are similarities on any level. Cam is almost 2 inches taller, almost 20 pounds heavier, has a more explosive vertical passing arm and has “done it” in the NFL. What am I missing?
Shouldn’t Andrew Luck be compared to his peer RG III?
by Ravens One on Feb 26, 2012 1:54 PM EST reply actions 2 recs
Not Really
It is just interesting that the “prototype dropback” QB had the same measurables as the “freak of nature dual threat QB” last year. Newton led the SEC in rushing last year, and had 20 rushing TDs, remember?
Also, consider that down the line, maybe 6-8 years from now, assuming all these QBs pan out, Luck and Newton will be more similar as NFL QBs than will Luck and RG3, or Newton and RG3.
by an_auburn_fan on Feb 26, 2012 2:01 PM EST up reply actions
Couldn't disagree more bro'
The misnomer about Luck is that he “can make all the throws”. I don’t see a QB that threatens every blade of grass on a football field. Luck played in WCO system at Stanford. In that offense the emphasis is on the short and intermediate passing game. Jim Harbaugh and the current coach at Stanford (Shaw) were coaching to Luck’s strength. Didn’t luck have NFL talent on the OL in OG Decastro and LT Jonathan Martin? The 12 personnel power sets and intermediate seam routes don’t work either if Coby Fleener is not an NFL prospect not to mention the other TE.
Chris Owusu is an NFL talent (who ran a 4.36 during the Combine today) at WR and there are currently 2 former Stanford WR’s on NFL rosters led by the Baldwin kid out in Seattle. Correct me if I’m wrong but the other is on the 49ers roster. I said that to say this…..Luck did play with good talent at critical positions at Stanford. The facts point to media outlets being incorrect into saying things like Luck was a one man show Stanford.
My point, I think Luck is overrated and will be a QB that will have to be manipulated with the play calling and system. I don’t see a wow passer. I don’t think he drives the football down the field. Will he be able to consistently break a defense down vertically? Can he challenge a defense consistently with his arm talent on 18-22 yard deep dig route, outside the numbers on18-20 deep comebacks or the 9 route especiallywhen the pocket is “muddy” and he can’t set his feet. I am of the opinion that he will not be able to attack all 5 field zone in the NFL without considerable help with the play calling. Felt this way for months now.
by Ravens One on Feb 26, 2012 3:40 PM EST up reply actions 2 recs
SO IF YOU ARE CORRECT
wouldn’t this be obvious to, you know, every scout that has watched him? No one has these concerns about him. If they did they’d have him as a 4th round pick.
I’ve watched him and I think he drives the ball down the field when he has to and takes something off when he has to.
He's smarter than everybody else...
just ask him.
You are wrong
check out this throw. 50+ yard throw falling to his knees with near perfect accuracy. Change your mind?
by doc m on Feb 26, 2012 4:44 PM EST up reply actions 1 recs
I was literally looking for this very video
upon reading Ravens’ post. His sports science special talks about his arm strength too.
On his measurables, not his playing style
Andrew Luck was only being compared to Cam Newton on the measurables at the combine as they have similar results. This is a complement to Luck, because it shows that he is just as athletic as Cam, who people raved about for his athleticism before last years draft.
The reason why Luck is not being compared to RG3 is because RG3 is a freak when it comes to athleticism. Luck can’t really match Griffin for the athleticism, but is still shown to be a very good athlete when you compare him against Cam.
by ben10parsons on Feb 26, 2012 4:28 PM EST up reply actions
Flawed (not you)
Andrew Luck was only being compared to Cam Newton on the measurables at the combine as they have similar results. This is a complement to Luck, because it shows that he is just as athletic as Cam, who people raved about for his athleticism before last years draft.
This is the reason why I mute the media now for the most part. I heard Mike Lombardi on NFL Network compare Andrew Luck to Rich Gannon too! That’s insane! Luck is nowhere near the athlete Rich Gannon was! Gannon ran a 4.3 40 coming out of Delaware and was drafted as a DB. The National media is doing their best to justify all the hype they have been pushing about Luck over the last 2 seasons. I think the media is doing Luck a disservice by comparing him to any NFL player that has done it.Combine measurable conversation skew things and confuse people/fans into thinking Luck is as talented physically as Cam Newton. It’s just not the case. In addition to having a howitzer for an arm, I watched Cam Newton against a Bucs defense in a 2 deep man under coverage concept and no spy on him step up into the pocket and sprint 50 yards for a TD with a defender draped all over him inside the 5 yard line. Luck does not possess that kind of athletic ability to overpower NFL defenders at the goal line.
All I’m saying is that I don’t see the comparison. When the cherry picking starts happening, I just start laughing. They do have a lot time to fill over at NFL Network during the broadcast. Mayock and Lombardi have to say something, don’t they?
@Ravens One
i compared Robert Griffin the Rich Gannon 3 months ago. People don’t agree but i think it is dead on. The side ways release …the pocket skills… the accuracy
Ravens One is one of the smartest fans on all of SB naton Blogs for those that don’t know him.
Oh and Ravens one you should check out a post i made about the pocket skills of Luck and RG3… it is dead on. It is the basis of why i said Newton last year.. and Stafford would be great.
Myth Buster by nature. I don't confront you i encourage you to think. Because your brillance in your own way helps everyone. Your opinion matters and I will listen to it. Good clean healthy debate is fun.
by Shankdiddy on Feb 27, 2012 6:24 AM EST up reply actions 1 recs
You are way too kind Shankdiddy
The football IQ and passion you display is appreciated by me. I know you are going to do your homework, give facts to backup opinions and get into the nuances of said opinions. Knowledge, passion, accuracy, thoroughness and stick-to-itiveness (tenacity) are highly admirable qualities that you possess in great abundance.
I look forward to reading your articles and comments as this 2012 NFL Draft approaches.
Similar results at combine
I was only saying that the athleticism can be compared, because of there similar results at the combine, showing that Luck is a good athlete, since his measurables match up with Cam’s, who is seen to be a good athlete.
Because of the similar results, people can’t now say that Andrew Luck isn’t a good athlete.
by ben10parsons on Feb 27, 2012 9:02 AM EST up reply actions
Insulting football intelligence of some fans
In the end, both men have all the physical and mental tools it takes to succeed. The one red flag I see for RG3 is he talks way too much. If he acts as cocky before gameday as he has in Indianapolis this week, especially if he gets taken by the Browns, some people in Pittsburgh and Baltimore might make it a point to remind him that this is a man’s league, not the Big 12.
And by “remind him” I mean break his f*cking face.
This does insult the intelligence of the hardcore football fan. I get that you want Andrew Luck to be your guy. Why throw negative unwarranted jabs at the best QB prospect (RG III) is this draft class ‘cause you don’t want him? RG III is so different from last year’s #1 Newton from the neck up among other things. Luck is said to possess all the intangibles of the greatest prospect to come down the pike since John Elway (according to many and the next Peyton Manning). I don’t share that opinion but no one asked me. As a Ravens fan, I can tell you for sure, I hope the Browns are stupid enough to pass up this kid and keep Colt McCoy as their guy. Maybe Holmgren will think the RG III talks too much too!
I really don’t get the hate speak on Griffin though. But this is your blog!
Manning told Irsay and Polian...
If they didn’t pick him he would be kicking that ass for 15 years. What’s more cocky than that?
by (206)NightRidah on Feb 26, 2012 2:34 PM EST via mobile up reply actions 3 recs
This does insult the intelligence of the hardcore football fan.
No, it doesn’t. It might insult you, for reasons that probably don’t make any sense. RG3’s cockiness is seen by some as a positive. I view it as a negative. Not a hard concept to wrap your mind around.
It’s not that big of a negative when weighed against his many positives. Still, if he’s cocky and flashy and showing off ‘Steeler socks’ before a game, he better watch out. Flashy and cocky is unhealthy in the NFL, especially at the QB position.
Also, ‘hate speech?’ Are you serious? Really? Get the fuck outta here.
SB Nation's Indianapolis Colts blogger at Stampede Blue and editor of SB Nation Indiana.
Great time by Luck
He doesn’t need to be any faster he is the better long term QB between the 2 of them !!!
Brad Wells: Sorry, Can't Agree With The "Cocky" Nonsense
Cocky was what Eli Manning pulled on draft day.
Cocky was the flame war that Peyton Manning – and company – initiated and perpetuated against Robert Irsay all offseason long, including purposefully overshadowing Irsay during Super Bowl week.
Cocky was Manning claiming that he should have been consulted before Irsay fired coaches and front office personnel from the team that he owns, and stating that he felt like he was being pushed out the door.
Cocky was Manning calling Mike Vanderjagt “an idiot drunk kicker.”
Cocky was Andrew Luck (through his father) proclaiming that Luck didn’t want to sit behind Peyton Manning but play right away (yes, team Luck walked it back later because of the furor, but still …)
Sorry dude. Being effervescent at a press conference is cocky, but the power moves and machinations behind the scenes that Manning and company are notorious for (and it seems like Oliver and Andrew Luck are just as capable of) is another level. And it is really as simple as this: RG3 is from a (somewhat) different culture that doesn’t do this bland, corporate-cliche speak. It is different, but it is not cocky. Cam Newton calling himself “an entertainer and an icon” at last year’s combine was cocky, and RG3 criticized Newton over that. RG3 said “Newton’s confidence is off the charts, and I am trying to keep mine on the charts.” Funny how no one saw fit to report that …
Folks agreed with you? Yep. Probably the same folks that did the historic hatchet job on Newton last year. The same folks who were spreading ridiculous rumors that RG3 was 6’1" or shorter (which had no basis whatsoever). And the same folks that are still furious over RG3 winning the Heisman. Those folks might agree with you, but not for the same reasons! Instead, these are folks who would rather RG3 be playing WR than QB.
That Manning-Rivers draft was between one guy who held a franchise hostage (Manning), and another guy who is one of the biggest trash talkers in the NFL of any position and over half the league hates his guts (Rivers). And Aaron Rodgers’ ‘tude is one of the reasons why he dropped to 24, where the franchise that had to put up with Brett Favre all those years took him. And Ben Roethlisberger? ’Nuff said. But RG3 is the cocky one that has to worry about getting blasted by the Steelers? That’s rich.
I am not going to accuse you of “hate speech”, but it is just that calling him “cocky” and “flashy” just reminds so many people of the not-too-subtle code words that have been thrown at the guy ever since he became a serious Heisman candidate.
by an_auburn_fan on Feb 26, 2012 3:33 PM EST reply actions 6 recs
How is Luck cocky
Over something his father said? If you’re son was the #1 overall draft pick, wouldn’t you brag about him? And if I remember correctly, Peyton’s father said the same thing about Luck.
Luck is not cocky. And I agree all the other examples you gave were. And so is RG3. He also had said that Luck was the de-facto Heisman winner and I beat him there, and he was the de-facto #1 and I intend to beat him here. Call it confidence. But I think its also cockiness
I enjoyed this
And it is so spot on that it should be placed in Webster’s Dictionary under the term cocky. You ran the gamut to articulate your position and thoughts. Ver well done, indeed. Rec’d.
by Ravens One on Feb 26, 2012 3:49 PM EST reply actions 1 recs
RGIII
I don’t think he’s too cocky. I actually love his personality. I think he’s funny, smart, outgoing, and confident/cocky. I like his personality a lot.
He has amazing physical tools, but he’s just not as good as prospect as Luck at this point in time. There’s really no denying that. Luck is more polished and much more NFL ready. I think RGIII could be a great quarterback and woudln’t be upset if he came to the Colts, but I’d rather have Luck.
You SHOULD Be Upset If He Came To The Colts
Because not taking Luck would surpass negligence.
by an_auburn_fan on Feb 26, 2012 6:58 PM EST up reply actions 1 recs
Absolutely
Cuz then they’ll mess up in other areas too… like the D. That’d be awful management
This is all irrelevant.
An NFL Network dude said a source close to Irsay said he does not care if Griffin flies at the combine. Luck is the guy.
Why did Luck meet with Christensen instead of Pagano? It takes about 30 seconds for somebody…anybody… to walk into a room and say “We are going to draft you.”
Notice the teams Luck has met with: the Colts.
Notice the teams Griffin has met with: the Browns, Dolphins, Chiefs, Eagles, Bills, Redskins…not the Colts.
by captaincomeback on Feb 26, 2012 4:26 PM EST reply actions
Anything you think he can't do, Luck can do better
Luck can’t throw the accurate deep ball?
Watch this: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tBz2ZOTXlKg&feature=related
Watch the balls trajectory… thats a money pass right there.
How bout run? Surely he can’t run..
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S4_w-puInqY&feature=related
Pay attention to the hit the Luck takes. And the look he gives the defender. This guy is power. He’s not a “Imma scramble if I get scared” type… more of a “Bitch get outta my way”
Oh dear, what about catch? I mean Tom Brady can’t throw and catch the balls at the same time, right? So how can Luck? (This is incredibly impressive guys)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3X0VJT1CmV0&feature=related
Notice the bare hands. The footwork. The reach. The coordination. I wish some of our pro receivers could catch like this.
The last link
It didn’t post right so here it is again:
Arm Strength Isn't About The Deep Ball
The deep ball is a pass that you are only going to hit like once every other game anyway. Being able to hit those vertical passes was more of a big thing in the 80s and 90s when teams still ran those 2 WR, 2 RB 1 TE offenses and would throw downfield on play action. (Or in the case of Dan Marino and Warren Moon, just throw downfield because you could!) It isn’t even a part of the modern NFL so much any more.
Instead, arm strength is about 1) those difficult intermediate routes going across the field where the ball has to go straight 30-40 yards in the air but at a high velocity, much different from just throwing a rainbow up in the air and letting it arc down and 2) gunning a ball into a tight window, technically a “covered” WR, before the DB turns around, or even if he sees it has a chance to react.
Based on what I saw of Luck at Stanford, he can’t do that consistently. No big deal … neither can Tom Brady or Drew Brees. The Colts would be wise to run an offense where he doesn’t have to do it as often; to take advantage of what the guy can do well.
by an_auburn_fan on Feb 26, 2012 7:06 PM EST up reply actions 1 recs
Luck will prove you wrong
I agree he can’t do it consistently. He’s not supposed to be amazing at everything yet. But this is something he can improve. Its not unreachable.
But the pass that I posted was a good looking pass. Luck can make difficult throws too, if you’ve seen him play
Wow
Are you his dad? Shit. Arm strength and speed are two things he won’t be able to improve very much at his age. Both are definitely sufficient to run a high caliber offense, if he has playmakers and a good line. That’s all either one needs to be successful.
by PeytonTheManning on Feb 26, 2012 8:07 PM EST up reply actions
good thing
he doesnt need to improve either
I said both are sufficient
Maybe look up the meaning of the word you’re unfamiliar with before commenting next time.
by PeytonTheManning on Feb 26, 2012 8:27 PM EST up reply actions
The way you say it
“at his age” – make it sound like Luck is very old. I don’t expect him to be perfect at everything.. but I do think he will do his best to improve in any way he can. And arm strength and speed can be improved… they depend on throwing mechanics. Luck has stated he wants to get a quicker release, and that will also bring a little more power.
Not saying he will improve. But that doesn’t mean he can’t
He's not old
There’s just not much that can be done to improve power behind throws at this point. A quicker release can be achieved, but that won’t increase velocity. It’s quite obvious you think he’s the greatest player to ever touch a football. We will all just accept your 99-100 rating on everything football related for Luck.
by PeytonTheManning on Feb 26, 2012 11:20 PM EST up reply actions
This was a good read
Instead, arm strength is about 1) those difficult intermediate routes going across the field where the ball has to go straight 30-40 yards in the air but at a high velocity, much different from just throwing a rainbow up in the air and letting it arc down and 2) gunning a ball into a tight window, technically a "covered" WR, before the DB turns around, or even if he sees it has a chance to react.
I agree with all of this.
Based on what I saw of Luck at Stanford, he can’t do that consistently. No big deal … neither can Tom Brady or Drew Brees. The Colts would be wise to run an offense where he doesn’t have to do it as often; to take advantage of what the guy can do well.
And this is the #1 reason why I said what I said. The RPM’s, on certain throws, are not there for Andrew Luck to operate effectively in a vertical passing offense if a chunk of routes are outside the numbers (X-iso). To my way of thinking, there should be no pasing limitations to the offense if you are drafting with the number 1 pick.
by Ravens One on Feb 26, 2012 10:35 PM EST up reply actions 1 recs
So the Colts shouldn't have drafted PM?
Wasn’t arm strength one of the concerns about PM going into the draft? Or his mobility, for that matter?
by JoeSmithers on Feb 27, 2012 12:28 AM EST up reply actions
Most college players don't have a fully developed body, arm
You can improve arm strength to some degree
Yes, yes you can
You can improve arm strength with certain exercises. But if you are talking about using the #1 pick on a QB you want that QB to be ready “getting off the bus” as he enters your facility. I had the occasion to listen to Bill Polian talk about the arm-talent of RG III on Sirius NFL Radio last week. Mr. Polian talked about RG III being a scheme diverse player. More specifically, Polian talked about RG III’s ability to boot action to his left under pressure, stop and throw the football 60-65 yards on a rope (not with air under it) back across the field to his right outside the numbers before defenders can react. Arm-talent like that is very rare.
There are very few current NFL QB’s capable of making that throw (Flacco, Roethlisberger Vick, Cutler Stafford, Rodgers and Cam Newton). The point is to place as much stress on the D-coordinator with the offensive system and you need a QB with a great arm to stress them to the breaking point when plays have to be made under less than ideal circumstances. Luck will probably be a good NFL player. Is he a revolutionary, once in lifetime and can’t miss? I don’t think so!
by Ravens One on Feb 27, 2012 10:37 AM EST up reply actions 1 recs
on the fictions
i had absolutely no idea there was a perception of Luck being a “statue”. the guy was lining up and catching passes in college. i’m glad he’s putting up impressive #‘s but i couldn’t care less. the thing that is so impressive to me is the pro-style he has been playing in and his audibles, accuracy, and clutch play.
the thing about RG3’s intelligence is starting to annoy me. i find it interesting that just because he speaks clearly, he is considered “intelligent”. this is a racial issue and i typically hate this conversation. just because you can communicate clearly has no bearing of your football knowledge. does anyone contend that Ryan Fitzpatrick is a “smart” guy? no, but he kinda sucks as a QB. it is never really a topic of discussion with white QB’s but it is with the black ones. i’m gonna go ahead and assume that RG3 is a smart guy but i’ll holdout my opinion on his football knowledge until i see him play the Steelers next year.
This Is Ridiculous
Ryan Fitzpatrick isn’t a bad QB because he lacks football knowledge. He is a bad QB because he doesn’t have much ability. And that is where the racial part comes in. Most QBs are white, so people associate winning QBs with things like “intelligence” and “leadership.” Nonsense … Peyton Manning, Eli Manning, Drew Brees, Aaron Rodgers, Ben Roethslisberger etc. have great athletic ability. There is more to athletic ability than being able to spin around and dunk from the free throw line … look at the Olympics. Denying the athletic ability of elite white quarterbacks and only associating it with the other 21 guys on the field is racism.
Second, my goodness, you don’t think that it took football knowledge to throw for 4300 yards at a 72.4% completion rate and win 10 games on the #109 defense (in one area) and #111 defense (in another)? If not, then what do you attribute it to? Chance? Good fortune? Or that it was somehow the product of his being able to run a 4.38 40? Look, Baylor did not run a pro-style offense, but it was still a passing offense. Very similar to the offense that Drew Brees ran at Purdue.
And for the record, Luck will have as much to prove against the Steelers as will any other QB.
by an_auburn_fan on Feb 26, 2012 7:12 PM EST up reply actions
I think he meant
it in the sense that Luck can read defenses better. Not necessarily book smarts. But I agree its misleading. RG3 is a smart guy. But he hasn’t been in a pro style system yet.
Anyways I think passing stats in college are overrated. My college’s QB, Nick Foles, was very accurate… but he sucks. It was more the system that created open guys.
Luck can read which area of the defense is more heavily defended and then adjust accordingly to get guys open. Thats special considering he’s 22
there is no comparison
between Luck and RG3. both of you missed the point. auburn, you missed my point so badly that i’m not sure what language you speak. my post was in no way meant to compare the 2 rather a response to the article.
the point
the point i’m trying to make about RG3 is this: he finished high school and college early while playing sports. he is obviously a smart guy so why is it always brought up that he is a smart guy? it should go without saying…..get it? having said that, just because he is a smart kid doesn’t necessarily mean he is a smart QB. this isn’t a diss on RG3, it’s a fact. same goes for Luck or anyone else. every time an article is written about RG3 or he’s being discussed on espn, it is always said “yeah, yeah, but he is an intelligent kid”. this to me is in itself is kinda rascist. its almost as if it’s amazing that he is smart, i mean how could an athletic black kid be smart too….
Dude, Andrew Luck's Intelligence Is Spoken Of All The Time
That he went to Stanford. That he has an architecture degree (or will soon have it). They were even claiming that Luck was the team’s offensive coordinator (which is totally ridiculous by the way) this season.
I agree that some of the talk about RG3’s intelligence is “man-bites-dog” racism, but keep in mind that a lot of people feel that the main reason for the failure of dual threat QBs and black QBs is their inability to learn sophisticated NFL offenses and read defenses. When you see guys like Kordell Stewart, Michael Vick, Daunte Culpepper, Vince Young, Cam Newton and Tim Tebow (white, but still definitely dual threat) every year, folks are going to say “WOW, FINALLY an athletic QB that MIGHT allow us to run our entire offense!”
by an_auburn_fan on Feb 26, 2012 8:14 PM EST up reply actions
i have kept that in mind
um, that is exactly my point. i’m gonna go ahead and give up on this one…
what a joke...
Learn sophisticated NFL offenses? R U kidding me? Some people just ignore the facts..the Black “dual-threat” QB’s
Kordell Stewart – 2001 Pro Bowl
D. Culpepper – 2000, 2003 and 2004 Pro Bowl and 2X ALL PRO
Viince Young – 2006, 2009 Pro Bowl
Cam Newton – 2011 Pro Bowl and ROY
Jeff Blake – 1995 Pro Bowl
Donovan McNabb – 2000, 01, 02, 03, 04, and 2009 Pro Bowl Selection
Mike Vick – 2002, 04, 05, 2010 Pro Bowl
Warren Moon – 9 x Pro Bowl – HOF
Randall Cunningham – 1988, 1989, 1990, 1998,
The White “dual-threat” OB’s
Steve Young – 7x Pro Bowl, HOF
Joe Montana – 8x Pro Bowl, HOF
Jake Plummer – 2005 Pro Bowl
John Elway – 9X Pro Bwol, HOF
The List goes on……so……..what are those folks talking about? HHHMMM!!!
by 33rd Street on Feb 26, 2012 9:11 PM EST up reply actions 3 recs
oops I forgot.....
Steve McNair – 2000, 2003 and 2005 Pro Bowl….
by 33rd Street on Feb 26, 2012 10:49 PM EST up reply actions
by the way
the RG3 statement was not directed at BBS. it was more directed to some of the chatter in the post section
"...might make it a point to remind him that this is a man's league, not the Big 12."
Haha, ya, because the Pac-12 is SO much better. [/sarcasm]
I am a college student that sleeps with a St. Louis Cardinals Fredbird Pillow Pet, and I am proud of it.
by Sir Sci on Feb 26, 2012 6:53 PM EST reply actions 2 recs
The fact that Luck has some speed will come in handy...
Being mobile is never a bad thing. Being a run first QB is always a bad thing…knowing that Luck can run a bootleg, take it into the endzone himself, or pick up a 3rd and 7 with hi feet occasionally is very good.
To show how fast A 4.66 is…Mohammed Sanu, who many people in here want the Colts to take if he is on the board at 34 ran a 4.67…Jerry Rice ran a similar speed. 4.66 is extremely fast for someone who doesn’t spending of his time on speed training. That’s just God given ability!
by (206)NightRidah on Feb 26, 2012 6:55 PM EST via mobile reply actions
Guys That Ran A Slower 40 Time Than Andrew Luck
Jerry Rice
Anquan Boldin
T.J. Houshmanzadeh
Plaxico Burress
Larry Fitzgerald
Cool eh? Now for some QBs:
Tim Tebow
Steve McNair
Vince Young (who ran a 4.58 on a faster track than Indy!)
Donovan McNabb
Daunte Culpepper
Looks like a big time athlete that you Colts are going to very soon have yourselves there. Oh yeah, and a pretty good passer too ;-)
Full QB results
Sorry for posting link to another blog, hope it’s not against any rules.
Interesting notes: of the top 5 QB prospects (my list, alphabetical: Foles, Griffin, Luck, Tannehill, Weeden), only Luck did the 3 cone (6.8, 3rd) and 20 yd shuttle (4.28, 5th). None of them did the bench press or 40 yd shuttle.
by JoeSmithers on Feb 26, 2012 7:07 PM EST via mobile reply actions
I Just Don't Get The Fascination With Foles
He put up good numbers, but in an air-raid/spread style offense, and had good talent around him. He had a lousy record as a starter, including a disastrous senior season. And other than being tall with decent (not great) arm strength, he didn’t seem to have much ability or skill. Also, have you read the reports from the senior bowl and the combine on his passing? The guy was pretty much awful. http://tucsoncitizen.com/wildcatreport/2012/02/26/ex-arizona-wildcats-foles-criner-on-the-slow-side-at-nfl-combine/
If the guy didn’t play in the Pac-12, he wouldn’t be considered a prospect.
by an_auburn_fan on Feb 26, 2012 7:17 PM EST up reply actions
Foles sucks
Feel really bad for whoever drafts him. What do you think of LaMicheal James btw Auburn? I think we should get him if he’s there 3rd or 4th round
LaMichael James? Not Much ...
Now of course, I have been wrong before. I thought that Robert Gallery and Knowshon Moreno would go to multiple Pro Bowls, I felt the same way about Matt Leinart and Vince Young, that Brady Quinn would be at least pretty good, and as I stated on another forum, I thought that Aaron Rodgers would be a bust. Matt Ryan is better than I thought he would be also.
But as far as James goes … plays in a gimmick offense. Doesn’t have the size, center of gravity or lower body strength to break tackles or move the pile. Was nowhere to be found when his team needed him the most against top opponents like Auburn, LSU and USC, but racked up huge yards against lesser teams. Even the Tennessee Vols slowed him down, except for one big run in the second half when they were tired.
The plus side: quick, fast, explosive, elusive, good change of direction, instinctive, and catches the ball a whole lot better than you would expect an option RB to. (Catching the ball and pass-blocking are different matters however.) I say that he is a 3rd down back. He’d be better off in an offense like New Orleans in a Reggie Bush/Darren Sproles type role, or in New England in a Kevin Faulk type role. With Luck in Indianapolis: I don’t know. Stanford was pretty serious about running the football, and it kept Luck in good situations. I’d feel more comfortable surrounding Luck with some of the same types of tailbacks that he had in college, and not guys better suited for a spread offense.
by an_auburn_fan on Feb 26, 2012 8:06 PM EST up reply actions
Wow
Based on your track record it doesn’t seem like we should believe any of your projections.
I’ll state now that I’m kidding. I don’t need DoItAlone replying about how Luck will destroy any track record I put in front of him.
by PeytonTheManning on Feb 26, 2012 8:17 PM EST up reply actions
I get that
Addai and Brown should definitely be sufficient. And Luck did work with bruising power backs. But James seems like a playmaker to me… he can catch too.
Luck will be running the play action a lot. We’ll need a decent running game eventually.
hhmmm!!!!
decision making ….Let’s get the record straight…..Luck has thrown 22 int while being sacked 23 times (1st round talent on the OL) over his college career and RG3 has thrown only 14.while being sacked 72 times (pressure and no Oline)…………………these are the facts…..
SSSOOOOOOO, who makes better decisions under pressure?
Personally, I believe that we can’t go wrong either way………but stop the madness with all of the criticisms of RG3….
If you prefer Luck, so be it but don’t bash RG3…..
If you prefer RG3, so be it but don’t bash Luck…..
they are BOTH great talents!!!!
Getting Sacked
Is part of the decision making process. Good QB’s don’t get sacked… they get rid of the ball and are able to anticipate pressure. Under Luck’s leadership, the Cardinal had the least number of negative plays in college – thats impressive and good decision making.
You need to take that into account.
And I agree both are talents. But I most definitely don’t agree that “we can’t go wrong either way.” Its downright stupid to pass on Luck. And we won’t. Cuz the Colts aren’t stupid.
In seven years, I’m sure (or rather think) the names Luck, Newton, Griffin, and Barkley will be widely stated among the QB realms.
This is a ridiculous argument, Luck was rarely under pressure.
Luck had two of the best offensive linemen in the nation, likely in the top 15 of ALL players in the draft; and add to that, them using three tight-end sets at times. What the hell would you expect??? Luck had excellent protection. The biggest question mark about Luck is how well he will fare without having the luxury of a good O-line and running game. There is too little of a example set for us to know if he’ll be any good when he’s surrounded by pressure. Plenty of great QB prospects get undone when they’re faced with this reality. So this is far from a bragging area right now.
that's my point....
Stanford stayed in “max-protection” formations…….two TE sets most of the time……
they also had All- Americans on the OL……
by 33rd Street on Feb 26, 2012 10:22 PM EST up reply actions
Forgot to mention... yards per pass.
Passing for shorter yardage helps a great deal too. It gives the defense less time to get to the quarterback.
RG3 v Luck and pressure
I think this is a bit of a misconception – RG3 faced fewer QB hurries than his opponents’ season average, and Baylor’s rushing game was actually (statistically) better than Stanford’s (235.62 yds / game v. 210.62 yds / game). Some of that is a credit to RG3, of course, both in avoiding pressure and rushing the football.
I actually ran a quick “statistical analysis” (using that term very loosely) of the passing defenses that Baylor and Stanford faced, and generally speaking, the main trade-off is more yards with more sacks for Baylor. Otherwise, the passing offenses, compared to the pass defenses they faced, are strikingly similar.
http://www.stampedeblue.com/2012/2/27/2827213/luck-v-rg3-against-pass-defenses
by JoeSmithers on Feb 27, 2012 12:47 AM EST up reply actions
RE: RG3 v Luck and pressure
Andrew Luck faced tons less pressure than RG3.
I would note to everyone how Newton was sacked 23 times at Auburn. (As i noted last year at this time he dealt with pressure very well.) Andrew Luck was sacked 23 times in his career at Stanford. RG3 was sacked 79 times in his career. Yet Griffin makes less mistakes with the football while under a lot more pressure and throwing the ball 128 more career passing attempts than Luck…. 17 int for RG3 and 22 for Luck…. how is this possible? How can you throw less int while under more pressure with more volume of attempts too make mistakes on….? Everyone that is pretty descent at math think about that for a moment… RG3 under significantly MORE pressure yet makes less mistakes while throwing the ball more. And we aren’t talking about dinkin and dunking we are talking about a lot of down field high degree of difficulty throws by RG3.
Myth Buster by nature. I don't confront you i encourage you to think. Because your brillance in your own way helps everyone. Your opinion matters and I will listen to it. Good clean healthy debate is fun.
by Shankdiddy on Feb 27, 2012 6:45 AM EST up reply actions 1 recs
What causes sacks? What causes interceptions?
I think we should be careful about trying to draw too many definitive conclusions based on cumulative statistics. None of these stats have a single input variable, although we might believe that results are most sensitive to QB decision-making.
For example, just off the top of my head, sacks are a function of offensive protection, offensive scheme, defensive pressure, defensive scheme, WR route running, secondary coverage, QB mobility, QB release time, and QB decision-making. Interceptions are also a function of offensive scheme, defensive pressure, defensive scheme, WR route running, WR catching, secondary coverage, QB accuracy, and QB decision-making.
5 more interceptions over the course of a college career is not really a significant difference. Luck averaged 0.58 interceptions per game over his career, while RG3 averaged 0.41 interceptions per game. It really doesn’t stand out as that much different, and I’m not going to attribute all those additional interceptions to Luck’s poor decision-making.
56 more sacks over the course of a college career is significantly different. However, for the reasons stated above, I’m still not going to attribute all those additional sacks to RG3’s poor pocket presence (see what I did there?).
I think we can agree that all quarterbacks, no matter how individually talented, and including both Luck and RG3, need a team around them – offensive line, rushing game, skilled wide receivers, defense, special teams, etc.
I think you miss the point of the poster
RG III was under duress much more than Luck. The fact that Luck had better 3 NFL O-lineman blocking for him. Power sets with max protection schemes are a staple in a traditional WCO. Isn’t this the offense Luck played in? Shankdiddy is (effectively in my opinion) pointing out the individual difference of each player under specific circumstances at critical times in game situations.
5 more interceptions over the course of a college career is not really a significant difference. Luck averaged 0.58 interceptions per game over his career, while RG3 averaged 0.41 interceptions per game. It really doesn’t stand out as that much different, and I’m not going to attribute all those additional interceptions to Luck’s poor decision-making.
Did you watch the Oregon game? The speed of Oregon forced Luck outside his comfort zone and you could see it.
by Ravens One on Feb 27, 2012 10:58 AM EST up reply actions 2 recs
Eyeball test v Misuse of stats
I don’t have any problem with people describing what they see. It’s their opinion, it’s based on the “eyeball test,” and as long as we all acknowledge that these are just opinions, we’re being intellectually honest.
I do have a problem with people trying to (mis)use college team statistics to “prove” something about individual prospects. We simply won’t know how these guys will really perform in the NFL until they actually get there. Even then, their performance will be related to the team around them and the teams they compete against.
For example, did you know that 54% of Baylors receptions went to exactly 2 receivers? For Stanford, 54% of receptions = 5 receivers. I could “use” that statistic to claim that RG3 only put up great passing numbers because he had Kendall Wright to throw to, regarded by some as one of the top 25 overall draft prospects, and that RG3 doesn’t do as good job of spreading the ball around or working through his progressions as Luck.
But that would be, in my opinion, a misuse of that statistic. If you have a great receiver like Kendall Wright, of course you’re going to throw to him. Do you see what I mean?
by JoeSmithers on Feb 27, 2012 11:55 AM EST up reply actions
I do actually
I do have a problem with people trying to (mis)use college team statistics to "prove" something about individual prospects. We simply won’t know how these guys will really perform in the NFL until they actually get there. Even then, their performance will be related to the team around them and the teams they compete against.
This statement goes against conventional scouting and personnel evaluation metrics. Past performance can be a measurement when projecting future success.
For example, did you know that 54% of Baylors receptions went to exactly 2 receivers? For Stanford, 54% of receptions = 5 receivers. I could "use" that statistic to claim that RG3 only put up great passing numbers because he had Kendall Wright to throw to, regarded by some as one of the top 25 overall draft prospects, and that RG3 doesn’t do as good job of spreading the ball around or working through his progressions as Luck.
Based on this draft and past talent at WR, Luck has done less with more. These are facts and are not debateable. Baylor has one O-lineman that’s draft eligible? You mentioned the 54% to 2 Baylor WR’s. The QB is responsible for getting the football to the playmakers. Right? In the Standford short to intermediate control offense the ball needed to be spread around. Why you ask? That’s the West Coast Offense. It can’t become predictable because everything happens in tighter quarters and the defense starts to get a read on what’s occurring offensively.
I think RG III is a high upside player with a dynamic vertical passing arm and special athleticism in and outside the pocket. Is Andrew Luck seen in the same light by you? Oh, and while you are at it…….name one player that Luck has made better, please.
These are facts and are not debateable. [sic]
The sure sign of someone losing a debate – claim ownership of the facts and declare them not debatable.
I was speaking
About the talent on offense at Stanford at the O-line position. Those are the facts I speak of.
But I could make the same argument for Drew Brees...
at Purdue. He played behind an incredible offensive line during his tenure at Purdue.
I understand the desire to be the contrarian with regards to Luck.
That said, I’d say that Luck has made all the players around him better because he’s an incredible talent – much like Brees made all the players around him better.
My beef is with relying too much on those metrics
This statement goes against conventional scouting and personnel evaluation metrics. Past performance can be a measurement when projecting future success.
Exactly. I think we all are making too much of these numbers. I’ve been throwing out numbers left and right like crazy to try and show there are lots of different interpretations. The exact same number can be used to support almost completely opposite arguments.
I think RG III is a high upside player with a dynamic vertical passing arm and special athleticism in and outside the pocket.
I’m fine with that statement – it’s an opinion, and you’re not trying to use any statistics to “prove” anything.
Is Andrew Luck seen in the same light by you?
Actually, no.
Oh, and while you are at it…….name one player that Luck has made better, please.
I think you misunderstand my point.
I agree with this:
There is too little of
a example setreal NFL data for us to know ifhe’lleither QB will be any good when he’s surrounded by pressure. Plenty of great QB prospects get undone when they’re faced with this reality. So this is far from a bragging area right now.
by JoeSmithers on Feb 27, 2012 12:01 PM EST up reply actions
Except
There is no NFL data whatsoever. There is however plenty film from this past season on RG3 facing immediate pressure after the snap than what we have on Luck. Baylor’s pass protection is porous, akin what we’d expect a bad team in the NFL to give, while Stanford’s passing protection is on par from what we’d expect from an excellent O-line in the NFL.
This is a valid observation
You’re talking about what you see on film, and how you evaluate what you see. That’s great – and I have no problem with that, as long as we acknowledge that it’s an opinion.
The difference between “film…on RG3 facing immediate pressure after the snap” v. “59 more sacks = RG3 has better pocket skills” is qualitative v. quantitative. I’m fine with qualitative evaluations of these guys. I’m not so fine about quantitative ones, and I’ve been throwing numbers out left and right to try and show that there are a lot of different numbers, and a lot of different possible interpretations, that we shouldn’t rely too heavily on them.
GOOD QB'S don't get sacked?
Good QB’s get sacked…..how many times did Aaron Rodgers get sacked this year? 36 times this season….Brady got sacked 32 times this season……..Big Ben got sacked 40 tims……..Romo, 36 times……Stafford, 36 times………..come on……..what’s your next point…..the measuring stick is what you do under pressure………we ALL know that!!
by 33rd Street on Feb 26, 2012 10:34 PM EST up reply actions
Im saying
72 versus 22 is a big ass difference.
23 vs 14 isn’t.
This is not a knock on RG3, he is very accurate. But I don’t see how you can conclude RG3 is better under pressure from just that stat. Luck makes brilliant decisions in the red zone and in third down. That to me is the real pressure. Those are the plays that win games and Luck was phenomenal in that area.
RG3 can also make plays. But I worry with that ridiculous sack total… he’s gonna get hurt man. I think he’s stronger than he looks, but he aint no James Harrison or Terrell Suggs strong. Luck on the other hand is really big.
RG3 can also make plays. But I worry with that ridiculous sack total… he’s gonna get hurt man. I think he’s stronger than he looks, but he aint no James Harrison or Terrell Suggs strong. Luck on the other hand is really big
Watching film confirms these stats. Luck is under little to NO pressure in the passing game. Robert Griffin had to deal with more bodies around him and more pressure.
These players responds to that pressure are key indicators.
Because in the NFL you will see tons of pressure. Luck in a Colts team that isn’t a run first oriented style team with no identity in that department… questionable to average recievers (minus Wayne)… a defense built to play with leads not play from behind (aging ends.. free agents)
This leads to Andrew Luck playing in a offense that will need him to carry them.. Luck won’t be able to manage the game Like Andy Dalton did and have the ability to throw it away on 3rd and 8 because of the defense. …. Luck will be in more Known passing situations facing more pressure than he ever has… so what happens when that sack total is 35 for one season vice 23 in 3 years?.. He turns the ball over with marginal pressure but now it will be increased x 5.
Robert Griffin dealt with more pressure and a crowded pocket yet still played better. And took care of the football better….it is a theme that really can’t be ignored or brushed too the side.
The question is what happens when those quarterback pressures dramatically increase for Luck? Griffin has been playing under tons of pressure already.
Myth Buster by nature. I don't confront you i encourage you to think. Because your brillance in your own way helps everyone. Your opinion matters and I will listen to it. Good clean healthy debate is fun.
59 more sacks isn't necessarily "better"
Again, be careful about trying to make too strong a claim based on the stats your using. One could argue that RG3 performed precisely as expected given the additional pressure – he took more sacks. You can’t simply neglect “sacks” from your analysis of RG3 as a quarterback.
Let me give you an example – let’s say that RG3 didn’t take the additional 59 sacks, but simply threw the ball away 59 more times. That would lead to some combination of a lower completion percentage and a higher interception rate. One could argue that if RG3 were truly a good “pocket presence” quarterback, he would have thrown the ball away a lot more for incompletions (no loss of yards), compared to taking sacks (loss of yards). Taking sacks isn’t a “good” thing – it’s, at best, a compromise (loss of yards but no loss of possession) in the context of increased pressure.
A tad hypocritical
Earlier you claimed: “I do have a problem with people trying to (mis)use college team statistics to "prove" something about individual prospects.” …
Yet you keep dangling sacks as an indicator of poor pocket presence. Oh sure, you state “one could argue” repeatedly as to stave off criticism, but then why not stop there, instead of making a number of posts against RG3 based on team statistics. Why keep arguing for it hypothetically, if you supposedly recognize suck an argument as BS? If you know the argument about sacks is not strong enough, why keep on and on about it?
Finally you state: “Taking sacks isn’t a "good" thing – it’s, at best, a compromise (loss of yards but no loss of possession) in the context of increased pressure.”
Actually it is a good thing, if you can’t safely get rid of the ball. Many of the sacks I’ve seen RG3 take, were due to a fast breakdown in protection, where trying to get rid of the ball would’ve carried a high probability of being stripped for a fumble or throwing an interception. I’d gladly take a sack under those conditions.
by soforizo on Feb 27, 2012 1:48 PM EST up reply actions 2 recs
I apologize for being unclear - I do change tone frequently
I’m (mis)using statistics to make a point – I don’t think we really can say, definitively, how these guys will really respond to pressure in the NFL. I (mis)use the statistic about sacks to show that the number can be interpreted differently – some interpret it to mean RG3 had lousy protection (and therefore played really well despite that lousy protection). However, some could also interpret that same number as reflecting poorly on RG3’s pocket presence. That’s the point – these statistics have multiple interpretations, and there are so many variables involved, we really SHOULD NOT project too much into future NFL performance based on them – either good or bad, for one prospect or another.
At the end of the day, I’m not actually saying that Luck or RG3 is better in the pocket, or a better QB in general. I’m trying to counter-balance the argument that the numbers show RG3 has much better pocket skills (and that’s my fault for not making clear the fact that I’m arguing hypothetically). In my opinion, the “numbers” don’t really prove anything.
I can agree with that
I agree we really can’t say definitively. Even if we were to see the exact same attributes and numbers out of another future prospect as Luck, it doesn’t hold that they will necessarily meet expectations or have the same outcome. Some like Shankdiddy have made a very interesting case concerning RG3 (http://www.dawgsbynature.com/2012/2/23/2820025/why-robert-griffin-is-more-advanced-as-a-quarterback-that-andrew-luck); but as of right now, Andrew Luck seems to me like a safer pick as your #1.
Nice plug
The Shankdiddy article is a very good read. Highly rec’d by me.
Please get off his nuts dude...
We get it you think Luck is better and the Colts should take him…So do 99.9999% of people that watch football.
NFL is hard either or both could suck. Either of both could be HOF’ers
by (206)NightRidah on Feb 27, 2012 9:25 AM EST via mobile up reply actions
Great stuff Brad. Also, thanks for the shoutout on the SBNation podcast
Agree with you about Griffin. He keeps talking smack and James Harrison will McCoy him
draftdatabase.wordpress.com
Follow @steelersrule124
by seton hall and steelers on Feb 26, 2012 9:42 PM EST reply actions
Rg3 still scares me as a prospect
Luck may or may not pan out but from what I’ve seen he rarely runs. What kept Peyton manning from getting hurt was his ability to not get hit. I have not seen rg3 play much but I hope for his sake he doesn’t try to run with the ball due to his speed (and this is wear cockiness can get him in trouble…thinking to himself…I’m fast and no one is open so I’ll run for it). Rg3 legs are little…and his Height makes him look like a tall thin man….unlike newton (who I believe can take more hits) rg3 will be oft injured if he tries to run often.
Now I will say to end this I have never liked mobile qbs mainly because that often believe in there legs to get them first down. If I were a DC going against a running qb….I’d tell my guys when you tackle hit him in on or near throwing arm…even if you give up a few yards or if you don’t injure him…a good sting to the arm means the next couple plays he won’t throw…most mobile qbs who run don’t have long careers..just a rambling thought
by nighttrain551 on Feb 26, 2012 9:46 PM EST via mobile reply actions
Losing the neck beard was probably good for .25 seconds....
New Math: 2011-18 = 2-14
by EVLGNUS on Feb 26, 2012 10:12 PM EST reply actions 1 recs
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Recommended FanPosts
Recent FanPosts
In Association With
Shutdown Corner - NFL - Yahoo! Sports
- Detroit Lions DT Nick Fairley arrested again; now has more NFL arrests than NFL sacks
- Former high-school star Brian Banks does serious time on trumped-up charge, now hopes for an NFL shot
- Former ‘idiot kicker’ Mike Vanderjagt in trouble after accosting junior-high heckler
- Adrian Peterson blows teammates away in footraces; appears to be on the mend
- UPDATE: Charlie Sheen didn’t buy Lawrence Taylor’s Super Bowl ring
