2012 Rookie QB Discussion

[No_Pressure]

Defense was never my argument. Luck has a slightly 'worse' team to work with.

...

BTW-You haven't mentioned the other rookie QBs receiveing corps...

Just for a moment, let's go back to what exactly started this whole thing:

Post 79-

Luck just needs a team around him. He'll be a good player.

I was quoted by someone saying:

He's got Wayne, Avery, Fleener and Allen to throw to. It's not like he's out there by himself.

I responded by saying:

He has a terrible offensive line, a non-existent running game, and most of their games he's playing while down 20 points because their defense is so awful. I'm actually surprised he's doing as well as he is considering that he's on a team which is basically as good as one of those Doug Williams/Steve Young Buccaneers teams.

At no point was I talking about another rookie QB, or only talking about Andrew Luck's offensive weapons in close comparison to anybody else. From the start I was talking team- offense, defense, special teams. The whole package really. Whether it if your opinion that the offense is as bad by comparison to ours as I think it is doesn't really matter all that much. We're #2 in the league in scoring points and we're 3-3. Teams can have great players and still be bad teams. The presence of Reggie Wayne and some unproven WR's, TE's and RB's with a questionable offensive line doesn't mean that Andrew Luck is part of a good team.

After those posts you start quoting me and talking offense. That isn't what I'm arguing and it never was. All I ever said was that Andrew Luck merely needs a good team around him and that he'll be a good quarterback some day. Apparently that was so appalling to multiple people on this thread that it had to be quoted and responded to multiple times.

Again, I said something about this before but I'll say it again: I think that a lot of Redskins fans want to say that Andrew Luck is doing less with the same opportunities as RG3 because...

They want to feel as if we made the better choice with our massive trading of picks in the draft. RG3 being better than everybody, especially the guy who was drafted ahead of him, while also making sure his success is seen as purely by his own merit and certainly not because of being in better circumstances is important to many Redskins fans because it validates pretty much everything that has happened with this team since the spring.

The fact is that Luck is on a worse football team than RG3 is. He may have some good support in a couple of places but he doesn't have as much as RG3. Luck is going to be a good quarterback in the NFL and Griffin it seems already is.

Once Luck's offensive line develops and perhaps upgrades at a couple of positions, they add a playmaker and not a "he's alright" type of guy at RB, once his WRs outside of 33 year old Reggie Wayne step up and develop, once they add a defense that can at least come up with a few big plays per game and not totally collapse for the first 2 quarters, I think we'll see Andrew Luck looking a whole lot better. Clearly the same could be said of most QBs anywhere ever, but reading pages 5-6 I got the impression that some Redskins fans out there might think Luck isn't going to be as good as he was advertized to be, and pretending like he's had all the chances in the world to lead the Colts to more wins but he's mistake prone. Do you remember watching Peyton Manning in 1998? The guy could flat out play, but he played his way to 26 TDs vs. 28 INTs and a 71 QBR.

[SkinsFTW]

Again, I said something about this before but I'll say it again: I think that a lot of Redskins fans want to say that Andrew Luck is doing less with the same opportunities as RG3 because...

They want to feel as if we made the better choice with our massive trading of picks in the draft. RG3 being better than everybody, especially the guy who was drafted ahead of him, while also making sure his success is seen as purely by his own merit and certainly not because of being in better circumstances is important to many Redskins fans because it validates pretty much everything that has happened with this team since the spring.

The fact is that Luck is on a worse football team than RG3 is. He may have some good support in a couple of places but he doesn't have as much as RG3. Luck is going to be a good quarterback in the NFL and Griffin it seems already is.

Once Luck's offensive line develops and perhaps upgrades at a couple of positions, they add a playmaker and not a "he's alright" type of guy at RB, once his WRs outside of 33 year old Reggie Wayne step up and develop, once they add a defense that can at least come up with a few big plays per game and not totally collapse for the first 2 quarters, I think we'll see Andrew Luck looking a whole lot better. Clearly the same could be said of most QBs anywhere ever, but reading pages 5-6 I got the impression that some Redskins fans out there might think Luck isn't going to be as good as he was advertized to be, and pretending like he's had all the chances in the world to lead the Colts to more wins but he's mistake prone. Do you remember watching Peyton Manning in 1998? The guy could flat out play, but he played his way to 26 TDs vs. 28 INTs and a 71 QBR.

I don't know why you feel the need to exaggerate how bad the Colts team around Luck is but earlier I only posted facts. Here they are once again, just to refresh your memory. The Colts are giving up 359 yards and 29 points a game. The Redskins are giving up 417 yards and 29 points a game.

I'm not sure how you've decided that the Colts defense is still so much more pathetic than ours and therefore Redskins fans are all just homering it up here. We aren't the ones dragging guys like Garcon, Helu and Royster into the conversation in order to make our offense look better when they haven't even contributed. Hell, just the fact that the Colts haven't had Cundiff and Danny Smith gives him a clear advantage in special teams and we already know that he has better receivers and more time in the pocket while still giving up fewer sacks. Sure, Luck will probably turn out to be a good QB too but no reason to be exaggerating his situation there for no apparent reason.

[G.A.C.O.L.B.]

I think it's pretty simple. Luck has the potential to be great, Bob has the potential to be revolutionary. I think that's been obvious from the start. So either Irsay wanted to play it safe or he had such a man crush on Luck he never even gave Bob a real look at #1 overall.

Either way, for all the bull**** hate Colts fans have thrown at Griffin, I almost hope Luck busts.

[No_Pressure]

I don't know why you feel the need to exaggerate how bad the Colts team around Luck is but earlier I only posted facts. Here they are once again, just to refresh your memory. The Colts are giving up 359 yards and 29 points a game. The Redskins are giving up 417 yards and 29 points a game.

I'm not sure how you've decided that the Colts defense is still so much more pathetic than ours and therefore Redskins fans are all just homering it up here. We aren't the ones dragging guys like Garcon, Helu and Royster into the conversation in order to make our offense look better when they haven't even contributed. Hell, just the fact that the Colts haven't had Cundiff and Danny Smith gives him a clear advantage in special teams and we already know that he has better receivers and more time in the pocket while still giving up fewer sacks. Sure, Luck will probably turn out to be a good QB too but no reason to be exaggerating his situation there for no apparent reason.

I'm exaggerating? It's a massive exaggeration to believe that the Colts team is just as good as ours and the only thing separating RG3 and Luck is the fact that RG3 is 1,000,000 times better. I brought up the Colts offensive players vs. ours because another poster was stating that Reggie Wayne and a sub par offensive line is just as good as our offense. You should go back and read my post where I talked about help Luck isn't getting from his defense that RG3 is getting from his. In terms of letting up points and yards we're just as ****ty as the Colts are in most respects. We've also generated something like triple the turnovers they have and the defense has scored 28 points. RG3 doesn't play most of the game in a 20 point hole. Why are we pretending that these things aren't happening for the Colts? Why are we pretending that the Colts are better than we are? They aren't. We have better depth at WR, we're better at TE, we're better on the offensive line whether Luck is taking fewer sacks or not. Our defense has surrendered 28 points more than the Colts have in one more game than they've played. They've also scored 28 points on the season and they've scored 7, so with one more game played we've let up 7 more points technically. We're giving up 28 per game, they've giving up 29.

Why exaggerate Luck's situation in favor of making him look worse than he is? Why pretend that the Colts are a good team? Why pretend that we're worse than they are? Do you think they would be 2-3 if Curtis Painter was calling the plays for them? Read GACOLB's post, at least he's honest that he wants to see Luck fail. Why not just admit it?

[MartinC]

Are you guys still going at this?

RGIII and Luck are both going to be - maybe already are - elite QBs. There are no losers here, both the Colts and us have got QBs who, injuries allowing, will be the best QBs in the NFL for a long time.

They are going to be compared just like Brady and Peyton and I tend to agree with arguments that RGIII has superior physical skills but again which ever QB of these two you have you are in good shape at that position.

[darrelgreenie]

I'm exaggerating?

Yes. Specifically you are exxagerating the lack of weapons the Colts have on offense while pumping up our own.

And below you create a strawman:

It's a massive exaggeration to believe that the Colts team is just as good as ours and the only thing separating RG3 and Luck is the fact that RG3 is 1,000,000 times better.

your belief that there is a huge talent gap between the Colts and the Redskins simply isn't true. You cannot point to or prove any one area where we are clearly superior.

I brought up the Colts offensive players vs. ours because another poster was stating that Reggie Wayne and a sub par offensive line is just as good as our offense.

I posted one of the only qualitative measure for OL performance from football outsiders, and they happen to support my opinion. Your response was to give more opinion.

I pointed out the actual sacks vs pass attempts you gave more opinion. For example:

and Winston Justice is one of the only starting tackles who I am confident in saying is as big of a turnstyle as Polumbus. He may not have shown it as horribly so far, but c'mon he was a running joke within NFC East fanbases.

And the only evidence about your opinion is actually the opposite of your view:

Objective Metric: https://www.profootballfocus.com/blo...nsive-tackles/

When you think of the top pass protecting tackles in the league, how long is it before the name Winston Justice springs to mind? It’s gone largely unnoticed but in his 173 pass blocks he’s given up just two hurries, compared to his teammate Anthony Castonzo who has given up 19 quarterback disruptions on his 247 pass blocks. Quite the discrepancy. Castonzo is far from the bottom, so this more an indication of how rock solid Justice has been and how important it is the Colts keep him healthy

.

BTW-You know who comes in at a whooping 42 spots behind Justice?
Tyler Polumbus WAS 202 18 93.2

We have better depth at WR, we're better at TE, we're better on the offensive line whether Luck is taking fewer sacks or not

We have better depth at WR that's it.
Are you gonna support anything? How are we better at TE?
Lol, about the OL, despite all the evidence they're just better because you say so?

Why exaggerate Luck's situation in favor of making him look worse than he is?

Why exxagerate how bad Luck's situation is?

[No_Pressure]

Yes. Specifically you are exxagerating the lack of weapons the Colts have on offense while pumping up our own.

He has nothing special around him aside from Wayne. He has one good WR and unproven or average ones otherwise. He has a TE who is unproven and playing at an average level right now. Forget pass blocking which, by the way, is 50% of the measure of an offensive lineman since there is such a thing as running the football, and while I did enjoy your lame attempt to tell me that you "liked" a bunch of nobody average at best runningbacks on the Colts, they aren't good in that department either.

And below you create a strawman:
your belief that there is a huge talent gap between the Colts and the Redskins simply isn't true. You cannot point to or prove any one area where we are clearly superior.

This is not a strawman argument. You and that other guy are trying to tell me that the Colts offense is just as good as if not better than our own, and clearly with the argument you're making, since the other guy decided to make it after I said something as innocuous as "Luck is good and just needs a team around him", you're both saying that Andrew Luck is not performing as well as he should given his great offense around him, at least not compared to RG3 and that he's doing it with the same support from a just as good or even better offense. You said that you think the Colts' O-Line is better than ours, you think we're not better at TE and you make it a point to label our superiority at WR as "better depth" as if you can have better depth and somehow not have a more talented WR corps from top to bottom. I get it. Reggie Wayne is a good player and you like their rookie. That's nice.

How about those runningbacks? Their offense is not as good as ours is. Stop pretending that it is. When you pretend that all things are equal between Luck and RG3's circumstances you are implying that whoever is doing worse statistically is by default an inferior football player to the other. This is not necessarily the case. I love RG3 and I think the world of him. I don't love Andrew Luck or frankly care what he does or doesn't end up achieving in the NFL. I can however recognize that he's a good player but he's going to need a bit more help before he can really start making a difference for indy.

I posted one of the only qualitative measure for OL performance from football outsiders, and they happen to support my opinion. Your response was to give more opinion.

Actually I posted conjecture not just opinion. Regardless, statistics can lie, like when we had a top ranked defense under Greg Blache but everyone knew we weren't very good. I'm giving thoughts based off of watching almost all of the snaps the Colts and Redskins have played this season. I didn't realize this was my doctoral thesis. How many sources would be appropriate for you? Should I get primary source opinions and a whole bunch of meaningless statistics? Hey wait a minute, were you that guy who kept insisting Jason Campbell was a great quarterback based off a whole bunch of statistics instead of watching the games and understanding how football actually works? I get the feeling that was you, I could of course be mistaken.

I pointed out the actual sacks vs pass attempts you gave more opinion. For example:
And the only evidence about your opinion is actually the opposite of your view:

Objective Metric: https://www.profootballfocus.com/blo...nsive-tackles/
BTW-You know who comes in at a whooping 42 spots behind Justice?
Tyler Polumbus WAS 202 18 93.2

I never said our offensive line was incredible or that Tyler Polumbus was awesome. Would I rather have him over Winston Justice regardless of pro football focus statistics? You bet. Why? Did you watch any Eagles games the past few seasons? His nickname was the human turnstyle. **** I think he gave up 5 sacks in a game a couple of times. Maybe he has some good stats right now, but the guy was traded for a 6th round pick which is indicative of the player he's been and I know he isn't really a different player. Want my dissertation on why that is true? Sorry, I guess you'll have to deal with somebody else's opinion not lining up with what stats on a website told you! I suppose at this rate Winston Justice is going to get voted to the pro bowl, since stats are the only thing that matter. Hell, Justice is at the top of that list! Number one! I guess that means Miami would like to give up that pointless Jake Long project and make a blockbuster trade with the Colts. He's higher on that list than any tackle out there, so I guess he has a shot at the hall of fame right? I mean when most people think of greatest pass protection money can buy they think of Winston Justice right away. That's what your stats tell me at least.

We have better depth at WR that's it.
Are you gonna support anything? How are we better at TE?
Lol, about the OL, despite all the evidence they're just better because you say so?

Why exxagerate how bad Luck's situation is?

My doctoral thesis on why our wide receivers are better as a group isn't necessary is it? Why our offensive line is better- you won't listen to it because the Colts are giving up something like 1.4 fewer sacks per game than we are, which is all them, but the fact that we're rushing for 166 yards and almost 2 TDs per game while the Colts are rushing for 86 per game and .4 TDs is entirely based on everything BUT our offensive line. Its RG3 and Mike Shanahan when our rushing game does well to you. It's the Colts O-Line when Andrew Luck is taking slightly fewer sacks. Again, when you run the offense well you can make your line look much better than it actually is. Maybe our offensive line is overall superior because, you know, we have the 2nd best rushing game in the NFL. Who makes who? Our offensive line blocked for 100 yard rushers in the last what? 4 games last season? Now that RG3 is here we're running the ball better, sure, but is it 100% him, 100% the offensive line? Apparently Luck not taking a ****load of sacks is 100% the offensive line and 0% him, and you know this because a website told you Winston Justice is the best tackle in the NFL. Ok then.

Do I really need to explain why Fred Davis averaging around 4 catches per game and 52 yards per game is playing better than Coby Fleener averaging 3.5 catches for 36.2 yards per game? Davis is coming off of an almost 800 yard season last year and he started 12 games. Do I really need to explain this one to you? Do I need to spell it out with multiple quotes from pro football focus and statistics to back my claims? Did I state my thesis properly? Thesis: Fred Davis is a better football player than Coby Fleener because he obviously is, and anybody who needs to be explained how and why obviously doesn't know as much about football as they think they do.

Again, why exaggerate how much help Luck is getting? I didn't even say off the bat that he has NOBODY. He has Wayne and a bunch of unproven players who aren't the worst ever, but aren't lighting the league on fire on offense with a line that isn't as great as you or your stats show it to be.

[darrelgreenie]

Reggie Wayne does play for the Colts right? Saying 'aside from Wayne' doesn't make him a non- factor.Andrew Luck has a #1 WR and a bunch of guys that are nothing special, we on the other hand are have a bunch of guys that are nothing special also but we have more of them.
^^If you remove your bias and look objectively it should be apparent that either the Colts WRs are better or equal.

He has 2 very productive but unproven TE in Allen and Fleener.

How can you praise Helu and turn around and act as if Brown isn't any good? Their production last year was identical. And to be quite clear I said we have the better running game. Remember?

In short:
Receiving Corps: Colts (best individual player and true #1 WR, Davis is best TE but the Colts have 2 good TEs)
RBs: Redskins (Best overall RB, but Colts have a deeper stable of backs)
OL: Push (Colts are better in pass protection which is beneficial because its what they want to do, we're better in the running game in large part due to the ZBS and the Griffin effect)...

you're both saying that Andrew Luck is not performing as well as he should given his great offense around him, at least not compared to RG3 and that he's doing it with the same support from a just as good or even better offense

More exxagerations. If you want to know something why not ask instead of jumping to false assumptions? I have no idea how Andrew Luck 'should' perform. And you have no idea about my opinion of Luck. The only thing you know is that I disagree with you that Andrew Luck is being held back by a lack of weapons on offense.

When you pretend that all things are equal between Luck and RG3's circumstances you are implying that whoever is doing worse statistically is by default an inferior football player to the other.

Jump to whatever false assumptions you like. Make whatever strawman argument you like. It just shows that you're overly defensive about your argument.

[NLC1054]

Here's the biggest difference between Luck and Robert whenever I watch, and it's got nothing to do with the teams they have around them; decision making.

Luck only threw one pick versus Green Bay. He should've had 5. When I watch Andrew Luck, the mind boggles at some of the throws he tries to make. Luck's throwing to coverage, a lot, and not into typical "tight window" kind of throws, but "oh my God that ball should never be thrown" kind of throws, and he's been getting away with it. And even though he didn't throw a ton of INT's at Stanford, I always thought the ones he did throw were of the "what the hell were you trying to do" variety.

Robert is more patient with his throws. He's also had a few of those "you're lucky that wasn't picked off" kind of throws, but in my viewing, he's had far less than Luck has. Luck throws it more but they have no one that can run the ball; Donald Brown is good for a couple big runs every game, but most of the time the run game gets stuffed. I don't know if Luck is pressing or what, but watching him frustrates the hell out of me sometimes.

[Rabsuz]

Why is Luck getting a pass for subpar play? I know he's a rookie but Weeden has been slammed in the media and looking at the numbers there is almost no difference between the two. It seems like Luck coming out was accurate and did nothing really wrong, solid in everything. But I can't help but wonder if he isn't just a jack of all trades, ace of none. He never wowed me in college yet he did everything well, I still do not think his decision making is an elite trait.

Griffin=Steve McNair
Luck= Sam Bradford
Tannehill= Jason Campbell
Wilson and Weeden are tough, I'll get back to you on them.

If Griffin came into here and threw 8 picks with a 53% completion percentage with a 70 QB rating we would never hear the end of it. He is still hearing a lot of criticism from everybody even though he has been playing lights out, no question. I can't help but wonder what would happen if the roles were reversed. I like Luck and there's no ill will but it seems like he is getting a pass...

[darrelgreenie]

NLC1054-

To my eye Griffin's dynamic athleticism and running ability are being harnessed by Kyle/Mike to create a read option based running game w/ play action elements. It allows the offense to remain fairly simple in passing game thus giving Griffin easier reads hence his high completion percentage. I actually think Luck is further along as passer despite having less overall benefit to his respective offensive unit. Arians, sometimes to a fault, allows Luck carte blanche to attack any defense and try any throw,(kinda like Cam in the first few weeks of his rookie season). That imo is why Luck makes some throws and reads that make me say 'wow' but there are also throws that would make Favre/Romo cringe.

I can't wait til Kyle/Griffin the spread passing element of the offense catches up to his running game, that my friend is gonna be scary.

[NLC1054]

NLC1054-

To my eye Griffin's dynamic athleticism and running ability are being harnessed by Kyle/Mike to create a read option based running game w/ play action elements. It allows the offense to remain fairly simple in passing game thus giving Griffin easier reads hence his high completion percentage. I actually think Luck is further along as passer despite having less overall benefit to his respective offensive unit. Arians, sometimes to a fault, allows Luck carte blanche to attack any defense and try any throw,(kinda like Cam in the first few weeks of his rookie season). That imo is why Luck makes some throws and reads that make me say 'wow' but there are also throws that would make Favre/Romo cringe.

I can't wait til Kyle/Griffin the spread passing element of the offense catches up to his running game, that my friend is gonna be scary.

I don't think Arian's offense is that much more complicated than ours; I think they run some of the stuff Arians' ran in Pittsburgh, but I also see a fair bit of...ehh...how do I put it...I see a lot of fairly basic West Coast Offense concepts. Three-step drops, 5 step drops, slants, curls. Halfback screens, wide receiver and tight end screens, three wide receiver sets; basically a lot of the same stuff I saw Luck run with no problem at Stanford.. Luck might have more authority at the line, I suppose, but the concepts themselves don't seem any more complicated than anything we run.

I also think, despite what a poor team he has, he's really been bailed out on some throws, particularly by Reggie Wayne. I try to stay objective, I truly do. But aside from attacking down field more often, I think his accuracy has been worse, I think his decision making has been worse, and I think he's been worse than Griffin in terms of taking sacks he doesn't need to. Some weeks I think Tannehill actually has looked better than Luck too.


I don't know if it's just that Robert and Tannehill are more controlled and Luck has a little more freedom, but I keep finding myself thinking that a lot of the time, he looks like the third best quarterback this year.

[Oldfan]

I think you can compare QBs on their skillsets, but it's unfair to compare them on performances.

Against the very same opponent, quarterback A threw three INTs and was throwing off his back foot even when not pressured (50 QB rating). Quarterback B was nearly perfect with a QB rating over 100.

We could say that quarterback B was much better than quarterback A -- except that A and B were both Tom Brady, with the same supporting cast, against the Jets in the same year. The difference was that the Jets were able to bring pressure in game one but not in game two.

If a difference in protection-pressure can make the same QB give such different performances, then how is it possible to intelligently compare two different QBs with different supporting casts?

[darrelgreenie]

I don't think Arian's offense is that much more complicated than ours

We're gonna have to disagree on this one. I think an objective view of our passing offense reveals a fairly simple but very effective play-action heavy passing game with very well defined reads that often has only 1 or 2 options, there are very few straight drop back passes and even fewer with full field progression reads. It features mostly high percentage short and intermediate passes and is ultra conservative on 3rd and long. The offense design puts the onus the scheme to create an open receiver and often requires that receiver to make yards after the catch. G

Arians is not 'managing' Luck like a rookie. Their offense is a rhythm drop back passing game with full field progression reads that attacks more often downfield then ours; because of their inefficiency in the running game they create fewer well with defined reads through play-action. Arians places the onus on Luck make a good pre-snap read and make the right decision post-snap going through his progressions. Imo the Bears game is a testament to Luck's ability passer. He went against a tough Bears defense that gives veterans QB problems and largely made good decisions and some very good throws into tight coverages.

I think he's been worse than Griffin in terms of taking sacks he doesn't need
to...Some weeks I think Tannehill actually has looked better than Luck too.

The stats actually bear this out. I recall reading that Luck holds the ball longer then Griffin and a higher percentage of his sacks happen after 3s, which would put the blame more on him then the pass pro.

I think pre-draft perception guides most fan/media rookie QB opinion and people are sleeping on how well Tannehill is playing, imo he's the rookie QB that is most devoid at talent at the WR position.

I don't know if it's just that Robert and Tannehill are more controlled and Luck has a little more freedom, but I keep finding myself thinking that a lot of the time, he looks like the third best quarterback this year.

They're all playing some good ball. Imo Griffin is far and away having the biggest impact for his team's offense and team. Tannehill and Luck are playing at high level for rookie QBs I would proly give the nod to Tannehill because he's getting production from a sub-par group of receivers. My man Russell is playing some good football too.

[darrelgreenie]

http://www.nfl.com/stats/statslab?ic...n=statsLab_Nav

------------------Comp %----YDS--------YPA----------TD-----INT--------Sacks-----Rate------QBR
Griffin-----------65.6--------1,993---------7.61----------8--------3-----------20---------93.0-------68.7
Wilson----------62.0--------1,639---------7.00----------13------8-----------15---------87.2-------56.9
Luck-------------56.5--------2,404---------7.16---------10-------8-----------19---------79.0-------76.1
Tannehill-------58.9--------1,762---------7.31----------5--------6-----------15---------78.2-------52.8

Rushing it ain't even close enough to list: Robert by a mile followed by Wilson a distant second