Jump to content

Andrew Luck Injury Update 2018


Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, Boltstrikes said:

That and the pre draft hype. Then he comes into the league and puts up Alex Smith type numbers but he’s labeled a top 5 QB ahead of guys like Rivers and Ben.

At this point I doubt he will see the field again. People will ask what he could have been? Exactly what he was. An above average starter who at times could be argued was approaching that top ten area. He was never a top 5 guy. Derek Carr has been better in comparison up to this point and still has room to grow to hit his ceiling. 

Alex Smith will never throw for 40 touchdowns in a season or pass for 4700 yards. Or carry a team of scrubs. Luck has had his bumps in the road, but injuries aside he was way more polished than Smith could ever hope to be. 

Edited by PapaShogun
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, Broncofan said:

Luck better than ARod?   Ridiculous.

Luck being Alex Smith?  Equally ridiculous.

It's like we can't have any kind of happy medium takes lol.   I know, I know....it's what we do at FF.

Seems like we're the only two sane people left on FF, @Broncofan.

Both takes are mind numbingly bad

Andrew Luck would currently be in the 3-10 range: He's not getting into the Brady/Rodgers discussion, but is probably in the "Brees to Ryan" tier. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, EliteTexan80 said:

Andrew Luck would currently be in the 3-10 range: He's not getting into the Brady/Rodgers discussion, but is probably in the "Brees to Ryan" tier. 

Luck is in the 3-10 range with a career 87.3 passer rating

Tannehill is a replacement level QB with a career 86.5 passer rating

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
26 minutes ago, Broncofan said:

Luck better than ARod?   Ridiculous.

Luck being Alex Smith?  Equally ridiculous.

It's like we can't have any kind of happy medium takes lol.   I know, I know....it's what we do at FF.

Luck for the most part was a less risk averse Alex Smith. Sometimes it worked for him. Sometimes it didn’t. But he’s largely overhyped because of his draft time potential. The Colts did gradually fall apart on him but this was a team that was also in a Super Bowl two years before he got there and he had stud receivers like Wayne and Hilton. 

Hes not better than Brady, Rodgers, Brees, Ben, Wilson, Rivers full stop. He’s a lot closer to a Romo or even a Smith. While less consistent I’d rate Ryan and Newton over him as well as far as peak level.  He’s around fringe top 10. Sometimes in it, sometimes outside it. 

Edited by lancerman
Link to post
Share on other sites
33 minutes ago, Broncofan said:

Luck better than ARod?   Ridiculous.

Luck being Alex Smith?  Equally ridiculous.

It's like we can't have any kind of happy medium takes lol.   I know, I know....it's what we do at FF.

Luck is better then Alex Smith no question. You can go back and read those first few years Luck entered the league and see Luck was regarded as top 5 and Smith as bottom 5, yet their stat lines were very similar. Obviously there are contributing factors but Luck has NEVER lived up to his pre draft hype. He was never a top 5 QB in this league. Fringe top ten at his peak. 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
29 minutes ago, cddolphin said:

Luck is in the 3-10 range with a career 87.3 passer rating

Tannehill is a replacement level QB with a career 86.5 passer rating

Luck has single handedly dragged a bad Colts roster to the AFC title game with TY Hilton and something called a "Bjorn".

Ryan Tannehill ISN'T replacement level, but hasn't replicated that success despite having a better supporting cast.

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, EliteTexan80 said:

Luck has single handedly dragged a bad Colts roster to the AFC title game with TY Hilton and something called a "Bjorn".

Ryan Tannehill ISN'T replacement level, but hasn't replicated that success despite having a better supporting cast.

Hahahaha

Link to post
Share on other sites

Just to note: I said that if Luck never gets hurt, and continued to progress as he had the first 4 seasons where he quite literally carried a terrible Colts team on his back to the playoffs every season from 12-15 and advanced a round every year. The guy was on his way to being ELITE. I really dont see how that is some ludicrous take.

You all really think that if somehow this injury doesnt happen, Luck doesnt miss the last 2 years, and continued on the track he was on that it is THAT impossible to think he might have overtaken Rodgers for the mantle of best QB right now at this time? On the trajectory Luck was on, and with how weak the AFC has been since his injury, I think the Colts could have won a Superbowl in 2016 or 2017. And if that happened, it would have been because of Luck. 

Thats not even close to being "just as stupid" as saying that Luck was never better than Alex Smith. Because THAT is a god damn joke. Not to mention my statement was based off of trajectory and hypotheticals (bc of the injury) based off what we saw from Luck and how he got better every year since being drafted. 

The other statement about Luck and Smith being basically the same QB/same level of QB (when Luck was healthy)? That literally can be refuted by facts and not based off a personal prediction. Anyone who thinks Alex Smith was a better QB than Luck ever was is just obtuse. No other way around it.  

If you put Alex Smith on those 2012-2016 Colts teams, that dude probably would have retired or would be a cast off back up QB by now. Those Colts teams would have been picking top 10 every year with Smith at QB.

But either way, my opinion on what Luck COULD have been if it werent for this stupid injury ordeal is moot because we will never know what could have been. We do know that Luck was on his way to being elite status, and we also know that 2014-2015 Luck is better than Alex Smith has ever been in his life. 

It just further shows how much of a shame this while ordeal is really. I think that Luck vs Brady would have been hella freaking great of a rivalry.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
19 minutes ago, EliteTexan80 said:

Luck has single handedly dragged a bad Colts roster to the AFC title game with TY Hilton and something called a "Bjorn".

Ryan Tannehill ISN'T replacement level, but hasn't replicated that success despite having a better supporting cast.

 

And Alex Smith had very talented teams - that he made play to the same level.   Luck carried those Colt teams that Grigson "built" (read:  destroyed slowly over time, but got propped up by Luck).

I agree he didn't quite live up to the hype - but that's IMO purely a function of the injury.  He was never the same after 2014.   2015 that OL got him killed - not just figuratively, but literally.   As early as game 3, reporters noticed something was off post-game.   And by October, he wasn't even close to his usual self.   

Still, you can't say he would have passed the top 2-3 QB's - you can't prove it until you do it.  But let's also recognize what role the injury, Luck's refusal to disclose it to medical staff (and them failing to pick up on it), and Grigson's absolute refusal to build an even-average OL to protect him, all played in his downfall.   

A guy as good as Luck was in his 3rd year, his last healthy year....yeah, the potential to be great was there.  But it didn't pan out yet.  Let's also recognize how much injury played a role here.

Link to post
Share on other sites
40 minutes ago, lancerman said:

Luck for the most part was a less risk averse Alex Smith. Sometimes it worked for him. Sometimes it didn’t. But he’s largely overhyped because of his draft time potential. The Colts did gradually fall apart on him but this was a team that was also in a Super Bowl two years before he got there and he had stud receivers like Wayne and Hilton. 

Hes not better than Brady, Rodgers, Brees, Ben, Wilson, Rivers full stop. He’s a lot closer to a Romo or even a Smith. While less consistent I’d rate Ryan and Newton over him as well as far as peak level.  He’s around fringe top 10. Sometimes in it, sometimes outside it. 

Lol he was on a team that was in the Superbowl? Are you serious right now? Youre really gonna try and say Luck was benefitted from being on a good team? And your argument is "well he had one old, future HOF WR and another young #2 in Hilton so who cares that he had to play under a new OC every year or that he had an idiot running his team or that he had zero run game or OL or that his defense made Alex Smith look like Tom Brady".  

Ill fix your post for you:

Luck was on a team that won 1 (2?) games before he got there. His receivers were a 36 year old Reggie Wayne and a 5'9 TY Hilton ,only this was before Hilton became the player he is today.  

I mean your take on Luck as being a "less risk averse Alex Smith" is just laughable. Luck was Andrew Luck. There wasnt another QB like him. Same with how theres no other Rodgers or RW or Wentz or Big Ben etc. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
52 minutes ago, EliteTexan80 said:

Luck has single handedly dragged a bad Colts roster to the AFC title game with TY Hilton and something called a "Bjorn".

Ryan Tannehill ISN'T replacement level, but hasn't replicated that success despite having a better supporting cast.

o.O

Tannehill's OL has been objectively worse 2012-2016, getting sacked and hit at a higher rate. He's gone through more head coaches and offensive coordinator changes. The Dolphins defense could have been considered better than Indy's in perhaps two seasons: 2012 and 2015, every other year it was basically a wash.

In Luck's 2014 season you characterized him as "single-handedly dragging" his team to the AFCC.. he had an abysmal 71.8 rating in the playoffs while averaging 19 PPG. (He had three defensive pro-bowlers that year and the 19th ranked defense). But that's ancient history at this point.. how have they done recently?

 

Most recent 8 games:

Tannehill
7-1
161/233 for 69.1%
1,723 yards at 7.39 YPA
13 TDs - 5 INTs
100.1 passer rating

Luck
5-3
167/269 for 62.1%
2,166 yards at 8.05 YPA
17 TDs - 9 INTs
94.5 passer rating

 

The bottom line is this: the difference between Tannehill and Luck is NOT the difference between Brees and AJ McCarron.. it's much closer than that if not a negligible difference at this point. Perceptions are skewed as a result of 1) Luck's pre-draft hype and 2) the national media and their LOLphins campaign.

Edited by cddolphin
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, BAConrad said:

Lol he was on a team that was in the Superbowl? Are you serious right now? Youre really gonna try and say Luck was benefitted from being on a good team? And your argument is "well he had one old, future HOF WR and another young #2 in Hilton so who cares that he had to play under a new OC every year or that he had an idiot running his team or that he had zero run game or OL or that his defense made Alex Smith look like Tom Brady".  

Ill fix your post for you:

Luck was on a team that won 1 (2?) games before he got there. His receivers were a 36 year old Reggie Wayne and a 5'9 TY Hilton ,only this was before Hilton became the player he is today.  

I mean your take on Luck as being a "less risk averse Alex Smith" is just laughable. Luck was Andrew Luck. There wasnt another QB like him. Same with how theres no other Rodgers or RW or Wentz or Big Ben etc. 

They won very few games before he got their almost exclusively because they got caught with their pants down without a viable QB and neither of their two QB’s that season ever took a snap in the league. Thats the primary reason they had a bad record. Don’t distort that. 

Its inconvenient to mention but a team doesn’t go nearly undefeated and a Super Bowl appearance one season, then gets the first overall the next, then go right back to the playoffs with double digit wins the next few years without a massive variable. The variable was they had no viable QB that year. It wasn’t a situation where the team was trash.

The team later became trash. But it’s highly misleading to act like Luck walked into a bad situation from the jump. The team just got worse over 5 years. 

And yeah statistically and by every measurable Luck is far closer to Alex Smith than he ever was to Rodgers. There’s no tangible argument against it besides “I just feel this way for reasons”.

Good player but wildly overhyped

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

When these guys on well established rosters retire it's going to be Luck and Carr as the top QBs.

Luck has already thrown for 40 td's in a season, and that's without a great defense, OL or a megatron/julio/ab/jordy nelson/gronk/etc that other QBs have been fortunate enough to have.

 

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...