This hasn’t been the easiest of seasons for Indianapolis Colts quarterback Andrew Luck, and it reached its nadir on Sunday. Indianapolis lost at home to New Orleans 27-21 and Luck was booed by his own fans. This follows a steady stream of negative stories regarding his early season play. The phenomena of Luck-Mania—an insane premature coronation unlike any I’ve ever seen in any sport over my forty-plus years of watching sports—has finally come to devour its own.
Andrew Luck was given impossible standards to meet before he ever entered the NFL. Following his junior season at Stanford, Luck, fresh off leading the Cardinal to a beatdown of Virginia Tech in the Orange Bowl, confounded conventional wisdom and chose to stay in school for his senior year. He would have been the #1 pick the 2010 draft (the honor that eventually went to Cam Newton) and his senior year of 2011 was dominated by a race to the bottom in the NFL.
“Suck For Luck” became the mantra of teams who weren’t in playoff contention. While tanking for a draft pick is a fact of life in the NBA, it doesn’t happen in the NFL. Maybe in the last week of the season when the top pick can go one of two ways, but Suck For Luck was different. Teams were talking about tanking as early as October and it wasn’t just the league’s worst.
This alone made Luck-Mania unbearable, but the ante was about to be increased. When the Colts won the “race” for the top pick it added a whole new element to the phenomena. Indianapolis had to decide whether to jettison Peyton Manning, fresh off four neck surgeries, or take Luck.
The option to keep Peyton was realistic. His eventual comeback can’t be seen as incredibly unrealistic—it certainly wasn’t for the myriad of teams that turned his eventual free agency tour into a virtual coronation ceremony. Furthermore, the decision was not strictly about Luck vs. Peyton, a paradigm that makes Luck an obvious choice based on youth. But that’s revisionist history. That was a lot more going for the Peyton side of this debate.
Indianapolis had the option to deal the top pick and get at least three first-rounders back in return. This is based on the fact that the 2-pick in this draft—the one used to select RG3—was deemed worth two first-rounders and a second-rounder by the Redskins. The modest uptick in price for the top pick is a conservative estimate of what Luck could have brought the Colts and it would have still included swapping picks with whomever their trading partner was (probably either the Redskins or Browns).
And if you’re worried about Peyton’s neck? Got you covered there. Draft Russell Wilson in the third round, when he was still available.
The other factor in this was that Indianapolis owned Peyton a balloon payment of $28 million if they kept him. Normally I’d take this consideration seriously. But given that NFL teams in general print money hand over fist and then Bob Irsay in particular walks around town randomly throwing out $100 bills to fans, I’m going to say that money should have not been a factor in this decision.
So this is the context that Andrew Luck entered the NFL. There were multiple teams ready to blow entire seasons to get him and the one that “earned” the opportunity kicked the greatest player in the history of its city to the curb, along with the chance to draft three high-quality impact players and another quarterback who already has a Super Bowl ring. Luck was essentially told to justify that price. He hasn’t—not because he isn’t a good quarterback, but because he’s merely human.
How about we let Luck-Mania drift into the annals of history? He’s not Tom Brady or Aaron Rodgers. He might not ever get to that level. But he’s still the kind of quarterback you build around for 10-15 years. He’s still a tough guy and a competitor. If you want to sell me on that, I’ll buy. But if you want to sell me that he’s Brady or Rodgers—or on the reverse end, that he’s now responsible for his team’s failings—then I’ll pass. That’s the sane view of Andrew Luck.
The Super Bowl betting odds are updated in light of the playoff matchups being set, and while I’m not a betting man, I do like to make hypothetical wagers. One that intrigued me was the Indianapolis Colts, who are a 30-1 longshot to win the Lombardi Trophy. In a league that’s seen teams come out of the first round with frequency of late, aren’t those odds kind of tantalizing?
This notion might seem peculiar from the same writer who in this same space last week, decried the premature coronation of Colts’ quarterback Andrew Luck. And yes, if Luck does win the Super Bowl, I have no doubt that the mainstream media—including every single game commentator on every network—will become absolutely unbearable. At the rate his coronation is already going, a third-year run to a championship might win him the Nobel Peace Prize.
But the question here is not whether the media would go nuts. It’s not even whether they’re the Colts are likely to win it all—they’re probably not. The question is whether they’re good enough to make a flyer at 30-1 a value bet.
I find it intriguing, and ironically, because of Luck. In the same piece last week where I pointed out his failings, I also described a few positives, including the fact that I like him in an underdog role. It’s that positive I now want to expound on.
There’s nothing that’s more valuable if you’re betting an NFL playoff longshot, than the ability to weather adversity and not mentally give in. Most games—especially playoff games—are going to be close anyway, and that’s certainly true if you’re an underdog hoping to pull a road upset. The last thing you need is a quarterback who loses his confidence if things go wrong.
Luck’s turnover problems make him suspect in the front-runner’s role, but he’s got outstanding mental makeup that’s extremely attractive as an underdog. If you fall behind 10-0 early and he throws an interception, he’s not going to wilt. He’s not going to become timid in the pocket in the face of a hostile crowd. He plays at his best when behind.
And ultimately, if Indianapolis gets the ball down by four points with about five minutes left, you can feel good about their chances. Luck has the clutch gene in his makeup. The biggest question he and his teammates face is, can they consistently get themselves in these kind of situations over the course of the next month?
Indianapolis’ problems are no secret to NFL observers. They only have one good offensive lineman, Anthony Castonzo, who protects Luck’s blind slide. Gosder Cherilus at the other tackle, has been disappointing and deprived Luck of at least being able to trust the perimeter of his protection. The interior of the line isn’t very good, and none of the lineman—including Castonzo—are all that dominant in the drive-blocking so crucial to running the ball consistently.
The loss of Ahmad Bradshaw for the season further damaged the running game, and took away a good receiving option out of the backfield. The defense has been hurt all year by Robert Mathis first being suspended and then tearing an Achilles. The Colt defense relies almost exclusively on Vontae Davis being a shutdown corner and Cory Redding playing pretty well at end.
That’s a thin reed to hold onto, and while they’ve had some good games, we’ve also seen good teams—notably Pittsburgh and New England—bury the Colt defense by both air and ground.
But at the risk of stating the obvious, of course there’s going to be significant problems. If there’s not, you aren’t getting 30-1 odds. You’re getting something more like 12-1, which is what the Steelers are. Or 8-1, where the Dallas Cowboys are priced.
Indianapolis hasn’t beaten good teams the way they did in the early part of last year (when the Colts knocked off San Francisco, Seattle and Denver). But they’ve swept the Houston Texans, who finished with a winning record. The Colts won a home game over the playoff-bound Baltimore Ravens. Indy shut out the Cincinnati Bengals, albeit when Cincy was missing A.J. Green.
The Colts might not have fared well against the AFC’s elite, but they have consistently beaten other teams that are .500 and above. And this is still a lot of the same players who won this big games in the early part of 2013. It might not be this year, but it’s not as though some key players—including Luck and big-play receiver T.Y. Hilton have no idea how to beat a really good team.
Would I pick Indianapolis to win the Super Bowl in a straight-up pool? Are you kidding? But at 30-1, to take a shot on Luck’s clutch skills overcoming his turnover issues? Sure, why not. Just bet the Colts, and also bet an equivalent amount of one of the two co-favorites, Seattle and New England, who are both 5-2. If one of the co-favorites win, you make a little money. If the Colts win, you make a lot.
I’m not all negative on Andrew Luck. From a handicapping standpoint, the spot Luck is in right now is right in his wheelhouse—the feisty underdog.
SIGN UP FOR THE FREE NEWSLETTER OF THESPORTSNOTEBOOK
ANALYSIS & HISTORICAL PERSPECTIVE FROM AROUND THE SPORTS WORLD
The clock was winding down in the CBS telecast of the Chiefs-Steelers game yesterday in the early window, and the network did a live look-in to promote the main game of the day, the Indianapolis Colts and the Dallas Cowboys down in Big D. Andrew Luck was warming up and CBS studio host James Brown identified the Indy quarterback as one who is “definitely headed for elite status.” Definitely? Aren’t we jumping the gun just a little bit here?
This offhand comment by Brown gets to the heart of what annoys me regarding media coverage about Luck. I discussed a lot of this back in a September column that asked why the Colt quarterback was the anointed one of the media, and traced it back to the insane hype that accompanied Luck during his senior year in college in 2011.
I won’t revisit all that here—except to again ask why Indianapolis wouldn’t have been better off trading that #1 overall pick used to pick Luck to get at least three first-rounders back, keep Peyton Manning and draft Russell Wilson as the insurance policy. What I want to focus on here is why we’re supposed to just assume that Luck’s rise to elite status is a foregone conclusion.
Let’s begin by acknowledging Luck’s obvious attributes…
He’s got the physical build of a classic NFL quarterback. He’s big enough to see over the line while in the pocket, durable enough to take hits and has a strong arm.
He puts up the Fantasy numbers, from passing yardage to touchdown passes.
He’s got an obvious clutch gene in him. If I were a betting man, I’d love to bet on this guy in an underdog role in the playoffs and hope he could just get the ball late in the game and a chance to lead a game-winning drive.
Now, let me ask you this. Review all these genuinely great things and ask yourself—is there any reason we can’t say the same about Matt Ryan in Atlanta? Would you consider Ryan an elite quarterback? I wouldn’t. I consider “Matty Ice”, who got his nickname for his coolness under pressure, to be pretty good and a quarterback I’d definitely like to have—but not elite.
If you would consider Ryan elite, than I have no problem with granting the same tag to Luck. Although if Ryan is elite, then so is Eli Manning, Joe Flacco, Ben Roethlisberger and maybe Tony Romo now that he’s won in December.
Add that to the standard list of Tom Brady, Peyton Manning, Aaron Rodgers and Drew Brees and we’re up to ten quarterbacks with the elite tag. If you’ve got almost of the third of the starting quarterbacks in this category, then we need to revisit what the term “elite” means before doing anything else.
Besides, when it comes to Luck, we know what James Brown and the legion of Luck defenders out there mean—that his coronation as the next Peyton Manning is all but assured. And I’ll conceded this—Luck might well get there. You can certainly look at his first three years and see what he’s already done, combine it with his potential and obvious work ethic and make a credible argument that he will become the next truly great quarterback in the NFL.
Making a credible argument on behalf of something though, is not the same as saying as it’s a foregone conclusion. And that’s the heart of my beef with Luck-Mania. We’re not allowed to wait. We’re required to assume. But prudence should instead require that we allow Luck’s career to unfold before elevating him past his current status as the next Matt Ryan and up to the level of the next Peyton Manning.
Because right now, Andrew Luck has committed more turnovers than any quarterback in the NFL not named Jay Cutler. And that’s not elite by any measurement.
SIGN UP FOR THE FREE NEWSLETTER OF THESPORTSNOTEBOOK
ANALYSIS & HISTORICAL PERSPECTIVE FROM AROUND THE SPORTS WORLD
The Indianapolis Colts’ Andrew Luck is pretty much the poster-boy of young quarterbacks in today’s NFL, with a Sports Illustrated cover to his credit, one that assures us by year’s end we’ll be acknowledging him as the best quarterback in football. I think Andrew Luck’s pretty good—in fact, I’d even make the compliment stronger and say I think he’s pretty tough. He’s competitive and he keeps his confidence up when things go wrong.
But is Andrew Luck really “all that”? This morning on First Take, ESPN’s Skip Bayless, who normally goes completely over-the-top on questions, asked one that was measured and reasonable and it summed up my thoughts perfectly—“why does this guy get a pass?”
Why, after the Colts lost to the Philadelphia Eagles 30-27 last night, does Luck get a pass from playing a subpar game at home and throwing an interception when his team was in position to kick a clinching field goal by going up ten points with five minutes left?
The answer is that the receiver, T.Y. Hilton was interfered with. He was, but since when his nuanced context ever mattered to the media? And Indy still got the ball back with a chance to win, but it was Nick Foles, not Luck, who was leading the game-winning drive.
This comes on top of Luck throwing a critical interception last week when his team was trying to rally from 24-0 down to beat the Denver Broncos. The Colts were in Bronco territory and an overthrow resulted in a pick.
The media reaction focused on Indy’s comeback in the first game—they ended up losing 31-24—and on the bad call last night. That’s not entirely unreasonable in either case, but are you telling me that other quarterbacks would get away with it? Colin Kaepernick is being taken to task for his three interceptions on Sunday night against the Chicago Bears. Why isn’t Luck?
Luck as a passer is rough around the edges. His short-to-intermediate range game can be boom or bust. He can throw a razor sharp dart one play, then overshoot or throw behind a receiver the next. It’s nothing incredibly alarming, especially at this stage in his career. And he throws a great deep ball (something I wonder why the Colts don’t utilize more often, but that’s a subject for another time).
In this regard, Luck is quite similar to Kaepernick. So why has the Indy quarterback been canonized, while the San Francisco signal-caller get constantly questioned?
If you watch quarterbacks enough, you realize that everything can be shaded in a certain direction. Was a shaky game the result of a bad offensive line or bad gameplan, or being forced into bad situations by your defense? Was a good game because you had all day to throw, because the defense had to respect the run and because your receivers bailed you out a couple times?
As a fan of the Washington Redskins, I’ve spent most of the last year-plus noting that everything about another one of Luck’s contemporaries, the now-fallen Robert Griffin III, had everything shaded against him. He could drop 45 points on the Bears, drop 27 on the Vikings and have a game-tying touchdown dropped in the end zone, complete 24/32 against the Giants with five easy passes dropped, and still get crushed in the media because his team lost.
So why isn’t Luck being taken to task the same way? Why aren’t people asking more about his seven interceptions in the playoffs? He gets rightful praise for leading the Colts from 38-10 down to beat the Kansas City Chiefs in the first round, but has anyone bothered to remember that it was Luck’s three interceptions that helped dig the hole to begin with? Or that he threw four more picks in a winnable game the next week in New England? Maybe I’m overly sensitive about RG3, but he never got this kind of benefit of the doubt.
Colts fans are now laughing and saying that Luck has gone 11-5 as a starter each of the first two years while Griffin went 9-6 his rookie year and then 3-10 his second. Okay, fine. Let’s move to another one of the quarterbacks in the draft class of 2012—Russell Wilson. If you believe quarterbacks are the sole reason for wins and losses and that’s how to measure them, then Wilson is indisputably the best quarterback to come out of that draft.
The media does sing Wilson’s praises, but primarily for his ability as a game-manager. Where’s his SI cover announcing him as The Next Great Thing?
There’s a hidden subtext in all this that I want to dispel. Even though I’ve just argued on behalf of three quarterbacks who are racial minorities, while Luck is white, I’m not attempting to secretly imply anything. I think the reason is something different, and it’s what I call the Insanity Of 2011.
It was Luck’s senior year at Stanford and he was considered the top pick in the NFL draft. Nothing wrong with that—I agreed with it then, and in spite of all I’ve written here, I agree with it now. Even though my heart was kind of with RG3 when he was at Baylor, and it became my full-fledged obsession when he became a Redskin, there was never any doubting Luck’s physical build and his toughness. He was the best investment in the draft.
But the media hype went far beyond that. Multiple NFL teams, including the Colts, were rumored to be tanking their seasons for the chance to get Luck. This wasn’t a couple teams at 3-12 in the last week of the season and one of them deciding to tank. This was anywhere from five to six teams rumored to be deciding as early as October to go in the tank for the first overall pick.
Remember the “Suck For Luck” campaigns that fans started. It was all enabled by pundits, like ESPN’s self-proclaimed draft expert Mel Kiper, leading the charge on Luck as “the best quarterback in a generation.”
How big is that? Well, I’m in my early forties, and I’ve seen the entire careers of Joe Montana, John Elway, Dan Marino, Brett Favre, Peyton Manning, Tom Brady, Steve Young, Troy Aikman and Jim Kelly. I probably forgot a couple in there, and we might as well tack on Aaron Rodgers for good measure. Even if you use a more narrow definition of “generation” and restrict to a 25-year window, that still includes the complete careers of Favre, Peyton, Brady and of course Rodgers.
That was the standard that accompanied Andrew Luck into the NFL. And it’s why I believe he gets a pass from the same sort of rigorous scrutiny that other quarterbacks face. There’s too many people in the sports media who have a vested interest in propping him up, lest they admit that things got out of control in the Insanity Of ’11.
Which brings us to what I consider the million-dollar question. It’s not whether Andrew Luck was worthy of being the #1 pick in the NFL draft. It’s whether he was so irreplaceable, that it was absolutely necessary for the Indianapolis Colts to take one of the greatest quarterbacks of all time—the most important man in the history of their franchise, who had made pro football relevant in an area where there was a lack of interest (I went to school in Indiana from 1989-92 and the Bears were significantly more popular then). Was it really necessary to take this man and kick him to the curb, so Luck could get in a Colts uniform.
Peyton Manning is now on his third great year in Denver. Yes, the Colts let him walk when there was uncertainty about his neck. But is his comeback really all that shocking? And again, is Luck so far and above the standard quarterback, that the Colts couldn’t have given Manning a chance in 2012 and just replaced him the following spring if it didn’t work.
The Colts have given up at least two MVP-caliber seasons and one Super Bowl trip to get Andrew Luck. And that price tag is still growing. And you thought the Redskins gave up a lot to get RG3. We just dealt a couple draft picks.
So there’s no misunderstanding my feelings about Luck as a football player, I would agree with the following proposition—he’s tough, he throws a good deep ball, he keeps his head in the game, his mobile and physical, he’s better than either Eli Manning or Joe Flacco have been at their best, and he’s well on his way to becoming the next Ben Roethlisberger—a little ragged at times, but clutch and someone you can with if the right pieces are in place. And yes, that he’s still got the time to get even higher.
That’s high praise. That’s the standard I measure Andrew Luck the football player. But as to his enablers in the media, the standard that has to be applied to them is the one I’ve asked in this column—was he worth trading two MVP-caliber seasons, a Super Bowl trip, possibly more on both counts, plus the immense intangible value that having Peyton Manning retire as a Colt would have meant to the fan base?
Not if he’s just another pretty good quarterback. Those come out every year. Only if he’s a generation standard-bearer. I don’t see that yet, and it’s time for the media to hold their Anointed One to the same standards they’ve applied to those of whom less was expected.
SIGN UP FOR THE FREE NEWSLETTER OF THESPORTSNOTEBOOK
ANALYSIS & HISTORICAL PERSPECTIVE FROM AROUND THE SPORTS WORLD
The Indianapolis Colts’ Andrew Luck is pretty much the poster-boy of young quarterbacks in today’s NFL, with a Sports Illustrated cover to his credit, one that assures us by year’s end we’ll be acknowledging him as the best quarterback in football. I think Andrew Luck’s pretty good—in fact, I’d even make the compliment stronger and say I think he’s pretty tough. He’s competitive and he keeps his confidence up when things go wrong.
But is Andrew Luck really “all that”? This morning on First Take, ESPN’s Skip Bayless, who normally goes completely over-the-top on questions, asked one that was measured and reasonable and it summed up my thoughts perfectly—“why does this guy get a pass?”
Why, after the Colts lost to the Philadelphia Eagles 30-27 last night, does Luck get a pass from playing a subpar game at home and throwing an interception when his team was in position to kick a clinching field goal by going up ten points with five minutes left?
The answer is that the receiver, T.Y. Hilton was interfered with. He was, but since when his nuanced context ever mattered to the media? And Indy still got the ball back with a chance to win, but it was Nick Foles, not Luck, who was leading the game-winning drive.
This comes on top of Luck throwing a critical interception last week when his team was trying to rally from 24-0 down to beat the Denver Broncos. The Colts were in Bronco territory and an overthrow resulted in a pick.
The media reaction focused on Indy’s comeback in the first game—they ended up losing 31-24—and on the bad call last night. That’s not entirely unreasonable in either case, but are you telling me that other quarterbacks would get away with it? Colin Kaepernick is being taken to task for his three interceptions on Sunday night against the Chicago Bears. Why isn’t Luck?
Luck as a passer is rough around the edges. His short-to-intermediate range game can be boom or bust. He can throw a razor sharp dart one play, then overshoot or throw behind a receiver the next. It’s nothing incredibly alarming, especially at this stage in his career. And he throws a great deep ball (something I wonder why the Colts don’t utilize more often, but that’s a subject for another time).
In this regard, Luck is quite similar to Kaepernick. So why has the Indy quarterback been canonized, while the San Francisco signal-caller get constantly questioned?
If you watch quarterbacks enough, you realize that everything can be shaded in a certain direction. Was a shaky game the result of a bad offensive line or bad gameplan, or being forced into bad situations by your defense? Was a good game because you had all day to throw, because the defense had to respect the run and because your receivers bailed you out a couple times?
As a fan of the Washington Redskins, I’ve spent most of the last year-plus noting that everything about another one of Luck’s contemporaries, the now-fallen Robert Griffin III, had everything shaded against him. He could drop 45 points on the Bears, drop 27 on the Vikings and have a game-tying touchdown dropped in the end zone, complete 24/32 against the Giants with five easy passes dropped, and still get crushed in the media because his team lost.
So why isn’t Luck being taken to task the same way? Why aren’t people asking more about his seven interceptions in the playoffs? He gets rightful praise for leading the Colts from 38-10 down to beat the Kansas City Chiefs in the first round, but has anyone bothered to remember that it was Luck’s three interceptions that helped dig the hole to begin with? Or that he threw four more picks in a winnable game the next week in New England? Maybe I’m overly sensitive about RG3, but he never got this kind of benefit of the doubt.
Colts fans are now laughing and saying that Luck has gone 11-5 as a starter each of the first two years while Griffin went 9-6 his rookie year and then 3-10 his second. Okay, fine. Let’s move to another one of the quarterbacks in the draft class of 2012—Russell Wilson. If you believe quarterbacks are the sole reason for wins and losses and that’s how to measure them, then Wilson is indisputably the best quarterback to come out of that draft.
The media does sing Wilson’s praises, but primarily for his ability as a game-manager. Where’s his SI cover announcing him as The Next Great Thing?
There’s a hidden subtext in all this that I want to dispel. Even though I’ve just argued on behalf of three quarterbacks who are racial minorities, while Luck is white, I’m not attempting to secretly imply anything. I think the reason is something different, and it’s what I call the Insanity Of 2011.
It was Luck’s senior year at Stanford and he was considered the top pick in the NFL draft. Nothing wrong with that—I agreed with it then, and in spite of all I’ve written here, I agree with it now. Even though my heart was kind of with RG3 when he was at Baylor, and it became my full-fledged obsession when he became a Redskin, there was never any doubting Luck’s physical build and his toughness. He was the best investment in the draft.
But the media hype went far beyond that. Multiple NFL teams, including the Colts, were rumored to be tanking their seasons for the chance to get Luck. This wasn’t a couple teams at 3-12 in the last week of the season and one of them deciding to tank. This was anywhere from five to six teams rumored to be deciding as early as October to go in the tank for the first overall pick.
Remember the “Suck For Luck” campaigns that fans started. It was all enabled by pundits, like ESPN’s self-proclaimed draft expert Mel Kiper, leading the charge on Luck as “the best quarterback in a generation.”
How big is that? Well, I’m in my early forties, and I’ve seen the entire careers of Joe Montana, John Elway, Dan Marino, Brett Favre, Peyton Manning, Tom Brady, Steve Young, Troy Aikman and Jim Kelly. I probably forgot a couple in there, and we might as well tack on Aaron Rodgers for good measure. Even if you use a more narrow definition of “generation” and restrict to a 25-year window, that still includes the complete careers of Favre, Peyton, Brady and of course Rodgers.
That was the standard that accompanied Andrew Luck into the NFL. And it’s why I believe he gets a pass from the same sort of rigorous scrutiny that other quarterbacks face. There’s too many people in the sports media who have a vested interest in propping him up, lest they admit that things got out of control in the Insanity Of ’11.
Which brings us to what I consider the million-dollar question. It’s not whether Andrew Luck was worthy of being the #1 pick in the NFL draft. It’s whether he was so irreplaceable, that it was absolutely necessary for the Indianapolis Colts to take one of the greatest quarterbacks of all time—the most important man in the history of their franchise, who had made pro football relevant in an area where there was a lack of interest (I went to school in Indiana from 1989-92 and the Bears were significantly more popular then). Was it really necessary to take this man and kick him to the curb, so Luck could get in a Colts uniform.
Peyton Manning is now on his third great year in Denver. Yes, the Colts let him walk when there was uncertainty about his neck. But is his comeback really all that shocking? And again, is Luck so far and above the standard quarterback, that the Colts couldn’t have given Manning a chance in 2012 and just replaced him the following spring if it didn’t work.
The Colts have given up at least two MVP-caliber seasons and one Super Bowl trip to get Andrew Luck. And that price tag is still growing. And you thought the Redskins gave up a lot to get RG3. We just dealt a couple draft picks.
So there’s no misunderstanding my feelings about Luck as a football player, I would agree with the following proposition—he’s tough, he throws a good deep ball, he keeps his head in the game, his mobile and physical, he’s better than either Eli Manning or Joe Flacco have been at their best, and he’s well on his way to becoming the next Ben Roethlisberger—a little ragged at times, but clutch and someone you can with if the right pieces are in place. And yes, that he’s still got the time to get even higher.
That’s high praise. That’s the standard I measure Andrew Luck the football player. But as to his enablers in the media, the standard that has to be applied to them is the one I’ve asked in this column—was he worth trading two MVP-caliber seasons, a Super Bowl trip, possibly more on both counts, plus the immense intangible value that having Peyton Manning retire as a Colt would have meant to the fan base?
Not if he’s just another pretty good quarterback. Those come out every year. Only if he’s a generation standard-bearer. I don’t see that yet, and it’s time for the media to hold their Anointed One to the same standards they’ve applied to those of whom less was expected.
SIGN UP FOR THE FREE NEWSLETTER OF THESPORTSNOTEBOOK
ANALYSIS & HISTORICAL PERSPECTIVE FROM AROUND THE SPORTS WORLD
We’re a few hours from kickoff of a preseason NFL Monday Night Game between the Cleveland Browns and Washington Redskins, which means Johnny Manziel and Robert Griffin III get an early stage. It seemed like an ideal opportunity to go over some early thoughts on both of these quarterbacks, along with other high-profile young signal-callers.
Here’s nine thoughts encompassing RG3, Johnny Football, Andrew Luck and Colin Kaepernick, all whom have questions of a different variety looming over them in 2014.
*We’ll begin with RG3, simply because he is the morning star around which the firmament of my NFL universe revolves (I have no idea if that sentence made sense, but you get the general drift). I’m expecting a big year from him. I think his problems of last year were vastly overstated, as the problems of the team were put on his shoulders. Combine that with a full offseason of preparation, a fully healthy knee and a head coach that doesn’t actively hate his guts, and I see an excellent season. What that means for the team is another question, but the Redskins will throw the ball effectively.
*If anything does RG3 in, it will be stubbornness. His competitiveness is his greatest attribute, but there are two areas that it works against him. The first is a stubbornness about not being buttonholed as a read-option quarterback. I believe in his pocket passing ability, but why not embrace the skills that make you different from everyone else? Then, when he does run, RG3 is way too stubborn about wanting to take extra yards at the cost of a big hit. Embrace who you are and run the read-option, but be smart and go down when the defense closes in.
*Directly related to RG3 is the question of his backup. I like Kirk Cousins a lot and believe he can make it as the starting quarterback on a playoff team. He’s got work to do in cutting back on mistakes—he makes the ill-advised pass much more frequently than RG3, but Cousins seems to be a bit more accurate in throwing the 10-15 yard pass. If this season gets away from Washington early and Griffin is not playing well, new head coach Jay Gruden is going to have make a very tough call.
*Manziel is in a tough situation, all too similar to the one RG3 was in for two years. It’s called having Kyle Shanahan as your offensive coordinator. Not only is Kyle mediocre at the job, he clearly prefers working with equally mediocre dropback passers, as opposed to someone more electrifying. The Browns traded up to get Manziel, and now everyone in the organization seems to be actively putting him down. This is the fault of the team, not the quarterback, but as was the case in Washington, the QB will take the rap.
*I believe in Manziel and think he can get it done. I like his fire, his mobility and I like his zip on the ball. By “get it done” in Cleveland, I mean get a team to 7-9 or 8-8—in spite of media hype to the contrary, there are still 21 other starters on any football team not called the quarterback. Johnny will need a lot more help, but the Browns should just go for it and put him in.
*Let’s shift over to Indianapolis, where Andrew Luck enters his third season with a divide of opinion that has traces of Moneyball in it. If you’re a stats guy, you probably don’t like Luck—his numbers weren’t all that different from RG3’s a year ago, which is to say they were only marginally better than Eli Manning, Joe Flacco and other quarterbacks acknowledged to have had bad years. But if you’re an “all he does is win” believer, than Luck’s 22-10 career record speaks for itself.
*Most of the time, I value the opinion of the scouting establishment and seek it out. That’s not the case with Luck. Too many people, starting with ESPN’s draft guru Mel Kiper, compromised their credibility on Luck by feeding the absolutely insane hype that tracked him in his senior year at Stanford. The “once-in-a-generation” rhetoric, a standard which requires that Luck be better than Peyton Manning (five MVPs) and Joe Montana (four Super Bowl rings) to be met. Consequently, when I see the scouting establishment rush to proclaim that Luck has already arrived, I see people engaged in political gamesmanship to protect their reputations.
*There needs to be two different standards on Luck. The first one, applied to those who stoked the flames of insanity in 2011, is that he win more MVPs than Peyton and more Super Bowls than Montana. The more reasonable standard is this—is Luck already pretty good, and set to have a good, long career? Is he capable of raising his game in the clutch? Is he tough and the kind of player who is fun to watch? The answer to all of those is yes.
*Colin Kaepernick is facing a threshold year in San Francisco, with injuries and personnel problems probably limiting the defense a bit. I’m very confident in Kaepernick’s ability to get it done and in fact I would consider him the best of the young quarterbacks. He’s got the arm strength, he’s got the running ability and he’s got what RG3 and Manziel don’t have, and it’s a body that’s built to last. And he’s fearless. Kaepernick is the quarterback I would build a franchise around.
SIGN UP FOR THE FREE NEWSLETTER OF THESPORTSNOTEBOOK
ANALYSIS & HISTORICAL PERSPECTIVE FROM AROUND THE SPORTS WORLD
We’re a few hours from kickoff of a preseason NFL Monday Night Game between the Cleveland Browns and Washington Redskins, which means Johnny Manziel and Robert Griffin III get an early stage. It seemed like an ideal opportunity to go over some early thoughts on both of these quarterbacks, along with other high-profile young signal-callers.
Here’s nine thoughts encompassing RG3, Johnny Football, Andrew Luck and Colin Kaepernick, all whom have questions of a different variety looming over them in 2014.
*We’ll begin with RG3, simply because he is the morning star around which the firmament of my NFL universe revolves (I have no idea if that sentence made sense, but you get the general drift). I’m expecting a big year from him. I think his problems of last year were vastly overstated, as the problems of the team were put on his shoulders. Combine that with a full offseason of preparation, a fully healthy knee and a head coach that doesn’t actively hate his guts, and I see an excellent season. What that means for the team is another question, but the Redskins will throw the ball effectively.
*If anything does RG3 in, it will be stubbornness. His competitiveness is his greatest attribute, but there are two areas that it works against him. The first is a stubbornness about not being buttonholed as a read-option quarterback. I believe in his pocket passing ability, but why not embrace the skills that make you different from everyone else? Then, when he does run, RG3 is way too stubborn about wanting to take extra yards at the cost of a big hit. Embrace who you are and run the read-option, but be smart and go down when the defense closes in.
*Directly related to RG3 is the question of his backup. I like Kirk Cousins a lot and believe he can make it as the starting quarterback on a playoff team. He’s got work to do in cutting back on mistakes—he makes the ill-advised pass much more frequently than RG3, but Cousins seems to be a bit more accurate in throwing the 10-15 yard pass. If this season gets away from Washington early and Griffin is not playing well, new head coach Jay Gruden is going to have make a very tough call.
*Manziel is in a tough situation, all too similar to the one RG3 was in for two years. It’s called having Kyle Shanahan as your offensive coordinator. Not only is Kyle mediocre at the job, he clearly prefers working with equally mediocre dropback passers, as opposed to someone more electrifying. The Browns traded up to get Manziel, and now everyone in the organization seems to be actively putting him down. This is the fault of the team, not the quarterback, but as was the case in Washington, the QB will take the rap.
*I believe in Manziel and think he can get it done. I like his fire, his mobility and I like his zip on the ball. By “get it done” in Cleveland, I mean get a team to 7-9 or 8-8—in spite of media hype to the contrary, there are still 21 other starters on any football team not called the quarterback. Johnny will need a lot more help, but the Browns should just go for it and put him in.
*Let’s shift over to Indianapolis, where Andrew Luck enters his third season with a divide of opinion that has traces of Moneyball in it. If you’re a stats guy, you probably don’t like Luck—his numbers weren’t all that different from RG3’s a year ago, which is to say they were only marginally better than Eli Manning, Joe Flacco and other quarterbacks acknowledged to have had bad years. But if you’re an “all he does is win” believer, than Luck’s 22-10 career record speaks for itself.
*Most of the time, I value the opinion of the scouting establishment and seek it out. That’s not the case with Luck. Too many people, starting with ESPN’s draft guru Mel Kiper, compromised their credibility on Luck by feeding the absolutely insane hype that tracked him in his senior year at Stanford. The “once-in-a-generation” rhetoric, a standard which requires that Luck be better than Peyton Manning (five MVPs) and Joe Montana (four Super Bowl rings) to be met. Consequently, when I see the scouting establishment rush to proclaim that Luck has already arrived, I see people engaged in political gamesmanship to protect their reputations.
*There needs to be two different standards on Luck. The first one, applied to those who stoked the flames of insanity in 2011, is that he win more MVPs than Peyton and more Super Bowls than Montana. The more reasonable standard is this—is Luck already pretty good, and set to have a good, long career? Is he capable of raising his game in the clutch? Is he tough and the kind of player who is fun to watch? The answer to all of those is yes.
*Colin Kaepernick is facing a threshold year in San Francisco, with injuries and personnel problems probably limiting the defense a bit. I’m very confident in Kaepernick’s ability to get it done and in fact I would consider him the best of the young quarterbacks. He’s got the arm strength, he’s got the running ability and he’s got what RG3 and Manziel don’t have, and it’s a body that’s built to last. And he’s fearless. Kaepernick is the quarterback I would build a franchise around.
SIGN UP FOR THE FREE NEWSLETTER OF THESPORTSNOTEBOOK
ANALYSIS & HISTORICAL PERSPECTIVE FROM AROUND THE SPORTS WORLD
Editor’s Note: This is the second in a two-part series previewing the NFL season by contributor Isaac Huss. Please also check out his 5 Key Storylines in the NFC.
Peyton “All-American Dude” Manning v. Andrew “Articulate Intellect” Luck
Nobody wanted it to happen this way. Peyton Manning has godlike status in Indianapolis, but his multiple neck surgeries combined with the Colts’ opportunity to draft Andrew Luck spelled the end of his tenure in Indy. It wasn’t without awkwardness, especially before Manning’s trade to Denver became official. However, Manning handed the whole process with nothing but class as usual, and Luck was basically handed the keys to the city. It seems like a win-win situation for everyone involved.
And by all accounts, Andrew Luck is going to be an excellent quarterback. Rating “intangibles” in a quarterback can be a nebulous proposition at times. Hard work, intelligence, competitiveness, etc. can be overblown and/or feted upon quarterbacks regardless of any exceptional trait he possesses which will actually translate into exceptional quarterback play. That being said, if ever there ever was a quarterback that seemed destined to succeed based on physical as well as intellectual qualities, it’s Luck. His postgame news conferences are almost as compelling as his quarterbacking.
The only thing Luck doesn’t have at his disposal is Hall-of-Fame genes. Which, of course, his predecessor does. Manning seems to have regained much of his pre-surger(ies) form, but it remains to be seen how his neck holds up over the course of a season worth of hits.
Of course, it’s unfair to compare Luck to Manning, who’s already one of the best quarterbacks of his generation, if not ever. However, because the Colts essentially chose to start over with Luck rather than continue the Manning era, Luck’s and Manning’s careers will be forever intertwined, and Luck will have the burden of living up to Manning’s stature, or at least his performance with the Broncos.
Meanwhile, John Elway and company jettisoned a local hero of their own in order to bring Manning to the Broncos, as they traded the immensely popular (albeit polarizing) Tim Tebow to the NY Jets. Nobody’s pretending Tebow is going to make the Manning trade look foolish, but if Peyton isn’t his old self, or worse, if his health keeps him off the field, Elway is going to have some ‘splainin’ to do.
Did somebody say Tim Tebow?
The quarterback battle between Mark Sanchez and… blah, blah, blah. Let’s be honest, Sanchez hasn’t done much to assure himself of a starting quarterback position so far in his career, but his job is safe. What’s far more compelling is observing the media’s obsession with Tim Tebow and how long it will take to cool off if Timmy becomes nothing more than provide a fake punt threat and/or goal line running option.
Is Tebow capable of leading a team to victory? Absolutely he is, as he proved last season, most sublimely in the Broncos’ upset win over Pittsburgh. But unless Sanchez goes down with injury and/or self destructs, Tebow will be left to work on his spirals in practice.
Rookie QBs: Everybody’s doing it
In addition to the Seahawks’ Russell Wilson and RG3 in Washington, three AFC teams have named rookies to be their starting quarterbacks. Luck was essentially assured a starting job from day one. However, both Brandon Weeden (Cleveland) and Ryan Tannehill (Miami) are somewhat surprising choices, although for different reasons.
The Browns drafted the 28-year-old graduate Weeden of Oklahoma State in the first round to replace the disappointing Colt McCoy, the latest attempt at finding a franchise quarterback in the draft, following McCoy (3rd round) in 2010, Brady Quinn (first round) in 2007, and Tim Couch (first overall pick) in 1999. The lingering question with Weeden is how much room for improvement he has, or even how long he’ll be able to play at a high level given his unusually advanced age. After spending five years playing professional baseball, he became the oldest player ever drafted in the first round.
So while Weeden is being told that he’s already too far along his career arc, Tannehill is facing the opposite kind of scrutiny. Tannehill played receiver for two and a half years before getting the chance to play quarterback for the final seven games his junior year as well as his senior year. Tannehill’s raw athleticism and ability are unquestioned, but it remains to be seen whether he’s ready to lead an NFL team. The Dolphins are willing to take a risk, especially since they’ve tried 17 quarterbacks since Dan Marino without finding a mainstay.
Patriots: Same old, same old.
The Belichick era rolls along in New England, a year removed from an improbably impressive run which included a 13-3 regular season and a near-miss in the Super Bowl against the New York Giants. Improbable because they did it without a defense to speak of which could keep teams from piling up yards, and eventually points, early and often.
So what did Bill do? He spent his first six draft choices on defense. Not to mention bringing in WR Brandon Lloyd into a receiving corps that already includes Wes Welker and the two headed TE monster, Rob Gronkowski and Aaron Hernandez. If the defense can offer any sort of resistance, another run to the Super Bowl seems easily within reach.
Holdout Hope
One team that is a continual threat to New England’s postseason aspirations is the Steelers, losers to Tebow and the Broncos a year ago in the first round of the playoffs. They were and are without RB Rashard Mendenhall, who tore his ACL in the last game of the regular season and is still on the PUP list. Adding insult to injury, literally, is Pro Bowl WR Mike Wallace’s continuing holdout. While it appears Wallace will blink first, it remains to be seen how effective he’ll be given his long layoff, much less his diminished role due to the emergence of Antonio Brown as Ben Roethlisberger’s favorite target.
Less clear is what will become of the Maurice Jones-Drew saga. Also holding out for a better contract, MJD revealed to reporters that he was open to a trade from the only team he’s known the London Jaguars of Jacksonville. Whichever team was to acquire the RB via trade would be instantly adding a top-5 running back in his prime. Perhaps the Jags’ unwillingness to negotiate with their franchise player is a sign that they don’t see themselves being competitive over the next couple of years and would be better served letting him walk than shell more money for a team going nowhere soon.
Given their compromised position, they would be hard-pressed to get full market value for Drew, but perhaps they are willing to let him go to save money until they become more competitive. However, regardless of how serious they are to be able to compete immediately, if they are serious about their intentions of developing the second year Blaine Gabbert at quarterback, they would be well-served to have a legitimate weapon out of the backfield to keep defenses honest.
A Texas-sized question mark at quarterback
Peyton Manning isn’t the only high-profile quarterback looking to bounce return from injury in 2012. Matt Schaub of the Texans is no superstar, but he throws to one in Andre Johnson, and along with Arian Foster leading the running attack, makes Houston a much more dangerous offensive team. Coupled with a defense which Gary Kubiak has molded into one of the league’s best, and the Texans are again the favorites to win the AFC South. With a healthy Schaub (and Johnson), the Texans pose a legitimate threat to compete for an AFC Championship.
Predictions:
AFC North: Baltimore
AFC East: New England
AFC West: San Diego
AFC South: Houston
Wild Cards: Pittsburgh, Denver
Wild Card round: New England over Pittsburgh, San Diego over Denver
Divisional round: New England over Baltimore, Houston over San Diego
NFC Championship: New England over Houston
Monday night’s Fiesta Bowl (8:30 PM ET, ESPN) is the best of the four BCS bowl matchups that lead up to the national championship game a week from tonight, as Oklahoma State meets up with Stanford. For Okie State, it’s a chance to send a message to voters who preferred giving Alabama a second chance at LSU rather than sending the Cowboys to New Orleans. For Stanford, it’s the final college game for Andrew Luck, the most anticipated NFL prospect I can recall. Here’s the summation of how each team got here and how they matchup…
Oklahoma State (11-1): Oklahoma State didn’t play heavyweights in their three weeks of non-conference play, but they fatten up on pastry either. UL-Lafayette and Tulsa were both bowl teams, while Arizona brought one the country’s top quarterbacks in Nick Foles for a Thursday night game. OSU quarterback Brandon Weeden let it be known early on this was going to be a prolific year. He went over 350 yards in all three games, while running back Joseph Randle cleared the 120 mark in each one. The Cowboy offense would never stop firing.
You couldn’t be as confident with the defense, which gave up big chunks of rushing yardage, particularly to Tulsa, who blasted them for 365 yards on the ground. It was a cause for concern as Okie State entered a four-game stretch in which they would play road games at Texas A&M, Texas and Missouri. Weeden gunned down all three, including a big comeback against the Aggies, with over 1,000 yards passing combined. While Justin Blackmon was his primary receiver, secondaries couldn’t lock in on him, as Weeden consistently involved an array of receivers into the offense, a pattern that would continue throughout the year. While the problems defending the run didn’t go away, the Cowboy secondary was turning into a ball-hawking unit, getting three interceptions apiece in all three road wins, which were sandwiched around a 70-28 blasting of Kansas at home.
In the Big 12, there’s no rest for the victorious and coming home meant Baylor and Kansas State were waiting. Blackmon had two huge games, catching 26 passes for 377 yards, as the offense put up 111 points in a pair of dazzling wins. Randle kept churning out yardage on the ground, as you couldn’t focus in on just one part of the Oklahoma State offense, lest another part bury you. While Oklahoma was still considered the top dog in the Big 12 at the time, it would be K-State and Baylor that would finish second and third in the league respectively, so in retrospect this was the point of the season were the Cowboys secured a conference title.
They were thinking a lot bigger, sitting at #2 in the national polls. But on a Friday morning they were to play Iowa State, tragedy struck the Oklahoma State community. A plane carrying the woman’s basketball coach and his assistant crashed and a pall went over everyone involved with the game. To this day, I believe the game should’ve been suspended until at least the next day, but with ESPN’s cameras on hand for a Friday night exclusive that wasn’t happening. The Cowboys looked flat, Weeden threw three interceptions and the Cyclones won in double overtime. To their enormous credit, no one associated with Oklahoma State has ever used the tragedy as an excuse for the loss. But those of us who are in the outside can exercise some common sense and say that it had to have affected. They played the game the same day the news was reported! In the end, though it may have cost Oklahoma State a national title shot, they have their honor intact, knowing they didn’t use the deaths of those close to them as a way of angling out sympathy votes for a national title game berth.
Oklahoma State still got a Fiesta Bowl bid when they destroyed Oklahoma 44-10 in the season finale, with their secondary continuing to play well and Randle having a big game on the ground. It may not have gotten into the BCS National Championship Game, but I wouldn’t expect a letdown—it’s the program’s first major bowl bid since the 1945 Cotton Bowl, when they matched up with St. Mary’s (CA).
Stanford (11-1): Even with the departure of head coach Jim Harbaugh to the NFL, the return of Andrew Luck had everyone abuzz about Cardinal football and Luck gave little reason for anyone to question his undisputed status as not only the #1 pick in the NFL draft, but the best QB prospect in a generation. In a year where the NFL produced outstanding quarterback seasons from Aaron Rodgers and Drew Brees, it’s not too much to suggest that Luck’s presence in the NFL this year matched both of them, as lower-level teams raced for the bottom.
On the football field in Palo Alto, Luck’s current team opened with easy wins over San Jose State and Duke, in which the basic offensive formula was established. Luck hit a high percentage of his throws, made few mistakes and spread the ball around, while getting 75-100 yards of ground support from Stephan Taylor. It set the stage for five easy wins to start the Pac-12 schedule. Stanford cruised past Arizona, UCLA, Colorado, Washington State and then hung 65 points on Washington. Luck threw 14 touchdown passes in these games against only two interceptions. The Stanford defense was respectable, if not overwhelming and Taylor had four 100-yard games.
Next up was a prime-time battle in Los Angeles against USC and it proved to be another one of college football’s memorable battles of 2011, right up there with Wisconsin-Michigan State‘s regular season game. This one went triple overtime before Stanford won 56-48. Luck outplayed Barkley, but Stanford committed 11 penalties, a circumstance they can’t afford to repeat tonight in the Fiesta Bowl.
After an easy win over Oregon State, it was time for an anticipated showdown with Oregon to settle the Pac-12 North and keep the Cardinal on track for an appearance in the BCS National Championship game. Playing at home for a prime-time audience, Stanford came up with a dud. They lost three fumbles and turned it over five times overall. Luck completed 27 of 41 passes, but Oregon effectively kept him underneath, making those completions add up to just 256 yards. Stanford couldn’t stop LaMichael James on the ground and they were beaten badly, 53-30.
To the credit of head coach David Shaw, he kept his team focused for challenging games against improving Cal and Notre Dame to end the season, both of which Stanford needed if they wanted to make a major bowl game. The Cardinal didn’t play their best game in either spot, but they were good enough to beat decent teams and the rush defense was solid both times out.
The Matchup: The Weeden-Luck showdown is what gets the media attention and I see the logic. But what I’m watching is the Randle-Taylor matchup. While Stanford played good rush defense against above average teams, they couldn’t handle James, and if I’m Mike Gundy I absolutely think my running game is as good as Oregon’s. In the case of Oklahoma State, when you have a team that can’t stop the run, while intercepting passes left and right, doesn’t that make committing to the ground an obvious choice? Taylor is one of the more underrated backs in the country and Stanford’s physical nature is also underappreciated. If it’s me, I’m pounding him early on and opening things up for Luck. As is the case with today’s Rose Bowl, Las Vegas is expecting a shootout and the Over/Under is slotted at 74. I like Oklahoma State to get the win. The ability of the secondary to create some mistakes, combined with the general superiority of play in the Big 12 make the Cowboys the pick here.
Please note TheSportsNotebook.com will be doing a live blog during the Rose and Fiesta Bowls today, along with the Sugar and Orange Bowls the next two nights. Stop by during the game to get reaction as the games unfold.
