pizzatyme
Footballguy
Who were his QBs in that span?You lost me at dominating red zone target. He has 65 TD in 173 career regular season and post season games.
Who were his QBs in that span?You lost me at dominating red zone target. He has 65 TD in 173 career regular season and post season games.
QBs who certainly could have made use of a "dominating red zone target." Houston was a top-5 offense three times in that span, and Johnson never got even 10 TDs. Schaub led the league in passing yardage in 2009.Who were his QBs in that span?You lost me at dominating red zone target. He has 65 TD in 173 career regular season and post season games.
I agree. I feel like if he stays healthy, 10 receiving TDs is in the cards for him.Yeah, Andre is a lot of things but he's never been a "dominating red zone target". And even mediocre/bad QB's can take advantage of a 6'3" guy in the endzone, so I don't buy that it has been the QB's for ten years. It weirdly just isn't a strength of his.
Maybe I'm wrong and his coaches just always preferred to run on the goal line, pass to any other player in the red zone.
If he's always been capable of being the "dominating red zone target" you say he is, then Luck will bring it out in him.
Should be interesting.
Colts owner Jim Irsay said the team will likely wait until next offseason to extend Andrew Luck's contract.
"Andrew still has two years left," Irsay said. "I really think most likely the scenario is going into the offseason next year is when that second contract will come up. That's the vision I have right now." The Colts will exercise their fifth-year team option on Luck this offseason, putting Luck under contract for the next two seasons at around $18-19 million. That's a huge bargain before the Colts will have to hand over quite possibly the largest contract in NFL history to Luck.
Source: ESPN.com
Mar 23 - 6:08 PM
Obviously you got some pushback on this comment. And rightfully so. Andre, for whatever the reasons, has been a top 5 receiver in all areas except TD's. Perhaps he underperforms in the redzone, perhaps his QB's were afraid to throw into tight spaces (Schaub), perhaps Kubiak liked to use him as a blocker and a decoy because Foster was so good at running in the redzone.Johnson does more than absorb targets. He's a dominating red zone target that the team sorely needs.
Gore is a pounder that the Colts have been missing. No he's not going to make his own holes, but they did add Herremans and hope to have a healthy Cherilus back at Rt Tackle. Another thought on Johnson is that I think this frees up TY to play the slot in 3WR sets. He'll be very efficient in there so while the Colts may pass less, I can see the passing game becoming more effective.
If they can add depth in the draft there, that will be a vast improvement over years past. The Colts are strong on their left side of the line and just need the threat of running right as well.
The Colts really need 2 linemen on each sod of the ball and a safety. Anything else at this point is a bonus.
I'm hoping they grab a second day RB and DB as well.
Oh boy. This is sure to spark the age old debate about when to take a QB. Like anything else, it depends on the league and its scoring. But in the main, I don't see the value taking a QB first overall. There will be other decent QBs available rounds and rounds later. You can't really say that about the other positions.
I still remember the take Adrian Peterson #1 overall articles last year. Equally awesome.In befor the clickbait "take Luck #1 overall" article.
...oh
(I still remember Matt Berry trying to justify taking Vick #1 overall a few years back, that was awesome)
lol yeah I got screwed pretty hard taking Adrian Peterson second overall.I still remember the take Adrian Peterson #1 overall articles last year. Equally awesome.In befor the clickbait "take Luck #1 overall" article.
...oh
(I still remember Matt Berry trying to justify taking Vick #1 overall a few years back, that was awesome)
Individual data points do not a compelling argument make.
The kind who has good reasons, but still gets #### wrong sometimes. Just like with the Vick prediction.lol yeah I got screwed pretty hard taking Adrian Peterson second overall.I still remember the take Adrian Peterson #1 overall articles last year. Equally awesome.In befor the clickbait "take Luck #1 overall" article.
...oh
(I still remember Matt Berry trying to justify taking Vick #1 overall a few years back, that was awesome)
Individual data points do not a compelling argument make.
What idiot would have recommended doing that??
I'll make sure to write entire novels from now on, just for those incapable of understanding a simple point.I still remember the take Adrian Peterson #1 overall articles last year. Equally awesome.In befor the clickbait "take Luck #1 overall" article.
...oh
(I still remember Matt Berry trying to justify taking Vick #1 overall a few years back, that was awesome)
Individual data points do not a compelling argument make.
Justifying the Vick #1 overall suggestion is just as bad as making the Vick #1 overall suggestionThe kind who has good reasons, but still gets #### wrong sometimes. Just like with the Vick prediction.lol yeah I got screwed pretty hard taking Adrian Peterson second overall.I still remember the take Adrian Peterson #1 overall articles last year. Equally awesome.In befor the clickbait "take Luck #1 overall" article.
...oh
(I still remember Matt Berry trying to justify taking Vick #1 overall a few years back, that was awesome)
Individual data points do not a compelling argument make.
What idiot would have recommended doing that??
FWIW, Luck should probably be regarded as a safer bet to finish near the top of the value rankings. Peterson's a little long in the tooth for a RB, hasn't played in a year, and plays a high-impact position. Vick was obviously not super into playing a style of game likely to keep him healthy and on the field. Luck doesn't have any of those problems, but he does have a GM who went out and stocked the cupboards for him in the offseason.
I'd have no problem with anyone taking him #1 overall.
This needs more attention. Watching Chicago game and Luck is running for his life and has taken numerous big hits.Colts have concerns with the offensive line's ability to protect Andrew Luck:
http://espn.go.com/blog/indianapolis-colts/post/_/id/13256/colts-have-concerns-with-the-offensive-lines-ability-to-protect-andrew-luck
This is my concern as well. That said, can the line be worse than it was last year? They were pretty brutal and he still had a monster year.rascal said:This needs more attention. Watching Chicago game and Luck is running for his life and has taken numerous big hits.Colts have concerns with the offensive line's ability to protect Andrew Luck:
http://espn.go.com/blog/indianapolis-colts/post/_/id/13256/colts-have-concerns-with-the-offensive-lines-ability-to-protect-andrew-luck
Not sure if stats are the issue with the brutal line. Its not getting up off the turf one on one of those plays.This is my concern as well. That said, can the line be worse than it was last year? They were pretty brutal and he still had a monster year.rascal said:This needs more attention. Watching Chicago game and Luck is running for his life and has taken numerous big hits.Colts have concerns with the offensive line's ability to protect Andrew Luck:
http://espn.go.com/blog/indianapolis-colts/post/_/id/13256/colts-have-concerns-with-the-offensive-lines-ability-to-protect-andrew-luck
So what are you saying here? Are you thinking this year his luck runs out?Not sure if stats are the issue with the brutal line. Its not getting up off the turf one on one of those plays.This is my concern as well. That said, can the line be worse than it was last year? They were pretty brutal and he still had a monster year.rascal said:This needs more attention. Watching Chicago game and Luck is running for his life and has taken numerous big hits.Colts have concerns with the offensive line's ability to protect Andrew Luck:
http://espn.go.com/blog/indianapolis-colts/post/_/id/13256/colts-have-concerns-with-the-offensive-lines-ability-to-protect-andrew-luck
Indy QBs took the 3rd most hits in 2013 and the 4th most hits in 2014.
Thanks for the update, please continue to tell us every trade offer you make this season, guy.Offering A 2 for 1.. Dion Lewis/T. Taylor for Luck. I would be 2-0
He's had the most pass attempts in that span as well, no?28 picks/fumbles since 2014.
most in NFL
Right after you get a sense of humorThanks for the update, please continue to tell us every trade offer you make this season, guy.Offering A 2 for 1.. Dion Lewis/T. Taylor for Luck. I would be 2-0
Maybe T. Rich was a steadying influence on Andrew?Andrew Luck, Colts' offense stuck in neutral, not going anywhere:
http://espn.go.com/blog/indianapolis-colts/post/_/id/13780/andrew-luck-colts-offense-stuck-in-neutral-not-going-anywhere
A lot of times he overcomes his turnovers with late game heroics, so people tend not to notice how often it happens. They only remember him being "clutch" at the end of the game. But you can't rely on that forever. Eventually that stuff evens out.28 picks/fumbles since 2014.
most in NFL
NoPipes said:He's had the most pass attempts in that span as well, no?Soulfly3 said:28 picks/fumbles since 2014.
most in NFL
But why be reasonable when there are hot takes to be had?Carter_Can_Fly said:Two tough defences to start the year. His O line is god awful and he has not played well himself, but he will be fine and still be a top 3 qb. Ugly start to the year though.
Looking back at the game logs, it appears he's been struggling since week 13 of last year. If I did my math correctly he's something like 12 TDs vs 14 INTs in his last 9 games including playoffs. Passer rating less than 80 in all but 2 of those games.In a 2 QB league where this guy was the #1 pick, would anyone be trying to buy with a huge offer and maybe pry the guy away after these first two tough games? Or are people legitimately concerned here? Would you deal away guys like Brady, Wilson, Roethlesberger as well as some extra juice for him?