The Mike Shanaplan

[Dirtbag59]

To start with believe it or not best QB prospect of all time really isn't that hard of a feat, so sorry for overselling that label. Of the 19 QB's drafted first overall I could only find 1 that was virtually flawless and thats Peyton Manning. Elway was close but he obviously had the whole "don't draft me Baltimore or I'll play baseball" problem. Eli was also another highly rated guy coming in but he didn't have the same level of production of his older brother.
Book of Odds - The NFL Draft: QB or Not QB

The rest either had character concerns, simple offenses, average competition, or average production. Maybe thats the last remaining knock on Luck. The fact that he only has two years as a starter under his belt. However he has taken his game to a level that I have never seen or heard of for that matter.

Simply put Luck is both fooball and book smart. His arm is very good and capable of making every throw. His funky release is actually quick and allows him to get rid of the ball. He is capable of breaking 50 yard runs as well as buying time in the pocket. He is tall enough to see over his lineman, heavy enough to take a beating. And above all he's throwing for 30+ TD's with 70% in the second best conference in the country. Even with a great line you don't see QB's throwing the ball down field in a pro style offense and still finishing with a completion percentage above 70%. That is unreal.



By the way, while I do agree that Luck had a quality O-Line it still doesn't change the fact that the 3 seniors on that line in this years draft went undrafted. Remember he's still playing at Stanford, a school whose bending of the rules for scholarship athletes are still ridiculously high compared to most other major football programs.

[Ruhskins]

Originally Posted by Dirtbag59

To start with believe it or not best QB prospect of all time really isn't that hard of a feat, so sorry for overselling that label. Of the 19 QB's drafted first overall I could only find 1 that was virtually flawless and thats Peyton Manning. Elway was close but he obviously had the whole "don't draft me Baltimore or I'll play baseball" problem. Eli was also another highly rated guy coming in but he didn't have the same level of production of his older brother.
Book of Odds - The NFL Draft: QB or Not QB

The rest either had character concerns, simple offenses, average competition, or average production. Maybe thats the last remaining knock on Luck. The fact that he only has two years as a starter under his belt. However he has taken his game to a level that I have never seen or heard of for that matter.

Simply put Luck is both fooball and book smart. His arm is very good and capable of making every throw. His funky release is actually quick and allows him to get rid of the ball. He is capable of breaking 50 yard runs as well as buying time in the pocket. He is tall enough to see over his lineman, heavy enough to take a beating. And above all he's throwing for 30+ TD's with 70% in the second best conference in the country. Even with a great line you don't see QB's throwing the ball down field in a pro style offense and still finishing with a completion percentage above 70%. That is unreal.

By the way, while I do agree that Luck had a quality O-Line it still doesn't change the fact that the 3 seniors on that line in this years draft went undrafted. Remember he's still playing at Stanford, a school whose bending of the rules for scholarship athletes are still ridiculously high compared to most other major football programs.

Dirt, do you think that an injury-free Bradford could've been close to that "nearly flawless" level?

[Dirtbag59]

Originally Posted by Ruhskins

Dirt, do you think that an injury-free Bradford could've been close to that "nearly flawless" level?

Maybe. I mean you look at the media and they still gave him a hard time for running a spread offense even though he put up great numbers in a pro style offense during his first year as a starter. He also was slightly limited in terms of arm strength. He [Bradford] doesn't have the "elite arm, as he's more in the "well he can make all the throws" category.

Bradford seemed more of a high floor with a decent sized ceiling as opposed to Luck who I feel and many scouts feel is a high floor high ceiling type of player.

As I said before, Luck doesn't have the J. Russell arm but it's still considered a "very strong arm." For Gods sake he threw it almost 50 yards while falling down.

And the best part with Luck, if he does fail at QB you can still play him at Running Back or Linebacker. Though as 30Gut said before I'm entrenched in the 'Luck is money in the bank" position.' So I'll need to see him snorting blow off a strippers bum before I start to consider otherwise.

[30gut]

Originally Posted by Dirtbag59

To start with believe it or not best QB prospect of all time really isn't that hard of a feat, so sorry for overselling that label. Of the 19 QB's drafted first overall I could only find 1 that was virtually flawless and thats Peyton Manning. Elway was close but he obviously had the whole "don't draft me Baltimore or I'll play baseball" problem. Eli was also another highly rated guy coming in but he didn't have the same level of production of his older brother.

You're operating with the benefit of hindsight.
For every so called 'flawless' prospect there is the evil twin Leaf and now it easy to say that Manning was the better prospect but lets not kid ourselves they were basically a coin flip.

Btw-Elway was a better prospect then Manning, Elway, in fact, is actually considered one of the best QB prospects ever.

However he has taken his game to a level that I have never seen or heard of for that matter.

Then imo you simply haven't been looking.
I know you don't agree but Locker is very good prospect himself, he has a better arm, he's more athletic, more of a playmaker and has a cleaner throwing motion.

And imo the main difference is that Locker chose to go to one of the worst DI programs in the nation devoid of many NFL prospects other then Locker. Luck plays/played for one of the best coaching staffs in college football on team filled with pro-talent and a great OL(NFL talents).

Even with a great line you don't see QB's throwing the ball down field in a pro style offense and still finishing with a completion percentage above 70%. That is unreal.

Scott Tolzien Wisconsin 72.9 comp% with a higher ypa.
Greg McElroy 70.9 comp % also had a higher ypa then Luck.

Like I was saying in my last post scheme and overall team talent matters.
Power running games with a great OL are conducive to a well protected QB, a well protected QB that can play action off a power running game is gonna have a high comp %.

Tolzien and McElroy illistrate that production is not a main factor in QB evaluation for the NFL. (Tolzien undrafted, McElroy late round draft pick)

By the way, while I do agree that Luck had a quality O-Line it still doesn't change the fact that the 3 seniors on that line in this years draft went undrafted.

C'mon we're beyond this type of discussion right?
If you can't concede that Stanford has a great OL, one of the best in college football then what can we agree upon?

STANFORD, Calif.-- Stanford's offensive line ranked as one of the best in the nation last season, allowing the second-fewest sacks in the nation and paving the way for Toby Gerhart's record-breaking running season. This year four of five starters return and they will again protect quarterback Andrew Luck and hopefully lead to big things in 2010