What is Andrew Luck Worth?

[EARTHQUAKE2689]

Originally Posted by REDSKINS4ever

This is what I think about Andrew Luck. He's a great collegiate quarterback. He's one of the best that I've ever seen. The thing is this: how would he play in a more competitive conference like the BIG 10, BIG 12, or SEC? The defenses are far more competitive in those conferences as opposed to the PAC 10. How would he do against Michigan, Penn State, Ohio State, Oklahoma, Texas, LSU, Auburn, or Alabama? My opinion is that whether Luck struggled against these defenses or not, they are far more better than the defenses from Washington, Washington St. Oregon, Oregon State, USC, Arizona, and Arizona St. And since Matt Barkley is a PAC 10 QB also, I'm bringing him into question also along with Luck.

Big 12 defenses are not great by any means and there is no Pac 10.

[REDSKINS4ever]

Originally Posted by EARTHQUAKE2689

Big 12 defenses are not great by any means and there is no Pac 10.

The addition of Utah and Colorado to the PAC conference is pretty insignificant.

[SBXVII]

MS did an interview where he was asked about Luck and what the going price for him could be (3 first round picks) and MS brought up the trade for Gruden, all the 1st round picks and 2nd round picks and he basically said that when he ran into Gruden he said to him "no disrespect but your not worth it". He was saying no way would he ruin a teams future by throwing away all their draft picks.

So I'm guessing if he feels a HC is not worth that then a QB would not either.

[CultBrennan59]

Originally Posted by EARTHQUAKE2689

Big 12 defenses are not great by any means and there is no Pac 10.

Woah now. The Big 12 does have some great defenses. Sure you have teams like Baylor and Kansas who can't stop anyone, but every conference has teams that have bad defenses. Pac 12 too. You have bad defenses like Washington State, Colorado, and Washington but Oregons a great defense, as is USC, Stanford, Cal.

So you really can't pull out that card to these QB's if they play in a BCS conference, because they all go against good and bad defenses. The defenses RGIII goes against is probably easier than what Andrew Luck goes against. Its the QB's like Case Keenum, or MAC QB's, or WAC QB's, or other Conference USA QB's that you should put up that 'they don't go against go defenses' argument.

[skinsfaninok]

Luck and Blackmon showcase tomorrow nite

[EARTHQUAKE2689]

Originally Posted by CultBrennan59

Woah now. The Big 12 does have some great defenses. Sure you have teams like Baylor and Kansas who can't stop anyone, but every conference has teams that have bad defenses. Pac 12 too. You have bad defenses like Washington State, Colorado, and Washington but Oregons a great defense, as is USC, Stanford, Cal.

So you really can't pull out that card to these QB's if they play in a BCS conference, because they all go against good and bad defenses. The defenses RGIII goes against is probably easier than what Andrew Luck goes against. Its the QB's like Case Keenum, or MAC QB's, or WAC QB's, or other Conference USA QB's that you should put up that 'they don't go against go defenses' argument.

Sure all conferences have bad D but in regards to the defense the Big 12 usually puts out there it has been way down.

[diehard]

Originally Posted by skinsfaninok

Luck and Blackmon showcase tomorrow nite

I'm sure someone has to something to say...

[That Guy]

Originally Posted by diehard

I'm sure someone has to something to say...

yeah, they both looked great.

[SFREDSKIN]

Originally Posted by REDSKINS4ever

This is what I think about Andrew Luck. He's a great collegiate quarterback. He's one of the best that I've ever seen. The thing is this: how would he play in a more competitive conference like the BIG 10, BIG 12, or SEC? The defenses are far more competitive in those conferences as opposed to the PAC 10. How would he do against Michigan, Penn State, Ohio State, Oklahoma, Texas, LSU, Auburn, or Alabama? My opinion is that whether Luck struggled against these defenses or not, they are far more better than the defenses from Washington, Washington St. Oregon, Oregon State, USC, Arizona, and Arizona St. And since Matt Barkley is a PAC 10 QB also, I'm bringing him into question also along with Luck.

So how do you think he looked against OKS? He looked fantastic, made great decision especially when being blitzed, the poise to find a receiver within seconds, rolling out and passing on both sides of the field. The guy is the real deal, it also helps that he has an outstanding OL. Martin and DeCastro are future pro bowlers and I would love to get either one.

[CultBrennan59]

My neighbor emailed an nfldraftscout guy, and asked him "if you were the redskins would you give up 3 first rounders to get luck?"

He responded "...maybe even four"

[SFREDSKIN]

I still can't believe that Shaw (Stanford coach) elected to runoff the clock and let a freshman kicker win the game. Luck moved the ball up and down the field all night and Stanford had a high redzone scoring avg. If you have Luck on your team, use him instead of a freshman kicker. Bonehead move by Shaw in my opinion.

[SmootSmack]

Originally Posted by SFREDSKIN

I still can't believe that Shaw (Stanford coach) elected to runoff the clock and let a freshman kicker win the game. Luck moved the ball up and down the field all night and Stanford had a high redzone scoring avg. If you have Luck on your team, use him instead of a freshman kicker. Bonehead move by Shaw in my opinion.

Agreed

[CultBrennan59]

Not that this should be anything new, but ESPN just ran a piece on andrew Luck and Peyton Manning as to if they can co-exist, and interviewed a bunch of analysts, mostly former players, they all pretty much said the same thing which is you must draft luck, and keep manning.

[NM Redskin]

Originally Posted by CultBrennan59

Not that this should be anything new, but ESPN just ran a piece on andrew Luck and Peyton Manning as to if they can co-exist, and interviewed a bunch of analysts, mostly former players, they all pretty much said the same thing which is you must draft luck, and keep manning.

The Colts could try and trade down and get a Tannehill(or what "development QB they want) plus picks for the number one. That way Manning can play a year or two, while a guy like Tannehill sits. Not as much pressure on Tannehill to play as there would be with Luck. Use the picks for one last run with Peyton.

[Lotus]

Originally Posted by NM Redskin

The Colts could try and trade down and get a Tannehill(or what "development QB they want) plus picks for the number one. That way Manning can play a year or two, while a guy like Tannehill sits. Not as much pressure on Tannehill to play as there would be with Luck. Use the picks for one last run with Peyton.

True dat. But then again, Peyton may be just one hit from retirement. The Colts may not have a year or two to groom someone else.