(02-05-2020, 04:47 PM)Upper Wrote: Other than the shoulder shortened season Luck's INT%+ was 99 98 118 99 and 100. Other than 2013 where he was excellent at avoiding INTs he was virtually exactly league average. Just another misconception.

So... he was average?
Thanks for adding to my point?

But seriously... WHEN you throw the INT matters as much (or more) than the total number or % of throws that end in INTs.
Like... down by 4 driving with less than 2 minutes in the game (Bortles and Garrard esque) as opposed to early in a game when your team can bounce back from it.
His INTs were almost always game changers in bad ways. Or at least momentum swingers.

Anywho... he was just aiight as far as #1 overall picks go.
And his career was rather short for a #1 overall pick. (Early retirement was a choice, not like he had nerve damage or career ending injury)
And his end results (and yes, it's a team game so average roster around him matters too) were just aiight. Manning never had elite OLs or run game either. He made them better with his play as QB, which is what Luck was supposed to do.

So "Luck is the next best thing to hit QBs since [insert already elite QB name here]" ended up being an oversell.
He wasn't. He was just a good QB. The clots went from a Manning led perennial 11 win team, to tanking to a 1 win season, to getting a Luck led 11 win team in 2 seasons (the roster wasn't THAT bad obviously)
The clots got 2 SB appearances with Manning and 1 ring and a decade of 10 plus wins.
They got 4 10 plus win seasons, 0 SB appearances and 0 rings, in arguably a worse AFCS than the one Manning played in.

---