Results 1 to 20 of 20

Thread: Franchise QBs, "Suck for Luck"

  1. #1
    Well, lookie here...
    YardRat's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    A hole in your wall.
    Posts
    70,856
    Thanks
    21,328
    Thanked 22,674 Times in 12,695 Posts
    Power to Give Rep
    199

    Franchise QBs, "Suck for Luck"

    Was it worth it?

    Did it produce expected results, or 'good enough' payback?
    YardRat Wall of Fame
    #56 DARRYL TALLEY
    #29 DERRICK BURROUGHS#22 FRED JACKSON #95 KYLE WILLIAMS

  2. Post thanked by:

    jimmifli (08-26-2019)

  3. #2
    My battery is low and it's getting dark. ParanoidAndroid's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Location
    St. John, USVI
    Posts
    11,686
    Thanks
    1,601
    Thanked 2,615 Times in 1,590 Posts
    Power to Give Rep
    43

    Re: Franchise QBs, "Suck for Luck"

    He was good. If not for the injuries, which were unpredictable, he could have been a perennial All-Pro. Throwing away a season, however, in the interest of getting one player is probably not good for the team's psyche.

  4. Post thanked by:

    Skooby (08-25-2019)

  5. #3
    Skoobasaurus-Rex Skooby's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    Naples FL
    Posts
    19,559
    Thanks
    11,638
    Thanked 4,515 Times in 3,203 Posts
    Power to Give Rep
    50

    Re: Franchise QBs, "Suck for Luck"

    Quote Originally Posted by ParanoidAndroid View Post
    He was good. If not for the injuries, which were unpredictable, he could have been a perennial All-Pro. Throwing away a season, however, in the interest of getting one player is probably not good for the team's psyche.
    Just ask Peyton Manning.

  6. #4
    Skoobasaurus-Rex Skooby's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    Naples FL
    Posts
    19,559
    Thanks
    11,638
    Thanked 4,515 Times in 3,203 Posts
    Power to Give Rep
    50

    Re: Franchise QBs, "Suck for Luck"

    Quote Originally Posted by YardRat View Post
    Was it worth it?

    Did it produce expected results, or 'good enough' payback?
    He failed to bring any championships & quit early, it wasn’t worth it.

  7. #5
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Posts
    4,675
    Thanks
    392
    Thanked 1,416 Times in 898 Posts
    Power to Give Rep
    20

    Re: Franchise QBs, "Suck for Luck"

    Luck took a garbage Colts team to the AFC Champ game, took that team on his back, he was the entire franchise. That team is awful without him, or rather Grigson constructed awful teams.

    Yeah, it’s ****ing worth it when the guy is a good as Luck, unfortunately the Colts did a **** job building around him, he got hit constantly, and ended up injured. Grigson is the real issue, he only drafted 3 OL before the 7th round, and they were all dog ****.

  8. Post thanked by:

    Cntrygal (08-25-2019),sahlensguy (08-25-2019)

  9. #6
    Registered User Scumbag College's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2002
    Location
    Top shelf where Mama hides the cookies
    Posts
    4,903
    Thanks
    618
    Thanked 1,278 Times in 710 Posts
    Power to Give Rep
    29

    Re: Franchise QBs, "Suck for Luck"

    I don't think that the Colts intentionally "Sucked for Luck" (sounds like a porno title) but it was just a product of not having Peyton Manning the entire year before Luck was drafted. The Colts picked Luck because they had the first pick and their 30+ year old Franchise QB missed an entire season with a neck injury that put his career in serious doubt...I think it would be GM malpractice to not take Luck in that set of circumstances.
    Last edited by Scumbag College; 08-25-2019 at 12:53 PM.
    Remember Kevin Everett in your thoughts.

    Vote Nader in 2008!

    http://www.votenader.org/

  10. Post thanked by:

    Mace (08-25-2019)

  11. #7
    Unreachable Douche
    Join Date
    Jul 2002
    Posts
    63,038
    Thanks
    6,509
    Thanked 3,597 Times in 2,235 Posts
    Power to Give Rep
    164

    Re: Franchise QBs, "Suck for Luck"

    Quote Originally Posted by YardRat View Post
    Was it worth it?

    Did it produce expected results, or 'good enough' payback?
    It was worth it at the time because they weren’t making the playoffs anyways.

    Who knew he’d be a quitter?

    Didn’t he go to school with Jonathan Martin?
    Draft a franchise QB that X-Era would be proud to put in his user name for the next 13 years.

  12. #8
    Unreachable Douche
    Join Date
    Jul 2002
    Posts
    63,038
    Thanks
    6,509
    Thanked 3,597 Times in 2,235 Posts
    Power to Give Rep
    164

    Re: Franchise QBs, "Suck for Luck"

    Quote Originally Posted by kingJofNYC View Post

    Yeah, it’s ****ing worth it when the guy is a good as Luck, unfortunately the Colts did a **** job building around him, he got hit constantly, and ended up injured. Grigson is the real issue, he only drafted 3 OL before the 7th round, and they were all dog ****.
    2018:

    Round 1: (6) Quentin Nelson G
    Round 2: (37) Braden Smith G

    2017

    Round 4: (137) Zach Banner T

    2016

    Round 1: (18) Ryan Kelly C
    Round 3: (82) Le’Raven Clark T
    Round 5: (155) Joe Haeg T
    ROUND 7248) Austin Blythe C

    2015

    Round 7: (255) Danezelle Good T

    2014

    Round 2: (59) Jack Mewhort T
    Round 7: (232) John Ulrick T

    2013

    Round 3: (86) Hugh Thornton G
    Round 4: (121) Khaled Holmes C

    They drafted 6 linemen in the top 3 rounds since Luck was drafted. In comparison the Bills have drafted 4, the Pats 4, Rams 5, Cowboys 4, the Packers 2 and 1 was this past year.

  13. Post thanked by:

    Oaf (08-26-2019)

  14. #9
    Acid Douching Asswipe OpIv37's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2002
    Location
    Baltimore, MD
    Posts
    89,791
    Thanks
    10,514
    Thanked 19,495 Times in 9,766 Posts
    Power to Give Rep
    251

    Re: Franchise QBs, "Suck for Luck"

    Think about it this way: remember all those years before Manning when the Colts were in our division? They never had a good QB. In 2012, the Bills, Dolphins and Broncos still hadn’t found QB’s to replace Kelly/Marino/Elway. NE only replaced Bledsoe cuz they got lucky with Brady in the 6th round. Teams like the Jets and Bears never had a good QB in my lifetime.

    Good QB’s are hard to come by.

    Manning goes down for the season and you don’t know if he’s ever gonna come back. You aren’t making the playoffs without Manning anyway and you know Luck is going to be the first one off the board in April.

    Short term, it sucks for the players and the fans to tank a season. Long term, it makes sense. They got several seasons of high level QB play and it’s hard to see how they would have found someone equal or better if they didn’t get Luck.

  15. Post thanked by:

    Haile SpikedLemonade (08-25-2019),Skooby (08-26-2019)

  16. #10
    Registered User Ed's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2002
    Location
    Denver, CO
    Posts
    8,007
    Thanks
    333
    Thanked 2,753 Times in 1,559 Posts
    Power to Give Rep
    36

    Re: Franchise QBs, "Suck for Luck"

    Quote Originally Posted by Scumbag College View Post
    I don't think that the Colts intentionally "Sucked for Luck" (sounds like a porno title) but it was just a product of not having Peyton Manning the entire year before Luck was drafted. The Colts picked Luck because they had the first pick and their 30+ year old Franchise QB missed an entire season with a neck injury that put his career in serious doubt...I think it would be GM malpractice to not take Luck in that set of circumstances.
    Yeah it definitely wasn't intentional. The Colts had no plans to suck for a new QB. They were so dependent on Manning to have any kind of success that they were completely unprepared to play a whole season without him. He masked how weak their roster was and their backup QBs were garbage.

    It still made sense for them to draft him at the time, but what really sucks now for Colts fans in retrospect is that they missed out on Manning's last four seasons in which he set records, went to two superbowls, and won one in his last season. It was really hard for Indy fans to say goodbye to Manning, but what made it palatable was the idea that they were getting one of the best QB prospects ever that had the chance to be really special for a long time. But instead they just get a few extra injury plagued seasons after Manning retires and no championships. That's probably the worst part for them in all of this, is that they didn't get to see Manning finish out his career in Indy where he was the greatest and most popular sports figure ever.

  17. Post thanked by:

    Mace (08-25-2019),sahlensguy (08-25-2019)

  18. #11
    Registered User feldspar's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Posts
    11,729
    Thanks
    2,292
    Thanked 6,944 Times in 4,017 Posts
    Power to Give Rep
    40

    Re: Franchise QBs, "Suck for Luck"

    The colts didn't suck for Luck.

  19. Post thanked by:

    Mace (08-25-2019)

  20. #12
    Registered User Swiper's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Location
    Sparing my telomeres
    Posts
    24,239
    Thanks
    11,185
    Thanked 10,187 Times in 6,858 Posts
    Power to Give Rep
    61

    Re: Franchise QBs, "Suck for Luck"

    Quote Originally Posted by YardRat View Post
    Was it worth it?

    Did it produce expected results, or 'good enough' payback?
    Shoulda been "Luck sucks." Would have been more accurate.
    Welcome to Buffalo Henri Jokiharju

  21. #13
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Posts
    1,106
    Thanks
    187
    Thanked 473 Times in 273 Posts
    Power to Give Rep
    15

    Re: Franchise QBs, "Suck for Luck"

    Quote Originally Posted by Scumbag College View Post
    I don't think that the Colts intentionally "Sucked for Luck" (sounds like a porno title) but it was just a product of not having Peyton Manning the entire year before Luck was drafted. The Colts picked Luck because they had the first pick and their 30+ year old Franchise QB missed an entire season with a neck injury that put his career in serious doubt...I think it would be GM malpractice to not take Luck in that set of circumstances.
    stop

    they tanked don't be naive

  22. #14
    Registered User CommissarSpartacus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2003
    Posts
    42,880
    Thanks
    9,953
    Thanked 20,553 Times in 12,622 Posts
    Power to Give Rep
    110

    Re: Franchise QBs, "Suck for Luck"

    The guy that sucked for Luck was Ryan Grigson, the douchebag behind Deflategate.

    Too bad the Colts already fired him.
    My tebya razdavim

  23. Post thanked by:

    Mace (08-25-2019)

  24. #15
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Posts
    4,675
    Thanks
    392
    Thanked 1,416 Times in 898 Posts
    Power to Give Rep
    20

    Re: Franchise QBs, "Suck for Luck"

    Quote Originally Posted by TacklingDummy View Post
    2018:

    Round 1: (6) Quentin Nelson G
    Round 2: (37) Braden Smith G

    2017

    Round 4: (137) Zach Banner T

    2016

    Round 1: (18) Ryan Kelly C
    Round 3: (82) Le’Raven Clark T
    Round 5: (155) Joe Haeg T
    ROUND 7248) Austin Blythe C

    2015

    Round 7: (255) Danezelle Good T

    2014

    Round 2: (59) Jack Mewhort T
    Round 7: (232) John Ulrick T

    2013

    Round 3: (86) Hugh Thornton G
    Round 4: (121) Khaled Holmes C

    They drafted 6 linemen in the top 3 rounds since Luck was drafted. In comparison the Bills have drafted 4, the Pats 4, Rams 5, Cowboys 4, the Packers 2 and 1 was this past year.
    I thought Grigson got ****canned after 2015, but they kept that idiot around. Regardless, he drafted **** OL the first 3 seasons Luck was in the league, Luck missed 9 games in 2015, and even though Grigson tried to patch it up in 2016, Luck got wrecked, played the entire year hurt and had to miss all of 2016. Grigson was a trash GM who tried to protect the best QB prospect in the last decade with 7th rounders. Only after Luck was in his 5th year did that moron get wise to the fact that Luck was getting blasted each and every game, and he had to protect him. Gross negligence.

  25. #16
    Registered User Bill Cody's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Posts
    8,639
    Thanks
    846
    Thanked 4,048 Times in 2,296 Posts
    Power to Give Rep
    35

    Re: Franchise QBs, "Suck for Luck"

    Guess they’ll really have to pipe in crowd noise now

  26. #17
    Peterman rocks and Pink knows it. Mace's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Location
    Buffalo
    Posts
    15,114
    Thanks
    17,693
    Thanked 12,755 Times in 6,975 Posts
    Power to Give Rep
    42

    Re: Franchise QBs, "Suck for Luck"

    Like others, I don't think they did it on purpose. It was all about Manning, long term backup was Curtis Painter, only one who was going to run that offense was Manning so it had to crash. They couldn't put an o-line together, couldn't put a good defense together to take pressure off. It's ironic they finally got a an o-line and defense together and Luck retires.

    Was it worth it taking Luck ? Manning went on to have 3 more high level years and one fading one. Those were the years Luck was feasting on a weak division, Manning could have done that too. Manning's last season was 2015, Super Bowl because there was a team around him. Indy went 8-8 in 2015, and wouldn't break .500 again until 2018. From 2015 to 2017. Luck would only play 22 games out of 48.

    You'd think, a competent organization would have built a team around the gem. They couldn't. Arguably, Manning and his quick release would have served them better, maybe even let Manning linger another year in his career. After the scare in 2012, you do like New England, get QB's comparable to your system. Like who ? Cousins in 2012, even Luck if you're ballsy enough to sit the no. 1 pick a few years behind Manning. He's still on his rookie contract, Manning fades and you have a fresh Luck in 2015 with a bunch more smarts and savvy....also in 2012, Foles ? 2013, slim pickings...Barkely ? Looks like he's a guy needs time and a system.....2014....Bridgewater, Carr, Garoppolo ?

    What if you trade the pick for Luck and build a real defense or manage to get the right OL ?

    I don't really see how it was worth it the way they did it. Should have been one way or another.

    I always think Luck is a good not great QB, might well have been great elsewhere, we'll never know. Was financially ok for him, not not football worth it for his career it seems.

    I think I feel bad for Indy and their fans because it finally looked like they have a good ol and defense. I feel bad for Luck because he can't enjoy it. Irsay made the bed though.
    I lost a bet with Pink and all I got was this dumb avatar that I've had awhile anyway.

  27. #18
    Retired - On Several Levels Night Train's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    The Last Depot
    Posts
    26,162
    Thanks
    5,598
    Thanked 9,852 Times in 5,011 Posts
    Power to Give Rep
    101

    Re: Franchise QBs, "Suck for Luck"

    I envision the Colts thinking he would have started far more games for his career, in relation to the $ paid out.

    Too many injuries and a short career.
    " When we were young, we were poor. But that didn't stop us from being miserable."


  28. #19
    Registered User Bill Cody's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Posts
    8,639
    Thanks
    846
    Thanked 4,048 Times in 2,296 Posts
    Power to Give Rep
    35

    Re: Franchise QBs, "Suck for Luck"

    Quote Originally Posted by Mace View Post
    Like others, I don't think they did it on purpose. It was all about Manning, long term backup was Curtis Painter, only one who was going to run that offense was Manning so it had to crash. They couldn't put an o-line together, couldn't put a good defense together to take pressure off. It's ironic they finally got a an o-line and defense together and Luck retires.

    Was it worth it taking Luck ? Manning went on to have 3 more high level years and one fading one. Those were the years Luck was feasting on a weak division, Manning could have done that too. Manning's last season was 2015, Super Bowl because there was a team around him. Indy went 8-8 in 2015, and wouldn't break .500 again until 2018. From 2015 to 2017. Luck would only play 22 games out of 48.

    You'd think, a competent organization would have built a team around the gem. They couldn't. Arguably, Manning and his quick release would have served them better, maybe even let Manning linger another year in his career. After the scare in 2012, you do like New England, get QB's comparable to your system. Like who ? Cousins in 2012, even Luck if you're ballsy enough to sit the no. 1 pick a few years behind Manning. He's still on his rookie contract, Manning fades and you have a fresh Luck in 2015 with a bunch more smarts and savvy....also in 2012, Foles ? 2013, slim pickings...Barkely ? Looks like he's a guy needs time and a system.....2014....Bridgewater, Carr, Garoppolo ?

    What if you trade the pick for Luck and build a real defense or manage to get the right OL ?

    I don't really see how it was worth it the way they did it. Should have been one way or another.

    I always think Luck is a good not great QB, might well have been great elsewhere, we'll never know. Was financially ok for him, not not football worth it for his career it seems.

    I think I feel bad for Indy and their fans because it finally looked like they have a good ol and defense. I feel bad for Luck because he can't enjoy it. Irsay made the bed though.
    It was also hard for the Colts to build around Manning because the guy needed to get every last dollar he could in salary. I would argue if Manning been as focused on winning as Brady he might have had several more rings

  29. #20
    Acid Douching Asswipe OpIv37's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2002
    Location
    Baltimore, MD
    Posts
    89,791
    Thanks
    10,514
    Thanked 19,495 Times in 9,766 Posts
    Power to Give Rep
    251

    Re: Franchise QBs, "Suck for Luck"

    Quote Originally Posted by Mace View Post
    Like others, I don't think they did it on purpose. It was all about Manning, long term backup was Curtis Painter, only one who was going to run that offense was Manning so it had to crash. They couldn't put an o-line together, couldn't put a good defense together to take pressure off. It's ironic they finally got a an o-line and defense together and Luck retires.

    Was it worth it taking Luck ? Manning went on to have 3 more high level years and one fading one. Those were the years Luck was feasting on a weak division, Manning could have done that too. Manning's last season was 2015, Super Bowl because there was a team around him. Indy went 8-8 in 2015, and wouldn't break .500 again until 2018. From 2015 to 2017. Luck would only play 22 games out of 48.

    You'd think, a competent organization would have built a team around the gem. They couldn't. Arguably, Manning and his quick release would have served them better, maybe even let Manning linger another year in his career. After the scare in 2012, you do like New England, get QB's comparable to your system. Like who ? Cousins in 2012, even Luck if you're ballsy enough to sit the no. 1 pick a few years behind Manning. He's still on his rookie contract, Manning fades and you have a fresh Luck in 2015 with a bunch more smarts and savvy....also in 2012, Foles ? 2013, slim pickings...Barkely ? Looks like he's a guy needs time and a system.....2014....Bridgewater, Carr, Garoppolo ?

    What if you trade the pick for Luck and build a real defense or manage to get the right OL ?

    I don't really see how it was worth it the way they did it. Should have been one way or another.

    I always think Luck is a good not great QB, might well have been great elsewhere, we'll never know. Was financially ok for him, not not football worth it for his career it seems.

    I think I feel bad for Indy and their fans because it finally looked like they have a good ol and defense. I feel bad for Luck because he can't enjoy it. Irsay made the bed though.
    This is true, but at the time they selected Luck, there was a strong possibility that Manning would never play again, period. With the benefit of hindsight, you could make an argument that ditching Manning for Luck didn't make the most sense, but they didn't know a) if Manning would play again, b) that Luck would have so many injuries and c) that Luck would retire young. So I can fully understand why they made the choice that they did at the time.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •