Andrew Luck seems to be getting most of the rookie quarterback hype these days, but after the 59-24 romp in New England we were reminded that Luck is still a rookie. That game overall serves as a snapshot of his season so far. A few weeks ago, an NFL.com writer posted an article making the claim that Luck deserves to be mentioned among possible MVP candidates. That's counting your chickens before they hatch. While he has a practically bare bones and rebuilding Colts team at 6-4, he belongs nowhere near the MVP debate. The rookie of the year conversation is another matter.
Luck has been solid, but inconsistent. He almost seems the perfect fit for the Seattle Seahawks as he plays much better at home than on the road (Seattle has not finished with a .500 road record since 2006 when they went 4-4 on the road). The game against the Patriots showed two Andrew Lucks. In the first half, barring a pick six early, he played pretty well. He had the Colts down by one touchdown going into the half and had actually moved the ball quite well. In the second half, he and the Colts fell apart. One can look at Luck's performances at home and compare them to his performances on the road to find a similar theme.
First of all, his road record is a little inflated since he has played a relatively soft schedule. That said, he is 2-3 on the road versus 4-1 at home. But it's more than just wins and losses. It's how he does it. At home, he looks like a veteran field general, completing 60% of his passes and throwing 8 touchdowns to just 2 interceptions. Additionally, he has rushed for 3 TDs at home and only lost 1 fumble. All in all, he's accounted for 11 TDs to just 3 turnovers at home with an average passer rating of 88.9. That's pretty darn good.
Compare those numbers to his numbers on the road though. Away from the dome, he has completed 56% of his passes (a few points higher than Mark Sanchez's completion percentage on the year). He has also thrown only 4 touchdowns while throwing 10 interceptions. Additionally, he has rushed for 2 touchdowns and lost 4 fumbles. Thus, on the road, he accounted for 6 TDs but 12 INTs with an average passer rating of 67.4. Those numbers aren't good.
It also seems the hype around Andrew Luck's Colts might be a little inflated. In 10 games, he has played against 4 opponents with winning records, going 2-2 (not surprisingly, the two wins against Green Bay and Minnesota were at home while the two losses against Chicago and New England were on the road). What's even more interesting about his home versus away performances is that the schedule has been a little tougher at home than on the road. Thus far, opponents he's faced at home are a combined 28-32 (.466) while the opponents on the road are a combined 17-23 (.425). Granted it's not a huge difference, but he has faced tougher competition at home than on the road. So why can't he pull off the same performances on the road?
This inconsistency leads me to lean toward another rookie quarterback who has been garnering hype this season: Robert Griffin III. As it stands right now, RGIII has played better and more consistently than any other rookie this season - and this season has been full of solid rookie play. Sure, the first thing people will note is that Griffin is two games under .500 (4-6) while Luck sits two games above (6-4). When you crunch Griffin's numbers, he has been incredibly consistent.
Let's break Griffin down the same way as Luck. At home, Griffin has completed 70% of his passes, throwing for 6 touchdowns and just 1 interception. He has also rushed for 3 touchdowns and lost only 1 fumble. His passer rating at home? 100.6! Now shift over to his road stats. This is where Luck's numbers drop considerably, but Griffin seems to stay the same. Away from Washington, he has completed 66% of his passes, throwing for 6 touchdowns and 2 interceptions. He has also rushed for 3 touchdowns and lost 1 fumble, and his passer rating on the road is 102.1! How about that for consistency?
Furthering his case is the fact that Griffin takes substantially better care of the ball than Luck. Luck has thrown for 12 touchdowns and 12 interceptions while also rushing for 5 touchdowns and 5 lost fumbles. Yes, Luck turns the ball over once for every touchdown he accounts for (17 touchdowns to 17 turnovers). Meanwhile, Griffin has also thrown 12 touchdowns, but only 3 interceptions. He has also rushed for 6 touchdowns and lost just 2 fumbles. All in all, Griffin accounts for 18 touchdowns (1 more than Luck) but only 5 turnovers (12 fewer than Luck).
The yardage thing is kind of a moot point. Differences in style of play are relevant here as Luck has thrown for 2,965 yards to Griffin's 2,193. It is a substantial difference until you look at the rushing yardage too, in which Griffin has rushed for 613 yards to Luck's 163. The difference in total yardage is 322 yards. It's not that big of a gap. Both quarterbacks have strong arms and are mobile, but Luck is not expected to make the same kind of plays with his legs. Washington runs a large number of intentional rushing plays for Griffin.
Another reason to give the edge to Griffin is that he has played so consistently against superior competition. His very first game was in the Superdome against future Hall of Famer (and chronic record breaker) Drew Brees. The Redskins' schedule has been tough. They've played 7 teams with a .500 or better record. The Saints, Bengals, Bucs, Falcons, Vikings, Giants, and Steelers are all battling for a playoff spot. That's nearly twice the number of .500 or above teams the Colts have faced. So sure, looking at the record, it makes sense that the Redskins would be 4-6 while the Colts are 6-4. And yeah, Griffin is 3-5 against those teams compared to Luck's 2-2, but Griffen has never shown any real drop in play.
In fact, Griffin has completed less than 60% of his passes in just two of those games! Meanwhile, Peyton Manning's successor has completed MORE than 60% of his passes four times. He's completed 50% or less in two games (and completed 51.1% in another). Those percentages are very reminiscent of a certain quarterback from the Big Apple on the hot seat...
Additionally, some might even argue that the Colts actually are a better all around
team than the Redskins. Yes, the Colts were pretty awful last season,
but the Redskins have been bad for a long time now. With a few
occasional blips into the post season, they have rarely been able to see
success, and they haven't exactly been the best at evaluating
personnel. While the Colts did some major remodeling in the offseason,
their team is still a similar structure - get a solid quarterback in
there, and you'll be all right. The team went 2-14 last year without
Peyton Manning, but if they had had a solid quarterback, they
could have been fine. You're not going to win many games - no matter who
you have around - if your quarterbacks are Curtis Painter or Dan
Orlovsky. Credit to Colts management for trying to build with Luck
instead of sticking Luck in there; they would have been fine if they had
gone that route too though. Still, both Griffin and Luck have had to do more with less. Luck has the Colts 4th in yards, but 21st in points. Griffin has the historically woeful Redskins offense 8th in yards and 10th in points.
Of course Andrew Luck has a bright future ahead of him. It's too early to call him the second coming of Peyton Manning, but he's shown many positive signs. He's a rookie and one imagines he'll only get better with time. He very well could lead the Colts back to AFC dominance like Manning before him, but right now everyone needs to scale down expectations a little bit. Luck will be lucky to make the playoffs (that wasn't meant as a pun), and he should be nowhere near the MVP talk.
Griffin shouldn't be near the MVP talk either, of course. It's impressive he has been able to play so well and so consistently despite being a Washington Redskins quarterback and with the beating he has taken - already suffering a rib injury and a concussion. It makes his long term future seem shaky. A lot of people like to compare him to Michael Vick (Vick was nowhere near as accurate and he relied heavily on his legs), but I tend to look at him more like Donovan McNabb (which reminds me even though I'm doing it right now - why do we only compare black quarterbacks to other black quarterbacks?) Either way, it has to make you a little nervous if you're investing in Griffin for the long term. Whether he is more like Vick or McNabb, or even more like a Ben Roethlisberger or Tony Romo type mobile quarterback, season impacting injuries seem looming on the horizon. Still, Griffin seems to play a little bit different than all of those guys.
I still think Luck will be better in the long term success of the Colts than Griffin for the Redskins, but so far this year, Griffin is the hands down Rookie of the Year.
No comments:
Post a Comment