In that same article, I did a comparison between who I thought was the best quarterback in the 2012 draft and Andrew Luck. My choice, Kellen Moore, went undrafted and Andrew Luck was the 1st overall selection. Do you see the similarity here? Much like Aaron Rogers, Tom Brady, Tony Romo etc, Moore was acquired by a team with a veteran QB already in place. This means it may be a while before he gets his shot. Of course, if the Lions don’t start winning some games, Moore’s chance may come sooner rather than later.
Let’s take a look at Kellen Moore’s college stats:
Now, let’s take a look at Andrew Luck’s:
Taking all of this in to consideration I have to ask: why is Luck who has less experience (3 yrear starter to 4 year starter), a lower career passer rating, (169.14 – 161.27), lower completion percentage (69.78 – 66.1), higher INT percentage (142 TD’s and 28 picks to 82 TD’s and22 picks), less wins (50-31), and only 1 championship win as the starter in 2 appearances compared to 3 wins in 4 appearances, projected 1st over all when the guy who is clearly the better quarterback in all categories was projected to be selected in 5th to 6th round? The only thing I can see is the knock on his size, or maybe the media just doesn’t like him much. Kellen Moore has all the traits you want in an NFL QB, so I’ll tell ya what:
“They can have their 1st overall pick, I’ll take my next Tom Brady or a Tony Romo in a later round.”
What I find amusing is the fans who believe that all of the Indianapolis Colts recent success is a result of drafting a 1st round QB. I guess having the 1st overall pick or the hiring of a new general manager who cleaned house, made a bunch of cuts, and then negotiated important free agency transactions had nothing to do with it?
Ok, I have a few questions for you. Would you rather have a QB who is mobile and has the ability to extend plays, or a pocket passer (Luck) who is immediately rendered ineffective when put under pressure by an effective pass-rush? Would you rather have a QB with a rocket arm (Luck) that can throw the ball a mile, or a QB who is extremely accurate? Would you rather have a QB who has the prototypical size (Luck) or a QB with a low interception percentage? Did you choose Luck or the other option? As I predicted prior to the draft, Andrew Luck was the wrong choice. I still believe Moore will be the better QB.
Lets take a look at how Luck has done so far:
2012: 1st overall Andrew Luck. In 14 starts, he has completed 308 of 564 passes (54.6%), for 3,978 yards, 20 touchdowns, and 18 interceptions (leads the NFL); he has also coughed up 5 fumbles. Luck’s passer rating is 75.5. Yes sports fans, Andrew Luck has more turnovers than passing touchdowns and one of the lowest completion percentages in the NFL! Is that the reason the Colts are winning? Is this what you would expect from the 1st overall pick in the draft?
2003: Undrafted Tony Romo. In 90 career starts, he has completed 2,051 of 3,160 passes (64.9%) for 25,103 yards, 171 touchdowns and only 88 interceptions. Romo has a career passer rating of 95.7; his passer rating for the 2012 season is 90.2 (which will be higher by the end of the year). As you can see, Tony Romo has about twice as many touchdowns as interceptions.
In comparison to other Dallas Cowboys QB’s, Romo currently has the highest QB rating, lowest interception percentage, highest completion percentage, most touchdown passes, the most 4th quarter comebacks, and is the only QB in franchise history to throw for over 4,000 yards in a single season (he has done it 4 times). Whether you like it, or want to admit it, Tony Romo is hands down the best QB in the history of the Dallas Cowboys.
What I can’t seem to figure out is why every time I turn on the TV all the talking heads in the media carry on as if Andrew Luck is already an elite QB, yet they continue to cut up Tony Romo. Do these guys watch the games? Luck is far from mobile: his 37 sacks illustrate his inability to evade pass-rushers because he has a better offensive line than Tony Romo’s current line with the Dallas Cowboys.
Andrew Luck isn’t an efficient passer. He has passer rating of 75.5, Tony Romo has a career rating of 95.7 and a rating of 90.2 in 2012. Luck isn’t a very accurate QB. His completion percentage is 54.6; Romo has completed 64.9 per cent of his passing attempts in his career, and he has a completion percentage of 66.7 in 2012. The question now becomes:
Why does the media act like Andrew Luck is a super star and continue to bash Tony Romo?
The bottom line is: the media attacks Dallas Cowboys Tony Romo because he is better than the “sure fire’ quarterbacks drafted in the 1st round. (Remember? They all said Romo wouldn’t make it).
How would it look if they took shots at their own poster boys?
Exactly. So, the medias’ so called experts need a scapegoat to keep the focus off of their shortcomings (and mistakes) in prognosticating which college QB’s will be able to succeed in the NFL. My point is: after looking at all of the top ranked college quarterbacks who were drafted in the 1st round and how they have performed in the NFL, Dallas Cowboys fans were stupid to want to give up Tony Romo and sacrifice the teams future draft picks to trade up and get Andrew Luck. (You know who you are!) How could that have made any sense?
My next question is: how much are NFL teams paying all of these experts who grade college prospects? Why do I ask that? I’ll tell you why: the current top 3 quarterbacks in the entire NFL are Drew Brees (2nd round pick), Tom Brady (6th round pick), and Tony Romo (undrafted). Maybe some of these NFL owners need to reconsider who is in charge of their 1st round draft pick because this neophyte from Florida has done a better job at evaluating quarterbacks than their highly paid experts.
To the fans who still think that the Colts improved so much by simply adding a 1st round QB, I have only one thing to say:
Andrew “Lucked” In To A Good Situation!
If you would like to receive email notifications when my articles get published Click Here.