COLTS 101

Yesterday, Colts 101 dismantled the comparisons between 1998 and this season. Contrary to the surface narrative, the Indianapolis Colts' situation with Andrew Luck is not a mirror image of Peyton Manning and 1998. While Manning had veteran leadership around him in Bill Polian and Jim Mora, Luck would be joining a team with a front office and head coach who are also rookies. 

Today, we'll take a look at history. If the past offers any instruction at all, it's crystal clear that it is in Luck's and the Colts' best interests for him to sit and learn at the beginning of his career.

Since 1983, 13 quarterbacks have been selected number one overall in the NFL draft. Only three of those 13 played in all of their team's 16 games their during their rookie season: Peyton Manning, Sam Bradford and Cam Newton. Bradford's Rams had the best record of that group, going 7-9. If the Colts are going to start Andrew Luck from the outset, they are sending a message loud and clear to their fan base: screw 2012. 

In the NFL, where "worst to first" is almost commonplace because of a system rigged for parity, asking Colts fans to endure 2-14 followed by a "rebuilding" year, isn't good business. It's simply not acceptable for a franchise to enter any season telling its fans "We're going to suck this season, but be patient. We'll be really good soon." That doesn't fly in Cincinnati or Buffalo where playoff appearances have been few and far between, and it certainly won't be well-received in Indianapolis where the playoffs are the accepted norm. It REALLY won't be received well if the Colts are picking inside the top 5 again in 2013 after Peyton Manning has taken another team to the playoffs or beyond.

There's a reason why none of the teams who started rookie quarterbacks chosen number one overall did poorly. It's the same reason they had the number one overall pick to begin with: they weren't very good anywhere. Only three rookie quarterbacks have started their team's 16 games and made the playoffs: Joe Flacco, Matt Ryan and Andy Dalton, none first picks overall. Not coincidentally, all three had 1000 yard rushers and 1000 yard receivers lining up with them and played behind solid offensive lines with legitimate defenses. Of those three, only Ryan's Falcons had a defense not in the top 10 in the NFL and he had a 1700 yard rusher in Michael Turner and a 1300 yard receiver in Roddy White. In other words, it wasn't up to any of those three to win. Even Manning, although he didn't post a winning season, had future Hall of Famers Marshall Faulk and Marvin Harrison lining up with him. For all the hype over Cam Newton's performance this season, he had 1600 rushing yards besides him in his backfield and 1400 yards from future Hall of Famer Steve Smith. Will Luck have that luxury?

Looking further into those numbers, not only do we see rookie quarterbacks not succeed their first year with no talent around them, we see "bust" written all over those who are expected to be "saviors" for their franchises. 

In 1987, Heisman Trophy winner Vinny Testaverde was brought in to turn around the Buccaneers. In 1999, Tim Couch was going to guide the new Cleveland Browns to glory. Same with David Carr, drafted by the Houston Texans in 2002. None of these three quarterbacks ended up living up anywhere close to their potential. What else did they have in common? None them had either a 1000 yard rusher or 1000 yard receiver on their team. That means they were the focal point of opposing defenses and, playing behind suspect offensive lines, they took far too many hits far too soon. Carr was sacked 249 times in five seasons in Houston.

Meanwhile, the list of quarterbacks who sat and learned, at least for part of a season, is impressive. John Elway sat behind Steve DeBerg, Dan Marino sat behind David Woodley (who had taken the Dolphins to the Super Bowl the previous season). More recently, Carson Palmer was served well sitting behind the veteran Jon Kitna and so was this year's Super Bowl winner, Eli Manning, by his time behind future Hall of Famer Kurt Warner. See the pattern?

Some in the local and national media have asserted that it's in the Colts' best interest to "move on" and draft Andrew Luck. Do they drug test sports writers? Given the history of rookie quarterbacks, the Colts would be foolish to throw Andrew Luck to the wolves his rookie season.

Besides the aforementioned rookie GM and rookie coach, how much better will the Colts offensive line be next season? Is Joe Addai or Donald Brown going to rush for 1000 yards behind that line? It's presumed Reggie Wayne will be elsewhere. Is Pierre Garcon more likely to be Steve Smith/AJ Green, or is he more likely to put up Jabar Gaffney type numbers with Luck at the helm? Chuck Pagano's presence offers promise for the defense, but are they going to be a top 10 unit next year? And who are the Colts counting on to play the role of Steve DeBerg (who also mentored Joe Montana)? Curtis Painter?

If the Colts want to risk their "franchise" quarterback for the next decade, then by all means, he should be thrown out there to "fight through it." Given the team's cap situation, even without Manning, there's not much hope of this team getting appreciably better at all those positions in one season. That virtually guarantees a 2012 that will look a whole lot like 2011 and puts Luck's body and psyche at a tremendous risk. And this is the "best" course of action?

No, history shows that if the Colts plan on going with Andrew Luck as their starter for 2012, he's more likely to be the next David Carr than the next Peyton Manning.

Related Videos

Related posts

• Indianapolis Colts Better Served Sitting Andrew Luck
• Is Andrew Luck Willing to Sit in Indy or Not?
• Archie Manning: Peyton and Luck as Teammates not a Good Idea