Don't take this the wrong way. Putting Geno and Luck in the same posts over and over again as if there was some comparison just destroys your cred. Have a good one. By the way did you know Payton Manning sucked his rookie year. Look up the stats, its true.
I'll take that risk. Again, people are taking the comparison too literally. I'm not saying Geno will be a true elite QB, just making the point that his stats aren't out of line with where a good, developing quarterback's numbers should be.
Smith was drafted with the 39th pick Luck was drafted with the FIRST Smith is doing a terrific job for a second round pick starting as a rookie in the NFL. period
And I'm telling you that stats don't mean shit. You don't have enough data for them to have any meaning and you don't know how to interpret them if you did. Geno passes the eye test. He makes some great throws and he makes some bad reads and bad throws when his footwork is off. All correctable or not depending on his ability to grow and adjust. Dumstein got it right in his post above.
So, only an advanced number cruncher can speculate on the meaning of sports stats? That's silly. I agree, Geno does pass the "eye" test. Isn't it at least a small positive that the numbers don't seem to contradict that test?
Most people who use sports stats are simply expressing an opinion where the stats may or may not be relevant to their opinion. Speculate is exactly the right word. Stats are a fact but they aren't meaningful facts. You don't have a hypothesis that your testing with scientific data. You have an opinion where your picking and choosing limited stats to back up your BS. Everyone on this board does it but it's not relevant as a fact and it certainly doesn't give either credit or discredit to your opinion. Data doesn't make your opinion more credible. There may well be a dozen shitty NFL QB's that had similar stats to Geno and Andrew Luck at some point in their career. You didn't choose them you chose Andrew Luck to make your conclusion. All I'm saying is your choice is way more relevant to your opinion which is clearly highly biased and has nothing to do with stats at all.
That is nice and all but how does that get us a Superbowl win in my lifetime? While it says a lot for Geno that he can overachieve based upon his draft position, the NFL does not grade on a curve. All that matters is whether or not we can win with Geno. I hope we can but we can't just throw away another four years like we did with Sanchez if we do not see any progress or improvement as the season continues.
Okay. Should we all just refrain from discussing player stats until Nate Silver shows up to tell us what they really mean? Of course, I'm not talking "facts" here. We're all amateur scouts, amateur statisticians, taking what we see and speculating on what it means. That's a big part of what a forum like this is for. The standard you're holding me to reduces the great majority of the discussion on this board to "BS". Why do you even hang around here if you need such a high level of certainty to lend meaning to a discussion?
Most people on this board don't compare Andrew Luck to Geno Smith. Of course most of the discussion is BS and that's fine when people are being reasonable. You went off the reservation.
For the umpteenth time, you're taking the comparison too literally. I'm not saying they're going to be the same player, I'm saying the early, comparable stats suggest that Geno is in a fine place for a young, developing QB.
6 games in the kid has two game winning drives and has thrown numerous beautiful passes. Plenty of mistakes but overall, pretty good for a young man starting in the NFL first year. Add in limited snaps in TC and pre-season because of an injury and a lame QB competition the installation of a new O and a revolving door of WR, TE and backs and he looks pretty good. I've been pretty happy with what I've seen so far.
Really like what we've seen from Geno. He's poised, can make any throw, holds himself as well as his teammates accountable & says all the right things to the media.He also seems to learn from his mistakes which is huge. Upgrade his talent on the outside & let him develop. He has a chance to be a good one.
I'm sorry, but how the hell does Geno "pass the eye test"?? Hes looked absolutely lost in 4 out of 6 games? By the grace of god he won against Tampa on a boneheaded penalty, i'll grant you he was effective against the piss poor secondaries of Buffalo and ATL
I agree he does do some good things, and it appears he's gotten better at avoiding fumbles as well. I still need to see him get better inside of the pocket as well as his footwork - hopefully he continues to get better and the FO puts him in a position to actually succeed - I don't think he's passed the eye test just yet.
He's produced come-from-behind wins in three games and made some beautiful throws in the process. The raw talent and poise seem to be there.
To be fair, Joe Flacco threw 5 INTs against Buffalo. But there's no way Geno passed the eye test after 6 games... This doesn't mean he's passed the eye test, he lacks several fundamentals still.
read an interesting comment about Jets fans players have to be perfect every game, every series, every snap if they're not All-Pro or Pro Bowlers then we need to move on from them or replace them
Using that standard, few rookie QB's will ever pass an "eye test". A QB with ability, poise, refined mechanics, and the ability to read defenses is a finished product, not a guy whose future people speculate about.
