I think we probably would have won 10-11 games with Andrew Luck this year

It's funny that Clay is referencing Andrew Luck like he actually watched him this year, though. Because clearly he didn't.

I want to say about 50% of it is playcall, which is a huge hamstring to the offense. The Oakland loss was clear evidence of this. ULTRA conservative playcall in the first half crippled the team and lost the game. Every play was either a draw, crossing route or screen. Completely vanilla. When he started opening the playbook and spreading it out in the second half the offense moved the ball at will.

Would you quit with this shit. All I ****ing do with my weekends is watch football.

And we would have won 12 games, minimum, with Andrew Luck.

Luck + elite RB + elite defense = serious contender.

he had a 20 : 2 TD/INT ratio against Jax / Tenn / Was / NYG

take out the bottom dwellers on his slate (those 6 games) and he did this:

20 TD's
21 turnovers

he also commonly padded that #1 passing offense in games where they were blown out from the game (for example, Pittsburgh; New England; Denver)

But it's fine. Continue making excuses for his mediocre year by blaming his offensive line and his running game.

I'm closing in on coming to terms that Andrew Luck, Tom Brady and Aaron Rodgers are going to get excuses any time they play poorly. Two of those guys deserve the benefit of the doubt. One of them doesn't.

With Luck we easily beat Arizona and Oakland and probably San Francisco.

That's 12 wins right there.

Luck had 24 turnovers. There is no way to assume anything with Andrew Luck. Especially with the Chiefs offensive line and receivers.

Luck would have ran a similar gameplan to what Reid is running with Alex Smith.

Luck fumbled 13 times with the Colts this year. How many fumbles would he have had with our offensive line? At least 13.

So anything Luck adds to our team with a vertical passing attack ... his carelessness with the ball takes back away from it.

I see Luck as being about 1 - 1.5 wins better than Alex Smith at this point in his career.

Protecting the football is kind of important if you're a QB.

13 fumbles
8 fumbles lost

that's really, really alarming

Just ignore our vastly superior running game and defense, Hootie.

I am not ignoring that one bit.

NFL QB's can't turn the ball over 24 times.

Your entire premise is Luck would win 12+ games because he'd open up our vertical passing attack.

In order to do that, he'd have to have a solid pocket to throw from.

Indy fan is telling us Luck trusted his line too much this year even though they were incredibly porous.

What would change in KC?

Would Luck not trust our incredibly porous line?

Would he suddenly start protecting the ball when he got hit?

Would his lack of pocket not lead to a comparable amount of interceptions (16) he had in Indy?

Would our inferior receivers really be able to take the top off of the defense like T.Y. and Donte?

Grass is always greener, Clay. The problems Luck is having in Indy would be magnified in KC offensively.

Unless, of course, he relied on our ELITE running game and ELITE defense to win games ... you know ... like Alex Smith.

So yes, if Andrew Luck ran our offense like Alex Smith with his ability to throw the ball down the field more accurately and freely ...

I could see us winning about 10 or 11 games but Andrew Luck would throw for around 4000 yards (tops) and 25 TD's (tops) ... because, you know, the Chiefs would rely on Jamaal Charles and our vastly superior defense ... because, you know, if not Andrew Luck would be prone to 24 turnovers which, in turn, loses football games.

As evidenced by Luck and the Colts performance against Denver, New England, Dallas, Pittsburgh and Philly.

I could cherry pick stats to make ANYONE look bad.

At any rate, if you want to call leading the league in td passes, 3rd in yards, and 7th in qb rating "mediocre", than I don't know what to tell you. :shrug:

the traditional QB rating stat is meaningless

leading the league in TD passes and yards doesn't mean a whole lot more

I'm more confused why an elite QB like Andrew Luck is getting blown out against every other elite QB he faced (Manning, Brady, Roethlisberger, Romo)?

Oh I know.

Because Luck isn't there yet. He's just not. But I realize his name is Andrew Luck so he's amazing.

Andrew Luck turns the ball over because the defense and lack of running game put more pressure on him. You're acting like he's Jake Plummer and just does stupid things constantly.

With that pressure relieved, his turnovers would be much lower.

So Clay

with our line and our receivers

hypothetically

how many sacks would Luck have taken? how many turnovers (INT + fumbles)? how many passing yards? how many TD's?

What would your hypothetical numbers be for Andrew Luck as the Chiefs QB for this 2014 squad?

I'd say about 4000 yards, 30 TD, 15 total turnovers.

Would do wonderful things with Bowe and Kelce.

Jamaal Charles takes a TREMENDOUS amount of pressure off of any qb. So does a defense that's better than 23rd in the league. Those two factors can't be overstated.

A question for you, Hootie-where do you think the Colts would be with Alex Smith? Certainly not in the playoffs, not in my opinion.

The Texans finished 9-7, 2 games behind Indy. Without Luck, there's no way we win the division.