I would agree if he was 6 foot but at 6'2" I don't think it is an issue. I think Luck is the superior QB but RGIII might go to a good team which will make all the difference of a QB's success. I have a feeling Indy will suck for a long time.
He's officially 6'2 3/8" and weighs 223. He isn't small at all. He's 1.5 shorter than Brady and an inch taller than Aaron Rodgers.
There are always exceptions. Big Ben is tall. So are Eli, Peyton, Brady, Rivers, Schaub, Flacco, etc.
I haven't really been following either QB much, but can someone explain to me what quality makes Luck better as a prospect than RGIII? From what I have seen. Griffin is -More athletic -Better arm -Similar intangibles (intelligence, leadership etc.) -Heisman winner What does Luck have over Griffin? Please don't tell me it's the pro style offense, people always say this as some sort of plus for a QB, but really any good qb he will learn how to play in a different offense, while a scrub is always going to be a scrub even if they do play in pro style offenses in college. Look at Matt Leinart, Brady Quinn, Clausen, all played in pro-style offenses in college.
RGIII is extremely impressive and definitely has the higher upside. Luck is the safer pick and franchises are more likely going to go with the safer pick when there is any debate. RGIII could be a better pro but he really established himself this past year while Luck has been highly regarded for a couple of years. It's hard to go wrong with either but teams will go for the safer bet when selecting potential franchise QB's of similar ability.
The OP is reaching so hard. Luck is a lock to be a stud QB. There's a reason he's as hyped as he is since Elway.
it's like comparing avocados to bananas. I think both will be really good rookies. As for this draft in general, i don't think it will be as good as last year's where almost every team got their impact player.
Do you watch football? RGIII is in a gimmick offense, he hasn't proven he can run a pro style offense.
matt leinart, brady quinn proved that they could run a pro-style offense in college and look where they are now. If that's the only reason Luck should be the #1 pick over griffin then that is one weak sauce reason.
the only reason rg3 is considered more of a risk and not consensus #1 is because he's black. there i said it. hes got more athleticism, better physical tools and obviously it requires some smarts to put up the numbers he did. all this talka bout him being risky is just dancing around the real issue
How about Luck has been a phenom over a longer period of time. He was incredible his last two freaking years. RGIII was hurt, then very good then one year of unbelievable. Luck is more of a sure thing. If you want to bring race into it, feel free to show you are r****ded.
really? so why all the black draft experts still pick Luck? bringing the race card to this, is stupid. Luck has been on the spotlight for 2 years, I dont even watch college, only NFL, and since last year every draft expert thinks he is the no.1 pick I cant say which one is better, because like I say I dont really watch college, maybe some bowl games, but thats it.
Or, maybe those so-called draft experts are too stubborn to change their decision after declaring him the #1 pick since last year. Like you said they didn't even know who RGIII was last year. Too bad that is irrational thinking, letting their proclamations in the past affect their decision making in the future. If you simply looked at this past season RGIII would be the #1 pick. I have not heard one good reason why Luck should be the #1 pick other than "welp, he was good last year and all the draft experts etc."
RGIII had Kendall Wright and Terrance Williams to work with at the WR positions this past year. Luck had a trio of TE's and below average to average receivers. If Luck had a legitimate top receiver to throw to, he would look more impressive. I'm guessing that also plays a part in the "expert's" evaluations?
Kendall Wright the guy with a 4.61 40 yd dash w/o height? Is that what you call a legitimate top receiver? Why dont you talk about the amazing offensive line Luck had at Stanford? If RGIII had a legitimate offensive line, he would look more impressive. A good QB has the ability to make his receivers look great, right? That's why Baylor's mediocre receivers (see Mr. 4.61) were made out to be great, but why can't Luck turn his Stanford receivers into being better than they are? That's even with a sick offensive line.
Half of Luck's interceptions were because his receivers couldn't grab catchable balls and were tipped to the other team. Not his fault his receivers can't catch properly. Wright is a 1st round talent regardless of his 40yd dash and size. He finds ways to get open on a regular basis and him running a below average 40yd dash doesn't change a whole lot, he's still going in the 1st round. Luck did have a great O-line but RGIII's wasn't bad either. The majority of Stanford's plays were running plays. I'm not saying Luck is outright better than Griffin. Don't think all the experts are either, it's all up in the air. Luck goes #1 in mock drafts because the risk is less and he the more conventional of the two, whether conventionalism should matter or not is debatable.
