Andrew Luck: Outstanding Start Confirms How Great Colts Rookie Will Be
Actually, all he needed was his first pass to do the trick.
While it was hardly a deep strike that cut through the defense—it was actually a three-yard dump-off to Brown, which he turned into a huge play by zigzagging through the defense to reach the end zone—it still was quite an impressive beginning to what should be a famed career.
It even paralleled the start of another very famous Colts QB, as ESPN's Trey Wingo pointed out on Twitter:
so, that was a nice start for Andrew Luck. first pass is a 63 yd TD, just like Peyton in 1998. lightning does strike twice— trey wingo (@wingoz) Aug. 12, 2012
He worked through his reads well, was very accurate and seemed to be in total command of his team, just like Peyton Manning was when he ran the squad.
Luck literately seemed to do no wrong in his debut on Sunday, and Colts fans can expect to see more of the same from him during his rookie year.
He'll live up to expectations, too—Luck is just a one-of-a-kind player.
He has the arm strength, the athleticism, the smarts and the field presence to dominate in the NFL, and all of those traits were on display Sunday, Aug. 12.
Many will say, "It's just the preseason, slow down," but Luck is that good.
There's a reason he was the consensus No. 1 overall pick in a draft chock full of talent. More impressively, Luck was so good that he convinced the Colts that they could afford to part with Manning.
And remember, that's Peyton Manning, perhaps the best quarterback of all time.
Luck, isn't quite there yet, but he'll have a great rookie season for Indianapolis. The team doesn't quite have the talent around him to challenge for the playoffs, but Luck will ensure that they're nowhere close to the top of the draft again.
It was just one preseason game, but when fans look back on Luck's career years from now, the game will really be labeled as the beginning of his legend.
What is the duplicate article?
Why is this article offensive?
Where is this article plagiarized from?
Why is this article poorly edited?