Phil Simms Out of Line With Luck Comments

Professional athletes are the center of attention both on and off the field. Even when their careers are over and they’re invited to be an analyst on ESPN, CBS, or other TV networks, they still find a way to make the headlines. In today’s world, it seems as if retired players are more focused on criticizing the current players rather than analyzing their game.

Lots of retired athletes are in an analyzing position today. Guys such as Magic Johnson and Tedy Bruschi are often seen at the TNT or Sportscenter desk talking basketball and football. Those guys, in my eyes, can say whatever they would like about current players because they enjoyed much success as well as had the stats to back up their talk. For instance, Magic blasted LeBron for his lack of rings and Bruschi openly ripped Chad Ochocinco after the first game the Patriots played this season. However, I don’t see a problem with that. Could they have gone about it in a different way? Yes, especially Bruschi. But the fact of the matter is, these guys have been around the game, they know what they’re talking about, and they’re credible sources when it comes to their sport.

Magic and Bruschi are special cases though. Magic’s a Hall of Famer and Bruschi has three Super Bowl rings. But it’s guys like Phil Simms (former New York Giants quarterback) that leave me scratching my head. Simms recently brought Stanford quarterback Andrew Luck’s potential into question when he openly stated that Luck “lacks arm strength.” Simms would then go on to say that Luck doesn’t make big-time NFL throws and doesn’t have what it takes to make it in the NFL.

So let me get this straight, Andrew Luck is a Heisman Hopeful, he’s led Stanford to an undefeated 8-0 record, is projected to be the first overall pick in the Draft, and you focus on his arm strength? Simms is focusing on the one part of Luck’s game that needs the most development. He failed to mention, however, Luck’s patience in the pocket, his field vision, his accuracy (71.9% completion), and the fact that he’s put Stanford atop the Pac 12. Personally, I find it kind of out of place for Simms to call out a college athlete like that. You’re not even a Hall of Famer and you’re bashing a kid who’s responsible for much of his team’s success this year.

Besides, very few, if any quarterbacks immediately come into the NFL and dominate. Matthew Stafford was two of the worst Detroit teams ever before finally presenting the city with a winning record thus far. On the flip side, Cam Newton has silenced his critics by wasting no time in making his presence felt. Every player’s position is different and everybody’s potential is different. Don’t count a kid out before he’s even finished his college career.

Does Andrew Luck have work to do before he’s ready for the NFL? Of course he does, everybody always has something they could improve on, even if they’re an NFL veteran. But for someone who’s of Phil Simms status to criticize one simple, and not even critical, aspect of Andrew Luck’s game is unfair in my eyes. Constructive criticism? I’m all for it. By all means, say what he needs to work on. But don’t go on air and say that he doesn’t have potential or that he won’t make it in the NFL because then it seems you’re just seeking attention.