Andrew Luck will improve, and very few people will notice.

One way Andrew Luck is special is his ability to throw
through (or after) a hit.  Big Ben was better; before injuries.

In all team sports there is rarely as strong a correlation between the play of one individual and the success of
a team as that between a quarterback and his team.  The goalie in hokey and pitcher in baseball may be the only other positions with comparable impact on a game.  When Peyton Manning lost to the Ravens in a game where he played well enough to win he was blamed, told that he was not clutch, and many argued that Tim Tebo at least won a playoff game.  They are ignoring the fact that if not for a couple of plays that were unlucky for the Broncos they would have won, and that by his regular season dominance Peyton 'won' a bye week for them, effectively the same as a playoff win.  Commentators look at Peytons overall playoff record of 9-11 and fail to account for the inferior teams he carried into the playoffs (there was a reason the colts only won two games when he was injured) and that he often lost to superior teams (or to a team that was famously cheating).  Wins are an important measurement for a quarterbacks ability but in a vacuum it leads to faulty conclusions.  By that measure a quarterbacks best years will always be those with the most superior supporting cast and ignore the even more impressive years when he carries a deeply flawed team.  As I discussed with Alex Smith and Mark Sanchez an average quarterback can have success on a stacked team, but only a great quarterback can have success on a flawed team, even if that leads to disappointing playoff failures.

Remember when he was the exciting young gun?

Outside the hashes does a great job explaining this phenomenon and how Manning was a superior quarterback caring a mediocre team than Brady was while winning championships with a fantastic supporting cast.

Andrew Luck and the Colts will soon face those similar false conclusions, except the false comparisons will be between a 2012 that was a revelation and a 2013 that will be a grind.

I am not saying that Luck of 2013 will have an inferior supporting cast to 2012.  With another good draft and the development of their young players they should be even more talented.  Many talking heads will use this to support the 'sophomore slump' narrative.

The defense should be better in 2013 after drafting 3 defenders and signing several free agents. Improving the defense was a clearly a priority for the Colts, but like all NFL off season moves we will have to wait until the games matter to see if they work.  Compared to the 7th worst defense in 2012 (by yards, they were the 12th worst by points allowed) it would be difficult for the Colts to regress defensively.

Luck will improve statistically:  He will throw less than 18 interceptions in a system imported from Stanford (where Luck played) with many shorter and safer receiver/tight end routs.  Luck will complete a higher percentage of his throws as his receivers and protection improve (they also drafted two offensive linemen).

It seems counter-intuitive for the quarterback (and thus the offence) and the defense to improve but to expect a regression.  The Colts were fortunate to win 11 games last season and their good fortune will likely fade.  They were outscored by over 30 points in the regular season, the only 11 win team to ever be outscored that badly.  They were able to do this largely by crushing a paper soft schedule by going 7-2 against some of the 10 worst teams of 2012 (Yes, 9 of their 16 games against bottom 10 teams, but that includes splitting games with the 2 win Jaguars and two victories against the 6 win Titans).  They only went 4-3 against all other competition (which resembles a much more plausible 9-7 projected record).  It is nearly impossible to predict the strength of schedule (the 2012 Broncos were projected to face one of the leagues most difficult schedules based on 2011 rankings, but as several 'tough' opponents faltered they faced a relatively easy path to the playoffs), but it is unlikely that the Colts will have such an easy path in 2013.

Additionally, thanks largely to Lucks composure, the colts went 9-1 in games decided by 7 points or less, an unheard of number.  Most teams win around 50% of those games over time, with elite quarterbacks like Brady, Rodgers, or Peyton Manning winning slightly more.  Luck may become one of those quarterbacks, but it is unlikely that he can sustain that pace (or even have 10 such games next year to swing in his favor).

The evil Bill Barnwell does a fantastic job of describing how the Colts were lucky last season.  I stole much of my previous two paragraphs from his work.  Sorry Bill, please do not sue me.

The Prediction:  The Colts will finish somewhere near 8-8 and miss the playoffs, with a better defensive ranking, turnover margin, and completion percentage.  The media will say that Luck has lost the poise he had in close games his rookie year, and that he was the wrong choice as the number 1 overall pick over Wilson and Griffin.
I am wrong if:  I can fail in two directions.  If the Colts make the playoffs again I am wrong, but if Luck fails to improve in completion percentage and in limiting interceptions I am also wrong.  If the Colts defense fails to improve I will not count it against this prediction, this is more about the undo blame put on quarterbacks.

It is better to be Lucky than good (I held off on that joke for
the entire column).  Next year Luck will be good, but he will
need more luck to make the playoffs again.