Jump to content
Indianapolis Colts
Indianapolis Colts Fan Forum

Irsay says he sees Luck's new deal coming next offseason


Superman

Recommended Posts

http://www.nfl.com/news/story/0ap3000000480981/article/andrew-luck-colts-unlikely-to-reach-deal-until-2016

 

"Andrew still has two years left, and whatever our talks are between Andrew and his people will remain confidential," Irsay said, per ESPN. " ... I really think most likely the scenario is going into the offseason next year is when that second contract will come up. That's the vision I have right now."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

no reason to extend him now when we can still use his fifth year option. we should be more focused in resigning AC ty dwayne and coby who are all FA at the end of the year. we cant afford to lose them

 

Multi-tasking is an important trait for NFL staff to have. They can re-sign all those guys if they want (although the cash might be prohibitive).

 

The argument for extending him now is to have more flexibility sooner in terms of restructuring and extending the next contract. But that's putting the cart before the horse. The plan seems to be to take full advantage of the four, low cost years, then use the leverage of the fifth year option (and potential franchise tag for a sixth year) to do a long term deal prior to 2016. I can't fault that plan. It keeps Luck's price tag as low as possible in 2015.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Multi-tasking is an important trait for NFL staff to have. They can re-sign all those guys if they want (although the cash might be prohibitive).

 

The argument for extending him now is to have more flexibility sooner in terms of restructuring and extending the next contract. But that's putting the cart before the horse. The plan seems to be to take full advantage of the four, low cost years, then use the leverage of the fifth year option (and potential franchise tag for a sixth year) to do a long term deal prior to 2016. I can't fault that plan. It keeps Luck's price tag as low as possible in 2015.

 

I agree with the idea of keeping luck's contract low cost as long as possible which is why Id prefer to visit this issue after his fifth year option and focus on players that will become free agents. plus franchising luck makes no sense. we'd be paying him basically a one year double digit contract in that situation 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Multi-tasking is an important trait for NFL staff to have. They can re-sign all those guys if they want (although the cash might be prohibitive).

 

The argument for extending him now is to have more flexibility sooner in terms of restructuring and extending the next contract. But that's putting the cart before the horse. The plan seems to be to take full advantage of the four, low cost years, then use the leverage of the fifth year option (and potential franchise tag for a sixth year) to do a long term deal prior to 2016. I can't fault that plan. It keeps Luck's price tag as low as possible in 2015.

Not questioning but curious.....

 

The designated franchise player will have his one year salary guaranteed if he elects to play for the team that designated him with the franchise tag and if he does not negotiate a contract with another team. How many other teams do you think would be willing to beat our offer for Andrew under a franchise tag? Half? 3/4's? Doesn't that kind of defeat the purpose of a franchise tag?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I agree with the idea of keeping luck's contract low cost as long as possible which is why Id prefer to visit this issue after his fifth year option and focus on players that will become free agents. plus franchising luck makes no sense. we'd be paying him basically a one year double digit contract in that situation 

 

Irsay's comments suggest they'll do Luck's new deal before the fifth year. He said next offseason. 

 

Also, Luck's franchise tag -- if it came to that -- would be around $20m for one year. I expect his new contract to average at least $20m/year. I doubt it comes to that, of course; I think they'll do the new deal prior to 2016. But it's still leverage, if necessary.

 

The other angle for doing Luck's new deal sooner is to get his deal done before the market gets reset. We've already seen Roethlisberger become the second highest paid player. Wilson should be up soon. Cam Newton should get a monster deal. If there was a chance of getting a slight discount on Luck's deal, it would be to do it now, before everyone else sets new precedents.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Not questioning but curious.....

 

The designated franchise player will have his one year salary guaranteed if he elects to play for the team that designated him with the franchise tag and if he does not negotiate a contract with another team. How many other teams do you think would be willing to beat our offer for Andrew under a franchise tag? Half? 3/4's? Doesn't that kind of defeat the purpose of a franchise tag?

 

Only with a non-exclusive franchise tag or transition tag can another team negotiate with your tagged player. If it came down to it, I'm 100% certain the Colts would use the exclusive franchise tag on Luck, in which case no one else could negotiate with him.

 

The Dolphins used the transition tag on Charles Clay. That allowed other teams to negotiate with Clay, and the Dolphins received no compensation when he left.

 

The Chiefs used the non-exclusive tag on Justin Houston. If another team signs him and the Chiefs don't match, they'll receive two first rounders for him.

 

The Cowboys used the exclusive tag on Dez Bryant; the Broncos used the exclusive tag on Demaryius Thomas. No other teams are allowed to negotiate with them.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Only with a non-exclusive franchise tag can another team negotiate with your tagged player. If it came down to it, I'm 100% certain the Colts would use the exclusive franchise tag on Luck, in which case no one else could negotiate with him.

 

The Dolphins used the transition tag on Charles Clay. That allowed other teams to negotiate with Clay, and the Dolphins received no compensation when he left.

 

The Chiefs used the non-exclusive tag on Justin Houston. If another team signs him and the Chiefs don't match, they'll receive two first rounders for him.

 

The Cowboys used the exclusive tag on Dez Bryant; the Broncos used the exclusive tag on Demaryius Thomas. No other teams are allowed to negotiate with them.

So if he was offered an exclusive tag we are assuming that would be cheaper then negotiating a new contract with him?

 

(exclusive - a one-year contract for an amount no less than the average of the top five salaries at the player's position as of a date in April of the current year in which the tag will apply, or 120 percent of the player's previous year's salary, whichever is greater)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So if he was offered an exclusive tag we are assuming that would be cheaper then negotiating a new contract with him?

 

(exclusive - a one-year contract for an amount no less than the average of the top five salaries at the player's position as of a date in April of the current year in which the tag will apply, or 120 percent of the player's previous year's salary, whichever is greater)

 

Maybe, depending on what that QB tag would be in 2017. This year, the QB tag would have been $18.54m. I think Luck's new deal will be $20-22m/year. But that's not the point. 

 

The point is that the tag could be used as leverage. If the team wanted, they could make Luck an offer right now at $20m/year. His reps could come back and say he's worth at least $25m/year, and they'd probably be right. But he's set to make $3.4m in 2015 (in actual cash, though his cap hit is $7m); then the team has a fifth year option which will probably be somewhere less than $17m. That's about $20m over the next two years, as opposed to $20m in 2015 alone (and is the real reason the Colts aren't going to extend him until 2016). Then, if they wanted, they could tag him in 2017 at somewhere around $20m. He isn't going anywhere; the Colts early offer would allow Luck to cash in sooner, and have a long-term deal with huge guaranteed money, as opposed to never hitting free agency. 

 

That's the hardball negotiating stance, IMO. Try to induce him to accept a slightly lower offer right now, and save annually moving forward. But the savings in 2015 make that less of an advantage for the Colts, so they'll stay put and do something after the 2015 season.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

no reason to extend him now when we can still use his fifth year option. we should be more focused in resigning AC ty dwayne and coby who are all FA at the end of the year. we cant afford to lose them

 

Out of that group, who is most likely to leave ?

 

AC, TY, Allen or Fleener ? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Multi-tasking is an important trait for NFL staff to have. They can re-sign all those guys if they want (although the cash might be prohibitive).

 

The argument for extending him now is to have more flexibility sooner in terms of restructuring and extending the next contract. But that's putting the cart before the horse. The plan seems to be to take full advantage of the four, low cost years, then use the leverage of the fifth year option (and potential franchise tag for a sixth year) to do a long term deal prior to 2016. I can't fault that plan. It keeps Luck's price tag as low as possible in 2015.

But couldn't it potentially result in higher cap hits in later years?  If Russell Wilson is going to be the highest paid QB, and Luck deserves more, then it will cost us more.  But if we do Luck's now, then Seattle will have to pay Wilson even more then before.  Plus, we have the added comfort of knowing it's done with and out of the way and we have a better idea of cap hits for future years.

 

I see the advantage in having 4+1 cheap years and a 1 year franchise tag, but I feel like it's better in the long haul if we get it done now.  As other QBs get paid, the price of Luck goes up.  Am I missing something that makes it significantly more advantageous to wait?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Out of that group, who is most likely to leave ?

 

AC, TY, Allen or Fleener ? 

 

I think all will most likely get resigned. allen and fleener will probably get similar contracts. id say 4-5 mil each. ty will get probably 10 mil, AC id say 8-10 mil

Link to comment
Share on other sites

But couldn't it potentially result in higher cap hits in later years?  If Russell Wilson is going to be the highest paid QB, and Luck deserves more, then it will cost us more.  But if we do Luck's now, then Seattle will have to pay Wilson even more then before.  Plus, we have the added comfort of knowing it's done with and out of the way and we have a better idea of cap hits for future years.

 

I see the advantage in having 4+1 cheap years and a 1 year franchise tag, but I feel like it's better in the long haul if we get it done now.  As other QBs get paid, the price of Luck goes up.  Am I missing something that makes it significantly more advantageous to wait?

 

Let's say it's an 8 year deal. The difference between $20m/year and $22m/year is $16m (and the reality is that he'd probably be extended before the eight years were up, so it's < $16m). Luck is going to be paid $3.4m in 2015. If he gets a $20m signing bonus and a minimum salary of < $1m, that's a total of $21m in cash in 2015, instead of $3.4m. That's an extra $17.6m in cash. The long-term savings are out the window because of the difference in 2015.

 

You can play with the numbers any way you want, and it's always going to be six in one hand, half dozen in the other. I think the major difference is just the extra savings in 2015 -- especially cash. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Let's say it's an 8 year deal. The difference between $20m/year and $22m/year is $16m (and the reality is that he'd probably be extended before the eight years were up, so it's < $16m). Luck is going to be paid $3.4m in 2015. If he gets a $20m signing bonus and a minimum salary of < $1m, that's a total of $21m in cash in 2015, instead of $3.4m. That's an extra $17.6m in cash. The long-term savings are out the window because of the difference in 2015.

 

You can play with the numbers any way you want, and it's always going to be six in one hand, half dozen in the other. I think the major difference is just the extra savings in 2015 -- especially cash. 

I see.  That makes sense.  I knew there was something I had to be missing.  Thanks for clarifying!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Let's say it's an 8 year deal. The difference between $20m/year and $22m/year is $16m (and the reality is that he'd probably be extended before the eight years were up, so it's < $16m). Luck is going to be paid $3.4m in 2015. If he gets a $20m signing bonus and a minimum salary of < $1m, that's a total of $21m in cash in 2015, instead of $3.4m. That's an extra $17.6m in cash. The long-term savings are out the window because of the difference in 2015.

 

You can play with the numbers any way you want, and it's always going to be six in one hand, half dozen in the other. I think the major difference is just the extra savings in 2015 -- especially cash.

we added a lot of salary this offseason....and paid out a lot of cash (guarantees) that got locked up. We all know we will be very quiet FA wise next year and the cash will go to Luck and our own. Makes sense. Owners are filthy rich but they don't have unlimited cash on hand. I'm not sure what we have left on our cap this offseason but Luck might have limited what we could do. Anyways we will role what we haven't used and will be available for next offseason. Luck isn't going anywhere...and he ain't going to be mad....he signed the rookie contract...he knew it would play out like this. We are using the savings for signing guys like AJ and company next offseason we sign him making him the highest paid player in the NFL. SB or not it's going to be the case...
Link to comment
Share on other sites

we added a lot of salary this offseason....and paid out a lot of cash (guarantees) that got locked up. We all know we will be very quiet FA wise next year and the cash will go to Luck and our own. Makes sense. Owners are filthy rich but they don't have unlimited cash on hand. I'm not sure what we have left on our cap this offseason but Luck might have limited what we could do. Anyways we will role what we haven't used and will be available for next offseason. Luck isn't going anywhere...and he ain't going to be mad....he signed the rookie contract...he knew it would play out like this. We are using the savings for signing guys like AJ and company next offseason we sign him making him the highest paid player in the NFL. SB or not it's going to be the case...

 

Yeah, Luck will be fine. He's not going anywhere. And there's almost no precedent for how to handle these first rounders under the new CBA. Even Cam Newton doesn't have a new deal yet. I don't think they intend to have him play on the fifth year option, but they don't have to do anything just yet. And they still have the franchise tag for the sixth year, and beyond, if they want. Same for Luck. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Let's say it's an 8 year deal. The difference between $20m/year and $22m/year is $16m (and the reality is that he'd probably be extended before the eight years were up, so it's < $16m). Luck is going to be paid $3.4m in 2015. If he gets a $20m signing bonus and a minimum salary of < $1m, that's a total of $21m in cash in 2015, instead of $3.4m. That's an extra $17.6m in cash. The long-term savings are out the window because of the difference in 2015.

 

You can play with the numbers any way you want, and it's always going to be six in one hand, half dozen in the other. I think the major difference is just the extra savings in 2015 -- especially cash. 

 

You know.......

 

You're a numbers guy.     But not all of us are.

 

And when you start talking about 6 in one hand,  and a half dozen in the other,  I have to take off my shoes and my socks and start counting on my toes.....     you know what I mean?!?

 

Go easy on the rest of us, will ya?!?     :scratch:     :giveup:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You know.......

 

You're a numbers guy.     But not all of us are.

 

And when you start talking about 6 in one hand,  and a half dozen in the other,  I have to take off my shoes and my socks and start counting on my toes.....     you know what I mean?!?

 

Go easy on the rest of us, will ya?!?     :scratch:     :giveup:

 

Okay, laymen's terms: The money the team would potentially save over the years by extending Luck at a slightly lower yearly average now wouldn't make up for the extra cash they'd be spending to sign him. The bonus + cash in 2015 offsets the long term savings.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Okay, laymen's terms: The money the team would potentially save over the years by extending Luck at a slightly lower yearly average now wouldn't make up for the extra cash they'd be spending to sign him. The bonus + cash in 2015 offsets the long term savings.

 

I knew what you were saying.....

 

I was only have some fun with you.....

 

Sorry....    I'd been a bad boy earlier in the evening,  thought I'd lighten the mood at the very end....    :peek:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Okay, laymen's terms: The money the team would potentially save over the years by extending Luck at a slightly lower yearly average now wouldn't make up for the extra cash they'd be spending to sign him. The bonus + cash in 2015 offsets the long term savings.

yeah I think it was simply having cash to pay all this seasons moves and play under that smaller cap cost for one last year and use next offseasons money to take care of our own. I think they saw how close we were and the guys that were available and wanted to upgrade now as opposed to the slower process of down the road upgrading in FA. Kinda use the money now or use savings down the road to add...we just chose to make moves now. I think we realize we have a nice window now and have improved enough to go after the SB now as opposed to the slower build process.

Everyone in the organization is on board and understands....outside people in the media and other teams fans (I hear a lot of Nashville and Stl stations and Dallas) those people think we are disrespecting luck but they are clueless. If we win the SB luck could ask for more money like Flacco did but honestly we know he is going to be the highest paid...so I doubt there is much difference.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

yeah I think it was simply having cash to pay all this seasons moves and play under that smaller cap cost for one last year and use next offseasons money to take care of our own. I think they saw how close we were and the guys that were available and wanted to upgrade now as opposed to the slower process of down the road upgrading in FA. Kinda use the money now or use savings down the road to add...we just chose to make moves now. I think we realize we have a nice window now and have improved enough to go after the SB now as opposed to the slower build process.

Everyone in the organization is on board and understands....outside people in the media and other teams fans (I hear a lot of Nashville and Stl stations and Dallas) those people think we are disrespecting luck but they are clueless. If we win the SB luck could ask for more money like Flacco did but honestly we know he is going to be the highest paid...so I doubt there is much difference.

 

It's not disrespecting Luck at all. Like you said, that's a clueless stance. He's still under contract.

 

I just looked up the cash for 2015, and it's at $125m. That includes all contracts so far, and will change if they do new deals for Fleener, Allen and Hilton. That's already more than the $98m in 2014. No one's going cheap or putting Luck in a bad situation. He's going to get paid, but all in due time.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's not disrespecting Luck at all. Like you said, that's a clueless stance. He's still under contract.

 

I just looked up the cash for 2015, and it's at $125m. That includes all contracts so far, and will change if they do new deals for Fleener, Allen and Hilton. That's already more than the $98m in 2014. No one's going cheap or putting Luck in a bad situation. He's going to get paid, but all in due time.

you know how it is on those local regional call in shows...not a lot of intelligence.....usually the hosts have good information about their home teams but the speculation on other teams...well not so much.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

you know how it is on those local regional call in shows...not a lot of intelligence.....usually the hosts have good information about their home teams but the speculation on other teams...well not so much.

 

There's an article on PFT that got picked up by some site called Inquistr that has spun this into some dream scenario in which the Bills pry Luck away from the Colts. It was in one of my feeds this morning. I rolled my eyes so hard I nearly fell out of my chair.

 

http://www.inquisitr.com/1952801/indianapolis-colts-rumors-jim-irsays-plans-could-put-andrew-lucks-future-with-the-team-in-doubt/

 

The bottom line is that Luck isn't going anywhere. If the Colts have to tag him every year until he finally signs, that's what they'll do. But what will actually happen is that they'll reach terms on a new deal sometime before the 2016 season, and everything will be fine.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm going to speculate that Irsay going public with this news about Luck's contract was done with the approval of Luck himself.

 

I don't see Andrew sitting at home stewing about this.

 

I think he knows Irsay is trying to put the best team possible around him for a legit run at the Super Bowl.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Irsay's comments suggest they'll do Luck's new deal before the fifth year. He said next offseason. 

 

Also, Luck's franchise tag -- if it came to that -- would be around $20m for one year. I expect his new contract to average at least $20m/year. I doubt it comes to that, of course; I think they'll do the new deal prior to 2016. But it's still leverage, if necessary.

 

The other angle for doing Luck's new deal sooner is to get his deal done before the market gets reset. We've already seen Roethlisberger become the second highest paid player. Wilson should be up soon. Cam Newton should get a monster deal. If there was a chance of getting a slight discount on Luck's deal, it would be to do it now, before everyone else sets new precedents.

 

That would be my thinking as well. You definitely want to pay him before Russell Wilson specifically. You have to pay him what he's worth and that includes what he will be worth in the future. And that worth is that of the best QB in the league, regardless of if he is or isn't right now.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Out of that group, who is most likely to leave ?

 

AC, TY, Allen or Fleener ? 

 

First,  I should say I think we'll keep all four.

 

But the most likely to leave for me is TYH....    because he now has an agent (Drew Rosenhaus) who is interested in getting every last nickel out of the club.    And I'm not sure how far along we'll play that game.    I know think TYH gets $10Mill + per year....   the question is...   how much is that "+"..??   

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That would be my thinking as well. You definitely want to pay him before Russell Wilson specifically. You have to pay him what he's worth and that includes what he will be worth in the future. And that worth is that of the best QB in the league, regardless of if he is or isn't right now.

Of course, there's two sides to every coin. I don't know the motivations of Luck or his agent, but they might not want to go first. They might want to go above whatever Russell Wilson gets.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Of course, there's two sides to every coin. I don't know the motivations of Luck or his agent, but they might not want to go first. They might want to go above whatever Russell Wilson gets.

 

I kind of sense that Irsay wants Wilson to go first so that he can beat it.  Just a gut feeling really.  He always talked about how he wanted Manning to be the highest paid. Irsay knows how lucky he is to have Luck following Manning and will do everything he can to make sure he's the face of the franchise for the next 10-15 years.

 

I'm sure the Colts will exercise Luck's 5th year option this season before the deadline which means that they wouldn't have to use the exclusive franchise tag while they negotiate next offseason.   If it the extension doesn't happen next year and spills over into the 2017 offseason then they will have to.  There is no way they will allow him to be exposed to FA (even with a non-exclusive franchise tag) because there would certainly be attempts to lure him away by probably half the teams in the league.

 

There will be a lot of cash that Irsay will have to come up with next offseason for signing bonuses if they plan to resign all of AC,TY, Luck, Allen, and Fleener in the same year.  And they'll have to get some done before FA begins or else expose up to three of AC, TY, Allen, and Fleener to unrestricted FA.  I'd expect TY or AC to get the non-exclusive tag if needed.  Hopefully, one of TY or AC will be extended before FA begins and they can use the tag on the other.  Unfortunately we may see both Allen and Fleener exposed to URFA in 2016.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...