Article claiming Colts will break the bank to infinity to pay Luck-opinions?

[threeflight]

6 minutes ago, GoatBeard said:

He sells out the stadium every single week. People pay to watch Andrew Luck. He gets us a tremendous amount of exposure. 9 times out of 10, if they are talking about the Colts on national TV they are talking about Andrew Luck. Every player on the team is asked about Andrew Luck in every single interview they do. There are more 12 jerseys out there than any other except 18. 

 

No other player on the team sells tickets. Do you pay to watch Vontae cover? Castonzo block? Vinatieri kick? No you don't and neither does anyone else.

 

This is foolish talk. The same % was said about Manning early in his career. Think if we would have listened to that nonsense.

So you would rather pay Luck the highest contract in NFL history, not because of his actual play, but because he is the only player on the Colts roster worth anything and that people talk about?  

 

That makes no sense, but that is what you are saying.

 

 I am the biggest Colts fan there is, but I have news for you.  Outside of Colts fans?  Very few people think he is the best player in football.  Many think of him as over rated and overhyped.  I argued against those people for 3 years.  But if they make him the highest paid player in football...I can't argue anymore.

[Goatface Killah]

3 minutes ago, threeflight said:

I am saying that Lucks rep and persona makes him SEEM better than he actually is. 

 

He is very very good. He is not worth the highest contract in NFL history good, and I urge anyone to justify to me how he is.  History has taught us that paying a QB that kind of money rarely works.  You are much better off building a complete team and winning that way.  With paying Luck that kind of money, we are going to be stuck with Luck, a few good O players, and a terrible D.  Same as always.  And it will be Manning revisited.  Except right now, LUCK is no where close to what Manning was in his prime, who was actually worth the money he was paid.  Why?  Because he was the best player in the NFL. PERIOD. 

 

Is luck?  Not even close.  

 

Actually he is better than Peyton was at this point in his career and has accomplished much more, with less. It took 7 years for Manning to win a single playoff game.

 

Unfortunately your opinion doesn't matter on how good he is. What matters is the fact that about 25 teams would gladly pony up that contract in a second. Because they know just how hard it is to find a QB like Andrew. And THAT is why he is worth every penny. The market tells us so. You would think you would understand this watching teams like the rams give their arm and leg for a guy who they think MIGHT be great someday. Andrew has already proven he is great.

 

You can speculate that our defense will be bad if you want to but that is all it is, speculation. And that isn't worth anything.

 

 

[CR91]

2 hours ago, threeflight said:

This article is saying the Colts are ready to not only make Luck the highest paid player in football, which is ludicrous, but they are also ready to give him the highest guaranteed contract in NFL history.  $98 MILLION of the entire contract ($200 M or more) guaranteed.  .

 

Look, I love Luck as much as anyone, but even at his best, he is not the best player in football.  To pay him this much is absolute insanity.  He is a turnover machine, and has yet to deliver what I would call a truly great season. He had a very good one in 2014, but not great.  And the thing is, Irsay almost seems like he is giddy to pay him that much.  He seems proud of it.  Makes no sense to me.

 

If it costs that much to retain Luck, trade him.  We could get a kings ransom from someone.  Paying that much to one player, no matter how good (and he is not even THAT GOOD yet) is a sure way to having what we had with Manning.  It doesn't work in the long run.

 

http://finance.yahoo.com/news/sounds-andrew-luck-going-contract-160719540.html

 

Makeshift line, no running game, less then average defense, and hit over 350 times. And all he's done is go to the playoffs every year pro bowl every year and a AFC championship berth while breaking every record possible in a three year qb span. Yea he's really trash. How about you form your own opinion instead of watching ESPN and NFLN

[BProland85]

Would be a huge mistake paying him that kind of money. And I highly doubt Luck is a demanding person when it comes to his contract. 

[Superman]

31 minutes ago, crazycolt1 said:

My question is how would a writer for ESPN be privy to Luck, his agent and Irsay ?  I just don't think this article has any validity. Some of those comments are just absurd.

 

 

Say what you want about ESPN, there's no reason Luck's agent couldn't be feeding someone information. But Barnwell claims his sources are NFL execs, not anyone close to the situation.

 

Like you, I think he's just throwing stuff at the wall.

[Goatface Killah]

3 minutes ago, threeflight said:

So you would rather pay Luck the highest contract in NFL history, not because of his actual play, but because he is the only player on the Colts roster worth anything and that people talk about?  

 

That makes no sense, but that is what you are saying.

 

 I am the biggest Colts fan there is, but I have new for you.  Outside of Colts fans?  Very few people think he is the best player in football.  Many think of him as over rated and overhyped.  I argued against those people for 3 years.  But if they make him the highest paid player in football...I can't argue anymore.

I want to pay him because he is both.

 

Contracts aren't just paid for production. You seem to be confused on how these contracts work and you want to penalize Andrew for not being in his prime yet.

 

 

[threeflight]

7 minutes ago, GoatBeard said:

 

Actually he is better than Peyton was at this point in his career and has accomplished much more, with less. It took 7 years for Manning to win a single playoff game.

 

Unfortunately your opinion doesn't matter on how good he is. What matters is the fact that about 25 teams would gladly pony up that contract in a second. Because they know just how hard it is to find a QB like Andrew. And THAT is why he is worth every penny. The market tells us so. You would think you would understand this watching teams like the rams give their arm and leg for a guy who they think MIGHT be great someday. Andrew has already proven he is great.

 

You can speculate that our defense will be bad if you want to but that is all it is, speculation. And that isn't worth anything.

 

 

We weren't paying Manning to be the highest paid player in the NFL at that stage of his career either.  

 

And I don't think LUCK is THAT GOOD.  2 years ago I did.  But he has regressed, even before his injuries.  Watch him last year....he was not good other than the Denver game.  Turnover machine. And his playoff stats are terrible.

 

Just because he is on the Colts, and has a rep coming out of college as the next Manning, does not make him so,

[threeflight]

1 minute ago, GoatBeard said:

I want to pay him because he is both.

 

Contracts aren't just paid for production. You seem to be confused on how these contracts work and you want to penalize Andrew for not being in his prime yet.

 

 

I am saying that I have seen nothing in Lucks first 5 years, and in fact last year makes me think the opposite, that Luck will be worth that kind of money.  Good money yes.  Top 5-7 paid qb money yes.

 

Most in NFL history.   No.

[IndySouthsider]

7 minutes ago, threeflight said:

So you would rather pay Luck the highest contract in NFL history, not because of his actual play, but because he is the only player on the Colts roster worth anything and that people talk about?  

 

That makes no sense, but that is what you are saying.

 

 I am the biggest Colts fan there is, but I have news for you.  Outside of Colts fans?  Very few people think he is the best player in football.  Many think of him as over rated and overhyped.  I argued against those people for 3 years.  But if they make him the highest paid player in football...I can't argue anymore.

 

I would rather pay him because he wins Football games. Period 

 

Fantasy Football doesn't interest me.

[Everyone]

57 minutes ago, threeflight said:

I said that.

 

One year.  In tds  And it wasn't an elite number like a 50,  It was 40.  That seem worth $30 M a year to you?

Yeah, I do think Luck will be worth whatever contract he signs.

[Superman]

32 minutes ago, Jason_S said:

 

Brackett, Sanders (considering the injury history), Manning's final contract, Cherilus, Freeney are just a few that immediately come to mind.  that and more than once he's made "oh yeah we're going to make him the highest paid player..."

 

now maybe this is a case of something that all owners do but I don't follow other teams closely enough to realize it...I do know Kraft has made similar claims about Brady...but Irsay's comments haven't been limited to just Luck and/or Manning.

 

There was nothing out of control about any of those contracts. Brackett's was blown out of proportion, as was Cherilus'.

 

Manning's deal tied Brady's and Eli's, for a 4 time MVP and easily the best/most important player on the team. Remember that people were talking about well over $20m/year for Manning before he eventually signed for $18m/year.

 

Freeney and Sanders' were among the best defensive players in the league, and both were worthy of their contracts. Sanders was coming off of a DPOY, and was a year off of being the difference maker for a SB team.

 

Just because Irsay has agreed to big contracts for players -- some being 'highest paid' -- doesn't mean he just throws money around. He probably talks about the money more than he should, but that doesn't mean the money is more than it should be.

[threeflight]

1 minute ago, IndySouthsider said:

 

I would rather pay him because he wins Football games. Period 

 

Fantasy Football doesn't interest me.

Didn't Hassleback have a better w-l record than Luck last year?  Remember how much smoother the O looked the first couple of games with Hassleback in there?  I am not saying MH is anywhere close to Luck in ability. I am saying that that is HOW POORLY Luck was playing last year.  He looked like a chicken with his head cut off.

[Superman]

40 minutes ago, threeflight said:

I am not sure how that makes sense when he is not close to being the top player in the league. He is in his 5th year.  Paying for potential is out the window.

 

You sound like someone who pays zero attention to NFL contracts.

[Goatface Killah]

1 minute ago, threeflight said:

We weren't paying Manning to be the highest paid player in the NFL at this state of his career either.  

 

And I don't think LUCK is THAT GOOD.  2 years ago I did.  But he has regressed, even before his injuries.  Watch him last year....he was not good other than the Denver game.  Turnover machine. And his playoff stats are terrible.

 

Just because he is on the Colts, and has a rep coming out of college as the next Manning, does not make him so,

 

I have watched them both and he is much better than Manning was at this point in their careers. 

 

"Except the Denver game" you mean the one where he made the best defense in the league look pedestrian in their own building? I'm sure Connor Cook could do that!

[Superman]

9 minutes ago, BProland85 said:

Would be a huge mistake paying him that kind of money. And I highly doubt Luck is a demanding person when it comes to his contract. 

 

In what way?

[threeflight]

1 minute ago, Superman said:

 

There was nothing out of control about any of those contracts. Brackett's was blown out of proportion, as was Cherilus'.

 

Manning's deal tied Brady's and Eli's, for a 4 time MVP and easily the best/most important player on the team. Remember that people were talking about well over $20m/year for Manning before he eventually signed for $18m/year.

 

Freeney and Sanders' were among the best defensive players in the league, and both were worthy of their contracts. Sanders was coming off of a DPOY, and was a year off of being the difference maker for a SB team.

 

Just because Irsay has agreed to big contracts for players -- some being 'highest paid' -- doesn't mean he just throws money around. He probably talks about the money more than he should, but that doesn't mean the money is more than it should be.

Well the fact is, in using that PAY BIG strategy, we have had one SB win  in 17 years, with 2 qbs who what many can agree is the greatest QB of all time, and what many of you are saying a qb now worth being paid the most money in the NFL.

 

So I fail to see how that strategy is working in anyway, shape, or form.  

[IndySouthsider]

2 minutes ago, threeflight said:

Didn't Hassleback have a better w-l record than Luck last year?  Remember how much smoother the O looked the first couple of games with Hassleback in there?  I am not saying MH is anywhere close to Luck in ability. I am saying that that is HOW POORLY Luck was playing last year.  He looked like a chicken with his head cut off.

 

Did you forget 2001?

[Coffeedrinker]

Am I the only one that thinks the real reason behind this thread is just a chance to bash Luck?

 

Seems some are getting awfully worked up over some speculation over what one person took and carried out to an extreme.

 

All the article says is that right now the guaranteed money players' agents are asking for is basically equivalent to three years of franchise tags.  So the author assume that means giving a player a franchise tag for 3 years ina  row which ads 25% to the previous year.  But that is just speculation on the author's part.  It's probably more like 3 times the franchise tag number, which in this case would be about 75 million guaranteed which is in line with what Newton got.

 

 

[threeflight]

2 minutes ago, GoatBeard said:

 

I have watched them both and he is much better than Manning was at this point in their careers. 

 

"Except the Denver game" you mean the one where he made the best defense in the league look pedestrian in their own building? I'm sure Connor Cook could do that!

That is a ridiculous statement.

[threeflight]

1 minute ago, Coffeedrinker said:

Am I the only one that thinks the real reason behind this thread is just a chance to bash Luck?

 

Seems some are getting awfully worked up over some speculation over what one person took and carried out to an extreme.

 

All the article says is that right now the guaranteed money players' agents are asking for is basically equivalent to three years of franchise tags.  So the author assume that means giving a player a franchise tag for 3 years ina  row which ads 25% to the previous year.  But that is just speculation on the author's part.  It's probably more like 3 times the franchise tag number, which in this case would be about 75 million guaranteed which is in line with what Newton got.

 

 

I am a big Luck fan.  I have argued endlessly with people over how good he is and can be.  

 

However I can see things clearly.  I am not a homer.  He is not worth that kind of money.

[Everyone]

3 minutes ago, threeflight said:

Didn't Hassleback have a better w-l record than Luck last year?  Remember how much smoother the O looked the first couple of games with Hassleback in there?  I am not saying MH is anywhere close to Luck in ability. I am saying that that is HOW POORLY Luck was playing last year.  He looked like a chicken with his head cut off.

You must not of watched Lucks last game against the Broncos.

[Goatface Killah]

1 minute ago, threeflight said:

Well the fact is, in using that PAY BIG strategy, we have had one SB win  in 17 years, with 2 qbs who what many can agree is the greatest QB of all time, and what many of you are saying a qb now worth being paid the most money in the NFL.

 

So I fail to see how that strategy is working in anyway, shape, or form.  

Two SB appearances and a dozen division titles is pretty good.

 

This is just another out of touch fan obsessed with the fact the Patriots won more than we did. 

 

1 minute ago, threeflight said:

That is a ridiculous statement.

How so? He has won 3 playoff games, and been to a title game already with a team most people don't think is that talented overall. 

 

You want to see horrible playoff stats? Go look at Manning's early in his career. And he was actually surrounded by talent on offense from day 1. 

[Superman]

11 minutes ago, threeflight said:

Well the fact is, in using that PAY BIG strategy, we have had one SB win  in 17 years, with 2 qbs who what many can agree is the greatest QB of all time, and what many of you are saying a qb now worth being paid the most money in the NFL.

 

So I fail to see how that strategy is working in anyway, shape, or form.  

 

What does that have to do with the guys we're talking about? They were among the team's best players. The issues were the other guys, unless you're claiming that the reason the Colts didn't win more SBs is because they overpaid guys like Dwight Freeney.

 

Good teams pay good players, especially their own good players.

 

You are clearly out of your depth on this topic. 

[Coffeedrinker]

3 minutes ago, threeflight said:

I am a big Luck fan.  I have argued endlessly with people over how good he is and can be.  

 

However I can see things clearly.  I am not a homer.  He is not worth that kind of money.

Sure, sure.

[Superman]

3 minutes ago, threeflight said:

I am a big Luck fan.  I have argued endlessly with people over how good he is and can be.  

 

However I can see things clearly.  I am not a homer.  He is not worth that kind of money.

 

LOL

 

So what kind of money is Luck worth, according to you?

[Everyone]

Just now, Superman said:

 

LOL

 

So what kind of money is Luck worth, according to you?

He must not know how contracts work. Luck will probably only be the highest paid for like 1 or 2 seasons.  He's just resetting the market.

[Jason_]

24 minutes ago, GoatBeard said:

He sells out the stadium every single week. People pay to watch Andrew Luck. He gets us a tremendous amount of exposure. 9 times out of 10, if they are talking about the Colts on national TV they are talking about Andrew Luck. Every player on the team is asked about Andrew Luck in every single interview they do. There are more 12 jerseys out there than any other except 18. 

 

No other player on the team sells tickets. Do you pay to watch Vontae cover? Castonzo block? Vinatieri kick? No you don't and neither does anyone else.

 

This is foolish talk. The same % was said about Manning early in his career. Think if we would have listened to that nonsense.

 

wow, you're all over the place.  Again, what does any of that rant about jersey's and filled stadiums have to do with which Colt players are "worth their contract".  We must have very different ideas of what it means for a player to be worth his contract.  To me that has nothing to do with jersey selling or stadium filling..it has to do with that player's contributions to the team on the field that helps the team win games.  Nothing more. 

 

And by the way, if I go to a game it's to see more than just Luck.  If Luck is the only player I want to watch I can watch the game on TV because broadcasts always focus on the QB.  If I go to the game, I spend just as much time, if not more, watching receivers run their routes, watching the OL block, watching Vontae and the other CBs cover etc etc.  So, might wanna be careful when you go speaking for everyone else.

[FanFromtheWasteland]

I will be so glad when the season starts and we are no longer subjected to this......drivel

[GAColtsFan]

2 hours ago, threeflight said:

I don't known what the solution is, but I do know you can't pay Luck that kind if money.  You just can't.

 

Maybe trade him to someone like a Denver, or one of the two teams who just drafted 1-2 qbs in the draft as part of a package.  Hell I would take Connor Cook and a bunch of players and draft picks rather than pay Luck that much.  It's lunacy.

Replace Luck with Connor Cook ?  You are being sarcastic,correct ?  Come On Man !!! You need quality under center.

[Goatface Killah]

Just now, Jason_S said:

 

wow, you're all over the place.  Again, what does any of that rant about jersey's and filled stadiums have to do with which Colt players are "worth their contract".  We must have very different ideas of what it means for a player to be worth his contract.  To me that has nothing to do with jersey selling or stadium filling..it has to do with that player's contributions to the team on the field that helps the team win games.  Nothing more. 

 

And by the way, if I go to a game it's to see more than just Luck.  If Luck is the only player I want to watch I can watch the game on TV because broadcasts always focus on the QB.  If I go to the game, I spend just as much time, if not more, watching receivers run their routes, watching the OL block, watching Vontae and the other CBs cover etc etc.  So, might wanna be careful when you go speaking for everyone else.

So if you're running a business you don't consider all factors when it comes to a player being worth his contract?

 

You guys act like we haven't been winning lol. We have yet to have a losing season, even with the disaster last year.

 

If you are running a team and you have one of the gems of the league that the vast majority of the league would kill for, and you decide he is "not worth it", you are a fool.

 

I'm not all over the place the kid has been phenomenal and anyone who doesn't think so doesn't k ow what they are talking about. You are just another Skip Bayless running your mouth. No football people say these kinds of things about Luck because they understand that it is damn near impossible to win while playing QB without protection, a running game or a great defense. Which Luck has managed to do. 

 

Stats don't tell you everything you need to know. This is real football not fan duel.

[threeflight]

8 minutes ago, Superman said:

 

LOL

 

So what kind of money is Luck worth, according to you?

Somewhere in the 4-7 slot of top paid NFL qbs.

[shakedownstreet]

[Goatface Killah]

2 minutes ago, threeflight said:

Somewhere in the 4-7 slot of top paid NFL qbs.

 

Congrats you saved us enough money to sign a really good free safety! 

[Coffeedrinker]

7 minutes ago, FanFromtheWasteland said:

I will be so glad when the season starts and we are no longer subjected to this......drivel

Why do you think this type of drivel stops when the season starts?  We still get the same type of drivel, sometimes even worse.

[threeflight]

Really amazed at all of the white knights sucking up to Luck in this forum.  If I didn't know better, I would have thought Luck was a 10/10 HBB posting a half naked pic to her 50,000 instagram followers with all of the white knighting going on.

 

Fact is LUCK has done nothing to justify being the highest paid player in the NFL, and I still have yet to see one shred of evidence from anyone here that he is.

 

 

[RockThatBlue]

2 hours ago, threeflight said:

This article is saying the Colts are ready to not only make Luck the highest paid player in football, which is ludicrous, but they are also ready to give him the highest guaranteed contract in NFL history.  $98 MILLION of the entire contract ($200 M or more) guaranteed.  .

 

Look, I love Luck as much as anyone, but even at his best, he is not the best player in football.  To pay him this much is absolute insanity.  He is a turnover machine, and has yet to deliver what I would call a truly great season. He had a very good one in 2014, but not great.  And the thing is, Irsay almost seems like he is giddy to pay him that much.  He seems proud of it.  Makes no sense to me.

 

If it costs that much to retain Luck, trade him.  We could get a kings ransom from someone.  Paying that much to one player, no matter how good (and he is not even THAT GOOD yet) is a sure way to having what we had with Manning.  It doesn't work in the long run.

 

http://finance.yahoo.com/news/sounds-andrew-luck-going-contract-160719540.html

Trading him away would be ridiculous.

 

 

[threeflight]

2 minutes ago, RockThatBlue said:

Trading him away would be ridiculous.

 

 

For 2-3 really good players, a top qb, and 2-3 number one picks and some 2nd and 3rd rounders?  And not have to pay him $25-$20 M a year?

 

Don't see how that is ridiculous.  He is not the second coming.  Did you actually watch him play last year?

[Superman]

2 minutes ago, threeflight said:

Somewhere in the 4-7 slot of top paid NFL qbs.

 

So it's okay if they pay him $21m/year (would be 5th in the league), but they're making a big mistake if they pay him $23m/year (would be 1st). Is that what you're saying? Over a six year deal, that's a difference of $12m, on average about 1% of the salary cap. Is that what you're making all this noise about?

 

What about the guaranteed money, which was the point of the article posted? What's the difference between guaranteeing his first three years and guaranteeing his first four? Do you expect the Colts to be getting rid of Luck within the next four years?

[Goatface Killah]

Just now, threeflight said:

Really amazed at all of the white knights sucking up to Luck in this forum.  If I didn't know better, I would have thought Luck was a 10/10 HBB posting a half naked pic to her 50,000 instagram followers with all of the white knighting going on.

 

Fact is LUCK has done nothing to justify being the highest paid player in the NFL, and I still have yet to see one shred of evidence from anywhere here that he is.

 

 

 

Think about this.....you all want to trade him to a team willing to give him that contract AND a slew of draft picks. And you think he's not worth it? 

 

 

[Jason_]

15 minutes ago, Superman said:

 

There was nothing out of control about any of those contracts. Brackett's was blown out of proportion, as was Cherilus'.

 

Manning's deal tied Brady's and Eli's, for a 4 time MVP and easily the best/most important player on the team. Remember that people were talking about well over $20m/year for Manning before he eventually signed for $18m/year.

 

Freeney and Sanders' were among the best defensive players in the league, and both were worthy of their contracts. Sanders was coming off of a DPOY, and was a year off of being the difference maker for a SB team.

 

Just because Irsay has agreed to big contracts for players -- some being 'highest paid' -- doesn't mean he just throws money around. He probably talks about the money more than he should, but that doesn't mean the money is more than it should be.

 

Difference of opinion on several of these.  IMO, Brackett shouldn't have even been given a new contract, and regardless of Sanders coming off a DPOY year, he had also not shown the ability to stay healthy for a full season, so I'd have personally never given him such a contract.  Freeney is one of the all time great pass rushers, but wasn't a complete player in terms of run support, so I disagree that he was one of the best defensie players in the league.  One of the best pass rushers?  Absolutely, but best overall defensive player?  No, not at all.  Again, just my opinion.

 

I do agree that Cherilus' contract was somewhat blown out of proportion, but still Irsay's need to tweet about making him the highest paid RT in the league gives me reason to wonder if the contract was inflated a bit more than it should/could have been.  Not saying it was out of control or anything, but I do believe it was inflated more than the typical FA contract is.

 

With Manning, I'm specifically thinking of times when Irsay would talk about how he was going to make Manning the highest paid player when there was no apparent need to make such a proclamation.  Then, with his final contract, there were multiple reports about how it was Manning that insisted on the clause in his contract that gave the team the option to release him depending on his neck health.  I would think that would have been highest priority to Polian/Irsay.  Also, this is just one article that talks about Manning telling Irsay/Polian that he doesn't want as much money as he was offered:

 

 

the article also has a quote from Irsay saying that, while Manning's contract was an average of $18 mil per year, he was actually going to be paid $23 mil per year the first 3 years and only $10 mil the final two...and we know how common it is for a deal to get restructured in the final year or two.  I don't see any universe in which Manning actually plays for $10 mil per those final 2 years.