Andrew Luck Signs (Merged)

[Superman]

2 minutes ago, csmopar said:

So would you classify this as a team friendly deal despite the large numbers?

 

I judge contracts as team friendly on the basis of whether the team can release the player in future years without significant cap penalties, and on the basis of how much cash has been paid to the player when the team reaches potential decision points. In Luck's case, it's not cap positive to release him until after Year 2, when the cap penalty would be $22.2m vs a cap hit of $24.4m. At that point, he will have been paid $60m for two seasons.

 

So no, it's not team friendly. (TL:DR, that's my answer.)

 

It's also a mega contract -- highest paid player in NFL history, highest "guaranteed money" in NFL history, largest amount of money paid through the first three years in NFL history... I don't see anything "team friendly" in there.

 

That said, he's a franchise QB. He has standing and accomplishments. And he's still presumably getting better. I've said that I don't care about the "guarantees" and potential cap penalties because there's less than a 1% chance that Luck doesn't play out this contract, barring totally unforeseen circumstances. He's not going anywhere, especially now.

 

So perhaps the best way to judge this contract is on the basis of % of cap, year to year, and the team's ability to extend/restructure in future seasons. Working backward, I don't see any reason to think about restructuring in future years, and that's because the contract has a reasonable rate of increase each year.

 

Re: % of cap, let's assume 7.5% increase each season for the rest of this contract. Based on Spotrac's cap numbers, his cap hits will account for 12, 12, 14, 14, 14, and 10% of the cap, every year. Those numbers are rounded up, slightly. I think the smartest thing is having a slightly lower cap hit in the final year, 2021, which protects the team from whatever happens in the first year of the next CBA, and sets the table for an extension.

 

I like this structure, for the most part. Rolling/staggered guarantees, doesn't break the bank for cash flow in the first two years, and it keeps the team away from cap trouble over the life of the deal. So as much as a record setting contract for a franchise QB can be team friendly, this one is.

 

More good contract work from Grigson and Bluem, IMO.

[Superman]

3 minutes ago, BOTT said:

It will a couple  days before someone here starts worrying about how his next contract will hamper the team.

 

PFFFT, go anywhere else on the Internet and it's all over the place. Ridiculous. Luck's contract averages less than 13% of the team's cap.

[Gavin]

It was a given he was going to get paid, We also knew or had an idea Irsay was going to make it the biggest contract in NFL history. He was going to get paid huge. Congrats to Luck

[bleevit]

Fantastic news! Does anyone know the cap situation yet? I'm a greedy Colt fan.

[Gavin]

5 minutes ago, Superman said:

 

PFFFT, go anywhere else on the Internet and it's all over the place. Ridiculous. Luck's contract averages less than 13% of the team's cap.

I'm not complaining or anything, You and I both knew this day was coming soon. But to me when I look at a players contract I don't really focus on the total cap amount of the team. I pay more attention to how much his individual yearly cap hits will affect the yearly cap space.

[Superman]

6 minutes ago, bleevit said:

Fantastic news! Does anyone know the cap situation yet? I'm a greedy Colt fan.

 

http://www.spotrac.com/nfl/indianapolis-colts/andrew-luck/

 

Cap situation is good. The Colts are still ~$13m below the cap in 2016. They have ~$132m committed in 2017, when the cap is projected to be $167m. That's before releases, resignings, free agency and the draft.

[Superman]

6 minutes ago, Gavin said:

I'm not complaining or anything, You and I both knew this day was coming soon. But to me when I look at a players contract I don't really focus on the total cap amount of the team. I pay more attention to how much his individual yearly cap hits will affect the yearly cap space.

 

?

 

If the Colts can't build a good roster with the remaining 87% of the cap (on average), then that's bad scouting, bad drafting, bad roster building. It's not because of Luck's contract.

[Andrew Luck fan club]

I really thought my boy would take a little less, but oh well I'm super happy we got him locked up.

I love how literally everyone in comment sections(not here) is talking trash about him and the Colts giving him this deal. It's gonna make this upcoming season so sweet. Go colts 

[Gavin]

5 minutes ago, Superman said:

 

?

 

If the Colts can't build a good roster with the remaining 87% of the cap (on average), then that's bad scouting, bad drafting, bad roster building. It's not because of Luck's contract.

Of course. That wasn't what I was saying. I was just explaining I guess not affectively that I keep it simple and just focus on the yearly cap hits and not the sum of the contract vs the total cap

[Cynjin]

1 hour ago, Superman said:

 

Nope, guaranteed for injury. The full guarantees reach $87m gradually.

 

Okay, thanks.

[CF4L]

I know its the market for QB's these days and given how contracts aren't guaranteed I'm not that broken up about it or anything. I'm glad its not hanging over the Colts head this season and its resolved. However I don't want to hear the Colts complain about not having enough to put together a defense etc the same excuses they had when they gave Manning his $$$ and "only won 1 SB."

[ColtStrong]

1 hour ago, Superman said:

 

PFFFT, go anywhere else on the Internet and it's all over the place. Ridiculous. Luck's contract averages less than 13% of the team's cap.

Sometimes you ramble on about yada yada, but this I agree with. Luck's contract will seem "tame" after 2-3 years. I'm Ok with it. I believe Luck will be worth it. 

[ColtStrong]

5 minutes ago, CF4L said:

I know its the market for QB's these days and given how contracts aren't guaranteed I'm not that broken up about it or anything. I'm glad its not hanging over the Colts head this season and its resolved. However I don't want to hear the Colts complain about not having enough to put together a defense etc the same excuses they had when they gave Manning his $$$ and "only won 1 SB."

It won't be the Colts complaining, it will be the fans. And guess what, every team that has a top tier QB will have to go through this. I'd rather be in this position than a team that still has yet to find their QB.

[Jules]

We knew it would be a mind blowing deal.

 

Now I just hope and pray Luck stays healthy.

[TheRustonRifle#7]

I am glad it is done and not surprised by it all....why should anyone have thought otherwise?

[Coltsman1788]

Irsay paid the man. Now let's hope he is worth the sizeable investment. Hopefully he will stop turning the football over so frequently and can take his game to the elite level.  He is being paid like an elite QB now so time to see if he can live up to that kind of contract. 

[oldunclemark]

3 hours ago, Barry Sears said:

Great news!!  New offensive line, new contract, new offense...going to be an exciting year!!

Looking forward to our return to the playoffs......we're ready

[CF4L]

20 minutes ago, ColtStrong said:

It won't be the Colts complaining, it will be the fans. And guess what, every team that has a top tier QB will have to go through this. I'd rather be in this position than a team that still has yet to find their QB.

 

Yes because the Colts didn't lament about how they didn't want to tie up all this $$$ to one player when they were planning to cut Manning. Oh wait...

 

I just think people shouldn't be so quick to think this makes Luck a Colt for Life. I just wouldn't put it past them to use it as an excuse the minute Luck becomes "too expensive" to keep around.

 

And its not a Colts thing its an NFL thing.....

[Superman]

3 minutes ago, CF4L said:

 

Yes because the Colts didn't lament about how they didn't want to tie up all this $$$ to one player when they were planning to cut Manning. Oh wait...

 

I just think people shouldn't be so quick to think this makes Luck a Colt for Life. I just wouldn't put it past them to use it as an excuse the minute Luck becomes "too expensive" to keep around.

 

And its not a Colts thing its an NFL thing.....

 

This is nonsense. Just like it was last time you posted it.

[CR91]

1 hour ago, csmopar said:

So would you classify this as a team friendly deal despite the large numbers?

 

The fact that it is front loaded and the rise of the cap in the for years it's very friendly

[21isSuperman]

10 minutes ago, Superman said:

 

This is nonsense. Just like it was last time you posted it.

Just curious here.  In the thread where Mike Florio suggested Luck should take a certain % of the cap each year, you voiced displeasure at the idea.  However, in this thread, you've stated that his contract only accounts for 13% of the total cap and the Colts should be able to build a solid team with the other 87%.  So if the idea of taking a certain % of the cap each year is bad, why use the same reasoning to claim it's a good contract?  Wouldn't it have also been a good contract if Luck did what Florio suggested and asked for 13-15% of the cap each year?  Not trying to call you out or anything, just curious as to what you have to say and what you think of the contract.

[crazycolt1]

48 minutes ago, CF4L said:

I know its the market for QB's these days and given how contracts aren't guaranteed I'm not that broken up about it or anything. I'm glad its not hanging over the Colts head this season and its resolved. However I don't want to hear the Colts complain about not having enough to put together a defense etc the same excuses they had when they gave Manning his $$$ and "only won 1 SB."

I understand what you are saying but it is the fans who would be doing the complaining, not the Colts. If the Colts win the fans will be saying Luck is worth every penny. If they lose it will be it's all because Luck makes too much money. Somebody has to be the blame for something.

[NewColtsFan]

24 minutes ago, CF4L said:

 

Yes because the Colts didn't lament about how they didn't want to tie up all this $$$ to one player when they were planning to cut Manning. Oh wait...

 

I just think people shouldn't be so quick to think this makes Luck a Colt for Life. I just wouldn't put it past them to use it as an excuse the minute Luck becomes "too expensive" to keep around.

 

And its not a Colts thing its an NFL thing.....

 

Not to worry.....    this contract will likely be redone at least once, and perhaps twice over the 6 years....    I wouldn't even rule out 3 times.

 

Luck will get more guaranteed money and his cap hit will get lowered which will give the Colts more room to keep the roster loaded with as much talent as the Colts can keep.      That's how good teams and top talent play the contract game.

 

Luck isn't going anywhere.       I'd put the chances of him leaving, or getting cut,  or traded,   right around ZERO.

 

Don't lose a minutes sleep over this.       Seriously.

 

[The Old Crow]

When many of you criticized Flacco's contract, I said this was what you had to pay to keep a front line QB. Flacco was also coming off a SB, plus other playoff appearances. That being said, you had to pay Luck, as he is a very good QB. The key is going to be protecting him, and putting the pieces around him. You just can't win in the NFL without a good QB, and when a QB has a record of winning, you have to pay them. 

[NewColtsFan]

 

Here's an ESPN story that says that while Luck got a very nice record breaking contract,  the view within the NFL is that he actually left a lot of money on the negotiating table.

 

That he had a LOT more leverage,  and chose not to use it.     And that by doing so,  he hurt other top tier QB's in the league who were hoping he'd hold out for even more.      An interesting perspective.

 

Just click and read.....    it's a non-premium story.

 

http://espn.go.com/nfl/story/_/id/16621472/andrew-luck-indianapolis-colts-87-million-guaranteed-contract-letdown-future-quarterbacks

[Superman]

19 minutes ago, 21isSuperman said:

Just curious here.  In the thread where Mike Florio suggested Luck should take a certain % of the cap each year, you voiced displeasure at the idea.  However, in this thread, you've stated that his contract only accounts for 13% of the total cap and the Colts should be able to build a solid team with the other 87%.  So if the idea of taking a certain % of the cap each year is bad, why use the same reasoning to claim it's a good contract?  Wouldn't it have also been a good contract if Luck did what Florio suggested and asked for 13-15% of the cap each year?  Not trying to call you out or anything, just curious as to what you have to say and what you think of the contract.

 

Because stipulating that your contract be tied to a percentage of the cap is different from analyzing a contract on the basis of how it relates to the cap.

 

Having a contract expressly tied to the cap would be a drastic departure from how contracts are done in the NFL, and all sports. 

 

I'm also projecting future salary caps based on presently unknown information. If the cap accelerates more than expected, then Luck's percentage of cap goes down. That wouldn't happen if his pay was tied to a percentage of the cap.

 

There's also the function and benefit. Luck is getting $44m in 2016. That's 28% of the cap, but his cap hit is only $18.4m, because of the typical prorated signing bonus + yearly salary structure of NFL contracts.. If you used the Florio proposal, the typical structure would be thrown out the window, and it would basically wreck the Colts cap to be able to pay Luck $75m through three seasons. Luck would be taking less money, or have significantly higher cap hits, particularly in the early years of the deal.

[Superman]

14 minutes ago, The Old Crow said:

When many of you criticized Flacco's contract

 

I am the one that was critical of Flacco's deal. It wasn't on the basis of value, it was about the structure. In March, the Ravens had to do exactly what I expected they'd have to do, because Flacco's contract was heavily backloaded. And Flacco is coming off of a serious injury. I'm sure he'll be fine, and the Ravens will be fine, but their hand was forced because of Flacco's ballooning cap hits. There are really no similarities between the two deals.

 

I'll also point out that, with Flacco's extension, the Ravens have paid him $106m in four seasons. The Colts will pay $96m through Luck's first four seasons, based on the current structure. Adjusted for inflation, the Ravens have paid a lot more for Flacco than the Colts will pay for Luck.

[jskinnz]

It won't be the Colts complaining, it will be the fans. And guess what, every team that has a top tier QB will have to go through this. I'd rather be in this position than a team that still has yet to find their QB.

 

Yes because the Colts didn't lament about how they didn't want to tie up all this $$$ to one player when they were planning to cut Manning. Oh wait...

 

I just think people shouldn't be so quick to think this makes Luck a Colt for Life. I just wouldn't put it past them to use it as an excuse the minute Luck becomes "too expensive" to keep around.

 

And its not a Colts thing its an NFL thing.....

Categorical nonsense.

[The Old Crow]

3 minutes ago, Superman said:

 

I am the one that was critical of Flacco's deal. It wasn't on the basis of value, it was about the structure. In March, the Ravens had to do exactly what I expected they'd have to do, because Flacco's contract was heavily backloaded. And Flacco is coming off of a serious injury. I'm sure he'll be fine, and the Ravens will be fine, but their hand was forced because of Flacco's ballooning cap hits. There are really no similarities between the two deals.

 

I'll also point out that, with Flacco's extension, the Ravens have paid him $106m in four seasons. The Colts will pay $96m through Luck's first four seasons, based on the current structure. Adjusted for inflation, the Ravens have paid a lot more for Flacco than the Colts will pay for Luck.

 

You made some valid points , but some didn't. I agreed with you on the structure, but remember I predicted they would restructure, because they really had no choice unless they were insane. The Colts definitely structured it better with Luck, but I'm thinking Ozzie maybe structured it  the way he did in case Flacco totally flopped after the SB. All that being said, the Colts and Ravens have capable and proven QB's going into the future, and you have to have that in the NFL. The other thing I like about Flacco and Luck are that they are both tough, and despite their offensive lines causing both injuries last year, have generally been healthy over most of their careers. 

[Superman]

29 minutes ago, NewColtsFan said:

 

Not to worry.....    this contract will likely be redone at least once, and perhaps twice over the 6 years....    I wouldn't even rule out 3 times.

 

Luck will get more guaranteed money and his cap hit will get lowered which will give the Colts more room to keep the roster loaded with as much talent as the Colts can keep.      That's how good teams and top talent play the contract game.

 

Luck isn't going anywhere.       I'd put the chances of him leaving, or getting cut,  or traded,   right around ZERO.

 

Don't lose a minutes sleep over this.       Seriously.

 

 

There's room for them to do that, if they wish. But in looking at the structure and the payouts, there's no real reason to do so. They appear to have been very conscious of balancing out his cap hits and keeping cash aligned with cap, to the extent possible.

 

Take what we know about this front office and how they manage the cap, and I don't see them trying to pry extra cap space to make roster moves in the future. They're very disciplined in their cap management, they take their hits and keep moving, knowing that they'll come out even eventually.

 

Irsay did specifically mention having the flexibility to adjust Luck's contract in the future. so I won't dismiss the idea altogether. The Colts restructured Manning's contracts multiple times to create cap space, but that was a different cap environment. Again, I won't dismiss it, I just don't see why it would be necessary.

 

Maybe they'll feel like they have to take a one year hit to keep some core guys on the team. That could happen in a couple years if the 2015-16 draft classes really hit. But the fact that they're ahead of the game (mostly due to bad drafting and other circumstances in 2013 and 2014) kind of takes that pressure away.

[NewColtsFan]

1 hour ago, Superman said:

 

There's room for them to do that, if they wish. But in looking at the structure and the payouts, there's no real reason to do so. They appear to have been very conscious of balancing out his cap hits and keeping cash aligned with cap, to the extent possible.

 

Take what we know about this front office and how they manage the cap, and I don't see them trying to pry extra cap space to make roster moves in the future. They're very disciplined in their cap management, they take their hits and keep moving, knowing that they'll come out even eventually.

 

Irsay did specifically mention having the flexibility to adjust Luck's contract in the future. so I won't dismiss the idea altogether. The Colts restructured Manning's contracts multiple times to create cap space, but that was a different cap environment. Again, I won't dismiss it, I just don't see why it would be necessary.

 

Maybe they'll feel like they have to take a one year hit to keep some core guys on the team. That could happen in a couple years if the 2015-16 draft classes really hit. But the fact that they're ahead of the game (mostly due to bad drafting and other circumstances in 2013 and 2014) kind of takes that pressure away.

 

Because I know how much you like this type of thing,  here's a nice breakdown of Luck's deal from Spotrac.

 

They note how TEAM FRIENDLY the deal is.      

 

I talked about the possibility of re-doing the deal when I saw how the cap hits go up in years 3, 4 and 5 of the deal...    2018 thru 2020.      I thought at that point, perhaps an adjustment would be made to accommodate both team and player.      Just food for thought.....

 

Here's the link:    Very easy to read story with nice easy to read stat breakdowns....     even I can understand it!

 

 

http://www.spotrac.com/research/nfl/colts-extend-andrew-luck-in-historic-manner-587/

[aaron11]

1 hour ago, NewColtsFan said:

 

Here's an ESPN story that says that while Luck got a very nice record breaking contract,  the view within the NFL is that he actually left a lot of money on the negotiating table.

 

That he had a LOT more leverage,  and chose not to use it.     And that by doing so,  he hurt other top tier QB's in the league who were hoping he'd hold out for even more.      An interesting perspective.

 

Just click and read.....    it's a non-premium story.

 

http://espn.go.com/nfl/story/_/id/16621472/andrew-luck-indianapolis-colts-87-million-guaranteed-contract-letdown-future-quarterbacks

i'm glad to hear they think the team got a good deal.  We all know luck isnt the type to hold out or threaten to leave.  Other QBs can feel let down all they want, but this is still a record and it's fair for the player and the team

 

he probably did have the leverage to get more, but the last thing he wanted to do was leave to a team like the browns for an extra few million

[2006Coltsbestever]

Great news, one less thing we have to worry about. We have him at least through the 2021 Season. He has 6 years now to try and get us a SB win. I guess he isn't leaving the Colts like some opposing fans were hoping for and some of the media seem to be wishing for. This contract will put Andrew through his prime years now.

[Narcosys]

smdh.  I've just read up on all Superman has said but it only slightly alleviates my issues with this.  That being he doesn't deserve it.  He hasn't played or shown the potential to play at that kind of level that he just got paid. 

 

Teams are not happy with the colts right now that's for sure.  Now contracts are really going to get skewed.  

[2006Coltsbestever]

What Andrew Luck has meant to the Colts so far:

-35-20 as a Regular Season starter (wins 63.6% of his games)

-3 Playoff wins and 1 Championship Game appearance

-Holds Rookie record for most Yards passing = 4374 (2012)

-Only 1 of 8 other QB's in NFL history to throw for at least 40 or more TD's in a season (2014)

-I think his greatest accomplishment so far in his career is taking a team from 2-14 to 11-5 and a Playoff berth in his Rookie Season. Following a guy like Peyton had to be enormous pressure. Our Roster was garbage that season with the exception of Reggie Wayne, Robert Mathis, Vonte Davis, Adam Vinatieri, and Pat McAfee. 2 of our best players were a Kicker and a Punter  TY Hilton luckily was Good as well and has panned out. That Roster was close to 70% different from the 2011 Roster and had a new HeadCoach, etc.. Going 11-5 that season was nothing short of miraculous!

[21isSuperman]

9 minutes ago, Narcosys said:

smdh.  I've just read up on all Superman has said but it only slightly alleviates my issues with this.  That being he doesn't deserve it.  He hasn't played ir shown the potential to play at that kind of level he just got paid. 

 

Teams are not happy with the colts right now that's for sure.  Now contracts are really going to get skewed.  

He didn't play well last year, but he was pretty good the year before.  Not only that, but in a case like this, you pay for what he's going to do.  He could very well win at least 1 MVP and 1 Super Bowl during the next 6 years

[2006Coltsbestever]

12 minutes ago, Narcosys said:

smdh.  I've just read up on all Superman has said but it only slightly alleviates my issues with this.  That being he doesn't deserve it.  He hasn't played ir shown the potential to play at that kind of level he just got paid. 

 

Teams are not happy with the colts right now that's for sure.  Now contracts are really going to get skewed.  

The market value for QB's will go way up in 2 or 3 years. Andrew Luck was in the discussion for League MVP by many analysts in 2014. For a Rookie, he had a Great Rookie Season and overall in his first 3 seasons he was Very Good. He was injured last season so I give him a pass for last season. Now if he stinks it up this upcoming season then we should all be concerned.

[Narcosys]

Just read an article on espn, wish ib could paste the link bit the mobile version of this format has never let me,  just does this

 

this HTML class. Value is http://espn.go.com/n

 

Anyways,  it says Luck's contract should have been bigger.  My question about the article is why would passing $27M of the guarantee into years 3 and 4 be a risk for the player.  It's still all guaranteed.  Is it because it becomes more incentive laden? 

[2006Coltsbestever]

16 minutes ago, Narcosys said:

Just read an article on espn, wish ib could paste the link bit the mobile version of this format has never let me,  just does this

 

this HTML class. Value is http://espn.go.com/n

 

Anyways,  it says Luck's contract should have been bigger.  My question about the article is why would passing $27M of the guarantee into years 3 and 4 be a risk for the player.  It's still all guaranteed.  Is it because it becomes more incentive laden? 

I am not really sure how alot of that works? Both Superman's can probably explain it. I have also been reading Andrew couldve got more money but agreed to this deal.

[CF4L]

3 hours ago, NewColtsFan said:

 

Not to worry.....    this contract will likely be redone at least once, and perhaps twice over the 6 years....    I wouldn't even rule out 3 times.

 

Luck will get more guaranteed money and his cap hit will get lowered which will give the Colts more room to keep the roster loaded with as much talent as the Colts can keep.      That's how good teams and top talent play the contract game.

 

Luck isn't going anywhere.       I'd put the chances of him leaving, or getting cut,  or traded,   right around ZERO.

 

Don't lose a minutes sleep over this.       Seriously.

 

 

True it could be redone but to say Luck is going to spend his entire career here is rather unrealistic considering past history.

 

How many thought Manning would retire elsewhere? He did and he's as big an icon for the Indy Colts as you can get.

 

Freeney, Clark, Saturday etc all ended up getting tossed aside even with their deals with the Colts. Nothing about Luck makes me think he's an exception over them.

 

These contracts don't guarantee anything except right now that Andrew Luck is the QB of the Colts for the foreseeable future but we don't know how long that future will be.