The Myth Behind Not Signing Andrew Luck Now

[Flash7]

I've heard that we should go ahead and sign Luck now and give him the play book so he can start to learn our offense. I've also heard that we shouldn't sign him because he may get injured or hurt before the draft. That lead me to think, if Andrew Luck gets injured before the draft, will that change your mind whether we should draft him or not? What if it were an ankle injury and what if it were a knee injury? In my opinion, an injury to Andrew Luck would just be a delay, and we shuld still draft him. Your thoughts?

(Not a jinx to Luck)

[CR91]

you better knock on wood there buddy.

[UndecidedFrog]

I would like to differentiate between 2 separate things:

1) Have Irsay privately inform Luck that he will be the Colt's choice

2) Signing Luck to a contract.

I support doing (1) as soon as possible, after the decision is made.

I support initiating the negotiations for (2) in about 10 days from today.

[Flash7]

I would like to differentiate between 2 separate things:

1) Have Irsay privately inform Luck that he will be the Colt's choice

2) Signing Luck to a contract.

I support doing (1) as soon as possible, after the decision is made.

I support initiating the negotiations for (2) in about 10 days from today.

1. By merely informing him that he will be the eventual choice, would this effect his ability to review the play book?

2. Can he even receive the playbook at this time according to the CBA even if he were signed?

[Fx Stryker]

An iffy Peyton is not okay?

But a possibility of an iffy Andrew Luck is okay?

hmmmm, okay then.

[FightLikeSin]

An iffy Peyton is not okay?

But a possibility of an iffy Andrew Luck is okay?

hmmmm, okay then.

when one is 36 and the other is 22? I would have less concerns about the future of the 22 yr old.

[UndecidedFrog]

1. By merely informing him that he will be the eventual choice, would this effect his ability to review the play book?

2. Can he even receive the playbook at this time according to the CBA even if he were signed?

From my understanding:

1) No, he needs to be signed in order to provide him with a playbook.

2) Yes, if he was signed, he is allowed to receive the playbook.

[Fx Stryker]

when one is 36 and the other is 22? I would have less concerns about the future of the 22 yr old.

One also is capable of playing at a high level. One you don't know.

[DS3]

Im new here and i know alot about the colts and i think they should sign him now because everyone knows we are going to draft him plus he has the same chance of getting injured after the draft

[oldunclemark]

I think Luck was told its him after Manning was released..

..and I think he's had whatever playobook we have (we have a new coach who has neever been a head coach so i dont know what 'playbook' we have constrcuted) since last month..

I could be wrong but I dont believe our peole would just sit around without being in almost constant contact

[Flash7]

One also is capable of playing at a high level. One you don't know.

I think that you have to take into consideration the injury. A bum ankle isn't a big deal. A knee injury is a big deal but we've seen others bounce back from them, (brady.) With Manning we were considering his age, his 4 neck surgeries etc..

The choice now wouldn't be between Manning and Luck, as Manning is already out. It's now, Luck or no Luck, or Luck or RGIII.

[FireJimCaldwell]

He would not be allowed to be given a playbook until he is under contract with the Colts. Even at that point he is limited by the CBA on when and how he can communicate with the coaches.

He should be signed a few days prior to the draft.

[FightLikeSin]

One was once capable at playing at a high level, but we have no idea about how he'll perform now that he is 36 coming off of multiple neck surgeries and a year of not throwing a football. One you don't know.

Fixed it for ya.

[FireJimCaldwell]

I've heard that we should go ahead and sign Luck now and give him the play book so he can start to learn our offense. I've also heard that we shouldn't sign him because he may get injured or hurt before the draft. That lead me to think, if Andrew Luck gets injured before the draft, will that change your mind whether we should draft him or not? What if it were an ankle injury and what if it were a knee injury? In my opinion, an injury to Andrew Luck would just be a delay, and we shuld still draft him. Your thoughts?

(Not a jinx to Luck)

With an ACL they would have to weight the factors of him sitting out a year.

With a Shoulder injury, it might be more of a gamble based on the injury.

Since it is set in stone that he's here for 15 years, one would have to compare and contrast whether or not one of those years should be used in rehabbing if such an injury were to occur. They would then have to view that against the RGIII scenario in the future.

[UndecidedFrog]

I think Luck was told its him after Manning was released..

..and I think he's had whatever playobook we have (we have a new coach who has neever been a head coach so i dont know what 'playbook' we have constrcuted) since last month..

I could be wrong but I dont believe our peole would just sit around without being in almost constant contact

If Luck was told when PM was released, why all the play-acting with private workouts, and public statements that the decision is up in the air? Why the invitation to a private workout for RG3?

It seems too elaborate to be true. The internal decision may have already been made, but I don't think anyone has told Luck.

[GoColts8818]

One also is capable of playing at a high level. One you don't know.

We don't know if Manning is still capable of playing at a high level. He hasn't played since the injury and that was a major part of this. It looks like he's recoverying but I even heard someone on ESPN yesterday say that Peyton probably wont be 100% again. So if it's not the old Manning how good will he be? That remains to be seen. There are a lot of unknowns about Manning at this point in time so let's not try to pretend that there aren't.

[Balzer40]

One also is capable of playing at a high level. One you don't know.

Are you ever going to move on?

[Fx Stryker]

I think that you have to take into consideration the injury. A bum ankle isn't a big deal. A knee injury is a big deal but we've seen others bounce back from them, (brady.) With Manning we were considering his age, his 4 neck surgeries etc..

The choice now wouldn't be between Manning and Luck, as Manning is already out. It's now, Luck or no Luck, or Luck or RGIII.

We seen people bounce back from neck injuries. What's your point. I'm not making it out to be Manning vs Luck. Just saying he doesn't deserve a special pass because he is Luck. He gets injured you take Griffin. That simple.

[Nobody]

Three reasons for not signing him yet

1) if Luck thinks we may sign RG3, he may be easier to sign, and for less $. (leverage)

2) unlikely, but he could get some sort of terrible injury.

3) He can't get the playbook until draft day.

[FireJimCaldwell]

Three reasons for not signing him yet

1) if Luck thinks we may sign RG3, he may be easier to sign, and for less $. (leverage)

2) unlikely, but he could get some sort of terrible injury.

3) He can't get the playbook until draft day.

Money/leverage isn't a part of the equation due to the Rookie Salary scale.Points 2 and 3 are spot on.

[Smonroe]

I've heard that we should go ahead and sign Luck now and give him the play book so he can start to learn our offense. I've also heard that we shouldn't sign him because he may get injured or hurt before the draft. That lead me to think, if Andrew Luck gets injured before the draft, will that change your mind whether we should draft him or not? What if it were an ankle injury and what if it were a knee injury? In my opinion, an injury to Andrew Luck would just be a delay, and we shuld still draft him. Your thoughts?

(Not a jinx to Luck)

I was really hoping to read a myth here. Something like Andrew Luck is too busy on his unicorn ranch to sign a contract right now.

I'm disappointed.

[Smurphy1]

Three reasons for not signing him yet

1) if Luck thinks we may sign RG3, he may be easier to sign, and for less $. (leverage)

What about the rookie wage scale? I don't think there is any real leeway in negotiating for more money after being drafted.

[FightLikeSin]

Three reasons for not signing him yet

1) if Luck thinks we may sign RG3, he may be easier to sign, and for less $. (leverage)

2) unlikely, but he could get some sort of terrible injury.

3) He can't get the playbook until draft day.

1. I don't think Luck has any doubts that the Colts are drooling over him. I'm sure they have already had the conversation with him before releasing Manning.

2. Solution - Plastic bubble until draft day.

3. No argument there.

[UndecidedFrog]

I was really hoping to read a myth here. Something like Andrew Luck is too busy on his unicorn ranch to sign a contract right now.

I'm disappointed.

:unicorn:

However, I think it is better not to associate our future QB with anything that remotely can be construed as similar to the situation of Vick and dogs.

[Dan]

3) He can't get the playbook until draft day.

Why not?

I'm not denying the validity of the statement - I'm just asking why he isn't allowed to

[haughvillian]

Actually, I think there's some negotiation on length of contract with option year(s). The top pick may want 4 year contract with no option. The team would like 4 year deal with an option year. I'm not positive about that but it could be the only ploy in playing the head games with Luck. The $ is pretty straight forward...

[Nadine]

I've removed several posts from this thread that were an attempt to resurrect the discussion as to whether manning should have been cut.

It's off topic, nobody is changing their mind.

Cease Fire invoked in this thread:

Read more about it: http://forums.colts.com/index.php?/topic/7021-cease-fire-please-you-know-who-you-are/

[UndecidedFrog]

Actually, I think there's some negotiation on length of contract with option year(s). The top pick may want 4 year contract with no option. The team would like 4 year deal with an option year. I'm not positive about that but it could be the only ploy in playing the head games with Luck. The $ is pretty straight forward...

According to the new CBA, all first round picks have mandatory structure on length of contract:

4 years with a 5th year at team option.

[FireJimCaldwell]

Actually, I think there's some negotiation on length of contract with option year(s). The top pick may want 4 year contract with no option. The team would like 4 year deal with an option year. I'm not positive about that but it could be the only ploy in playing the head games with Luck. The $ is pretty straight forward...

It's a 4 year deal with an 5th year option per the CBA. The option isn't negotiable.

Some teams/players had small negotiations on guaranteeing the full contract as 100% or not, but outside of that the money will stay the same. I guess some teams wanted to protect themselves from drafting a dud. Some rookie contracts were full guaranteed last year. Some weren't.

[Nobody]

Why not?

I'm not denying the validity of the statement - I'm just asking why he isn't allowed to

No idea. To keep some teams from having an unfair advantage I guess.

[Nobody]

Money/leverage isn't a part of the equation due to the Rookie Salary scale.Points 2 and 3 are spot on.

What about the rookie wage scale? I don't think there is any real leeway in negotiating for more money after being drafted.

1. I don't think Luck has any doubts that the Colts are drooling over him. I'm sure they have already had the conversation with him before releasing Manning.

2. Solution - Plastic bubble until draft day.

3. No argument there.

According to the new CBA, all first round picks have mandatory structure on length of contract:

4 years with a 5th year at team option.

Alright, my bad, 2 reasons, 2 and 3. Still, no reason to sign him yet. You never know.

[FireJimCaldwell]

Alright, my bad, 2 reasons, 2 and 3. Still, no reason to sign him yet. You never know.

Agreed still too soon.

[OZOC01]

I would not be surprised if Luck is signed in the next week or two. Then the Redskins will start to work on their guy's contract...

[UndecidedFrog]

No idea. To keep some teams from having an unfair advantage I guess.

Actually, you bring up an interesting point.

From my understanding,

1) All teams are permitted to provide to its contracted players a copy of their playbook. Similarly, all contracted players are allowed to receive from their team, a copy of the playbook. This was evident in the lock out situation earlier last season, when Alex Smith, a FA at the time could not receive a copy of the 49er playbook, even though he and the team had every expectation to re-sign.

2) Also, according to the new CBA rules (and the old CBA rules) the team possessing the #1 overall pick in the upcoming draft is allowed to negotiate and sign their pick before draft day.

3) There is no prohibition of providing the playbook to the #1 overall pick that is signed by the team.

I would be interested if anyone can find information to the contrary.

[Flash7]

If there is minimal contract negotiations and the likely hood of Luck getting hurt remaining the same regardless of whethe we sign him now or not, who not sign him?

It appears to me that the only benefit of not signing him now would be:

1. The FO is really unsure of who they would like to sign, which is a little unlikely to me. I think they knew the direction that we are headed in.

2. The Colts can benefit from being in the spot light a little longer, making a small market team more relavent on the big stage of the NFL, especially without you know who!

[UndecidedFrog]

If there is minimal contract negotiations and the likely hood of Luck getting hurt remaining the same regardless of whethe we sign him now or not, who not sign him?

It appears to me that the only benefit of not signing him now would be:

1. The FO is really unsure of who they would like to sign, which is a little unlikely to me. I think they knew the direction that we are headed in.

2. The Colts can benefit from being in the spot light a little longer, making a small market team more relavent on the big stage of the NFL, especially without you know who!

I think it is more likely #2.

[Flash7]

I was really hoping to read a myth here. Something like Andrew Luck is too busy on his unicorn ranch to sign a contract right now.

I'm disappointed.

Here is a myth about Andrew Luck. He has an esquilax. What's an esquilax you ask? It's a horse with the head of a dog, and the body of a dog.

[BleedingBlue]

LOL WHAT PLAYBOOK? Its in Denver.

[FireJimCaldwell]

If there is minimal contract negotiations and the likely hood of Luck getting hurt remaining the same regardless of whethe we sign him now or not, who not sign him?

The thing is if we do not sign him, then we still have options. If we do sign him and he's hurt, then we are stuck with damaged goods and/or time away from the game rehabbing.

[Flash7]

The thing is if we do not sign him, then we still have options. If we do sign him and he's hurt, then we are stuck with damaged goods and/or time away from the game rehabbing.

I guess that gets to the heart of the question. Would we sign him even if he was hurt?