If the Colts really suck, would they trade Luck to Buffalo?

[Chuck Wagon]

 

If they tank the season by trading Luck for draft picks to rebuild and draft another QB high in the 1st .

 

The team traded to would need a lot of cap space.

 

 

The receiving team wouldn't need that much cap space, it would be the Colts that would be looking at a huge cap hit. The receiving team only gets his guaranteed yearly salary, the bonus money accelerates immediately onto the Colts cap.

 

 

Take Sammy for example. He's costing the Rams $700K this year but he's $5.6 mil of dead money on our books.

[ALF]

 

 

The receiving team wouldn't need that much cap space, it would be the Colts that would be looking at a huge cap hit. The receiving team only gets his guaranteed yearly salary, the bonus money accelerates immediately onto the Colts cap.

 

 

You are right , just looked at his dead money, untradeable like Dareus contract

 

http://www.spotrac.com/nfl/indianapolis-colts/andrew-luck-9811/

[Canadian Bills Fan]

 

You are right , just looked at his dead money, untradeable like Dareus contract

 

http://www.spotrac.com/nfl/indianapolis-colts/andrew-luck-9811/

 

 

Wow that's one heck of a contract

 

 

CBF

[Coach Tuesday]

"suck for Luck" turned into "suck with Luck." they need to fire Pagano, i can't believe he still has a job. Arians was the best coach they've had since Dungy and they let him leave after he almost got them to the Super Bowl. it's been downhill ever since

 

And ironically enough, Luck would be the PERFECT QB for Arians' system. In fact the Cardinals should try to swing a trade for Luck, they already have the rest of their roster rounded out and don't really need the picks. Luck is the best QB in the league at keeping his eyes downfield and finding receivers late in their routes, and Arians' offense is predicated on that.

[dave mcbride]

 

And ironically enough, Luck would be the PERFECT QB for Arians' system. In fact the Cardinals should try to swing a trade for Luck, they already have the rest of their roster rounded out and don't really need the picks. Luck is the best QB in the league at keeping his eyes downfield and finding receivers late in their routes, and Arians' offense is predicated on that.

Yup. It leads to a fair amount of sacks, but the upside is big.

[Alphadawg7]

 

And ironically enough, Luck would be the PERFECT QB for Arians' system. In fact the Cardinals should try to swing a trade for Luck, they already have the rest of their roster rounded out and don't really need the picks. Luck is the best QB in the league at keeping his eyes downfield and finding receivers late in their routes, and Arians' offense is predicated on that.

 

Sorry Ih ave to disagree here...he is not the best QB in the league at anything. Not saying the kid is a bum by any means, but there isn't a single aspect of his game that is better than Aaron Rogers for instance. And its not really debatable IMO.

[GoBills808]

 

Sorry Ih ave to disagree here...he is not the best QB in the league at anything. Not saying the kid is a bum by any means, but there isn't a single aspect of his game that is better than Aaron Rogers for instance. And its not really debatable IMO.

Averages more passing and rushing yards/game, to start.

[Alphadawg7]

Luck to Buffalo: BAD idea. Here is why.

 

1. He has serious durability concerns. This is a legit issue with him because his injuries are things you can say is just bad luck, his injuries are because of bad Luck, as in the person. His play style is going to keep him a pillar of durability concerns, and he has shown no attempts to alter it to help preserve a body that has already taken a beating.

 

2. He has a team choking contract. A contract like Lucks here is going to see us have to get rid of other talent because we wont be able to afford to keep them. I think it would be a good bet Shady was gone, he would be a target given age for a RB and contract size. Wouldn't be surprised to see Clay be a casualty too, and Dareus would be another potential guy in danger of being moved given how big his contract is in relation to him being a knucklehead (this might happen ether way if he screws up one more time).

 

The only thing Luck has been proven to do with a bad roster, is beat bad teams and then see his play suffer greatly against good teams and in the playoffs.

 

3. He is mistake prone. 105 INT/Fumbles (over 1.55 per game) in just 76 career games. He compiles exciting totals, but he also costs his team plenty of games or put them in big holes because of his tendency to turn the ball over or fumble.

 

4. He has terrible personal stats in 3 playoff years never accounting for more TDs than turnovers a single time. His play is a substantial drop in the postseason in relation to the corresponding regular seasons.

 

5. There is WAY MORE to winning in the NFL than passing yards. A talented TEAM with balance will be substantially more dangerous than a weak roster with a QB that accumulates gaudy passing stats. Ask the Chargers, Saints, Falcons, Colts, and Lions who in the last 3 years have combined for 3 playoff appearances out of a possible 15 despite high volume passers at the helm.

 

So if there is a great QB prospect we can take at our draft slot or package some picks together to get one, that to me is a way better bet to rebuilding this team. You get that QB at an affordable price while assembling a way more talented team around him to go with all the other picks we saved NOT trading for Luck which would cost more than trading for a better draft slot.

 

I am a big NO on trading for Luck. He's an extremely talented player and would be without question the best QB we have had since Kelly. HOWEVER, I firmly believe our long term success is better rooted in adding to this team than taking away. And between his drop off against better competition, his mistakes, his injury history, and the sheer expense of both acquiring him and handling his contract with the cap its just not a good TEAM move.

 

Drew Brees should have as many rings as Brady if it was all about the QB as Bress has been light years better than Lucks career and hasn't had a winning season in 6 years.

Edited September 15, 2017 by Alphadawg7

[JÂy RÛßeÒ]

Rosen was actually a more celebrated prospect.

Aww, thanks BADOL!

[Over 29 years of fanhood]

They sucked into Luck, now we think they wish to suck outta Luck?

[GoBills808]

Luck to Buffalo: BAD idea. Here is why.

 

1. He has serious durability concerns. This is a legit issue with him because his injuries are things you can say is just bad luck, his injuries are because of bad Luck, as in the person. His play style is going to keep him a pillar of durability concerns, and he has shown no attempts to alter it to help preserve a body that has already taken a beating.

 

2. He has a team choking contract. A contract like Lucks here is going to see us have to get rid of other talent because we wont be able to afford to keep them. I think it would be a good bet Shady was gone, he would be a target given age for a RB and contract size. Wouldn't be surprised to see Clay be a casualty too, and Dareus would be another potential guy in danger of being moved given how big his contract is in relation to him being a knucklehead (this might happen ether way if he screws up one more time).

 

The only thing Luck has been proven to do with a bad roster, is beat bad teams and then see his play suffer greatly against good teams and in the playoffs.

 

3. He is mistake prone. 105 INT/Fumbles (over 1.55 per game) in just 76 career games. He compiles exciting totals, but he also costs his team plenty of games or put them in big holes because of his tendency to turn the ball over or fumble.

 

4. He has terrible personal stats in 3 playoff years never accounting for more TDs than turnovers a single time. His play is a substantial drop in the postseason in relation to the corresponding regular seasons.

 

5. There is WAY MORE to winning in the NFL than passing yards. A talented TEAM with balance will be substantially more dangerous than a weak roster with a QB that accumulates gaudy passing stats. Ask the Chargers, Saints, Falcons, Colts, and Lions who in the last 3 years have combined for 3 playoff appearances out of a possible 15 despite high volume passers at the helm.

 

So if there is a great QB prospect we can take at our draft slot or package some picks together to get one, that to me is a way better bet to rebuilding this team. You get that QB at an affordable price while assembling a way more talented team around him to go with all the other picks we saved NOT trading for Luck which would cost more than trading for a better draft slot.

 

I am a big NO on trading for Luck. He's an extremely talented player and would be without question the best QB we have had since Kelly. HOWEVER, I firmly believe our long term success is better rooted in adding to this team than taking away. And between his drop off against better competition, his mistakes, his injury history, and the sheer expense of both acquiring him and handling his contract with the cap its just not a good TEAM move.

 

Drew Brees should have as many rings as Brady if it was all about the QB as Bress has been light years better than Lucks career and hasn't had a winning season in 6 years.

I would EASILY lose Dareus, McCoy, and Clay for Luck. In a heartbeat.

[aristocrat]

luck might be the best qb in the league based on how bad they are without him

[BringBackOrton]

Luck to Buffalo: BAD idea. Here is why.

 

1. He has serious durability concerns. This is a legit issue with him because his injuries are things you can say is just bad luck, his injuries are because of bad Luck, as in the person. His play style is going to keep him a pillar of durability concerns, and he has shown no attempts to alter it to help preserve a body that has already taken a beating.

 

2. He has a team choking contract. A contract like Lucks here is going to see us have to get rid of other talent because we wont be able to afford to keep them. I think it would be a good bet Shady was gone, he would be a target given age for a RB and contract size. Wouldn't be surprised to see Clay be a casualty too, and Dareus would be another potential guy in danger of being moved given how big his contract is in relation to him being a knucklehead (this might happen ether way if he screws up one more time).

 

The only thing Luck has been proven to do with a bad roster, is beat bad teams and then see his play suffer greatly against good teams and in the playoffs.

 

3. He is mistake prone. 105 INT/Fumbles (over 1.55 per game) in just 76 career games. He compiles exciting totals, but he also costs his team plenty of games or put them in big holes because of his tendency to turn the ball over or fumble.

 

4. He has terrible personal stats in 3 playoff years never accounting for more TDs than turnovers a single time. His play is a substantial drop in the postseason in relation to the corresponding regular seasons.

 

5. There is WAY MORE to winning in the NFL than passing yards. A talented TEAM with balance will be substantially more dangerous than a weak roster with a QB that accumulates gaudy passing stats. Ask the Chargers, Saints, Falcons, Colts, and Lions who in the last 3 years have combined for 3 playoff appearances out of a possible 15 despite high volume passers at the helm.

 

So if there is a great QB prospect we can take at our draft slot or package some picks together to get one, that to me is a way better bet to rebuilding this team. You get that QB at an affordable price while assembling a way more talented team around him to go with all the other picks we saved NOT trading for Luck which would cost more than trading for a better draft slot.

 

I am a big NO on trading for Luck. He's an extremely talented player and would be without question the best QB we have had since Kelly. HOWEVER, I firmly believe our long term success is better rooted in adding to this team than taking away. And between his drop off against better competition, his mistakes, his injury history, and the sheer expense of both acquiring him and handling his contract with the cap its just not a good TEAM move.

 

Drew Brees should have as many rings as Brady if it was all about the QB as Bress has been light years better than Lucks career and hasn't had a winning season in 6 years.

What QB would you rather us trade for or acquire, realistically? Edited September 15, 2017 by jmc12290

[Alphadawg7]

Averages more passing and rushing yards/game, to start.

 

Under no circumstance do totals automatically equate to being the best at anything. As a math example, If someone throws 50 times and gets 300 yards passing, that does not make him better because of it than a guy who threw 20 times and got 280 yards passing.

 

There is not a single person in the NFL that would say Luck is better than Rogers in any aspect of his game. Even as a runner, Rogers is so much smarter in his running style and preserving himself to stay on the field.

[thunderingsquid]

Damaged goods, man.

[Alphadawg7]

What QB would you rather us trade for, realistically?

 

No one in the NFL, simply because I don't think anyone worth trading for will be available. If a franchise guy somehow was available in a trade scenario, sure, lets explore...just don't expect that to be an option.

 

I really like some prospects to target in the draft. Specifically Darnold, Mayfield, Hubert, and Rosen. We should be in position to draft or trade to draft one of those guys assuming they are all in the draft. And if we do need to make a trade to get into position to get the one we want, it wont cost us nearly as much as it would to get Luck IMO in draft assets and cap room. And there are other intriguing QB prospects as well that easily can rise into top 10 consideration by the time the Combine is over. This draft class has 1983 type potential depth in it.

 

We are rebuilding, lets do it with draft assets and not a bloated contract of a turnover prone QB who is a legit injury concern. I know many will not agree, and thats fine, this is just what I would do with a GM. People fail in love with totals and lose all site of effectiveness, reliability, and what makes an overall better team. Again, if totals mattered, Bress would be the winningest QB in the NFL, yet he hasn't had a winning season in 5 years.

Edited September 15, 2017 by Alphadawg7

[QuoteTheRaven83]

If we offered them our next 10 first and 2nd round picks, Marcell Dareus, Lesean McCoy, Kyle Williams, Micah Hyde, Richie Incognito, Tre'Davious White, Zay Jones, Charles Clay, and Tyrod Taylor. They'd definitely trade us Andrew Luck.

Edited September 15, 2017 by QuoteTheRaven83

[GoBills808]

 

Under no circumstance do totals automatically equate to being the best at anything. As a math example, If someone throws 50 times and gets 300 yards passing, that does not make him better because of it than a guy who threw 20 times and got 280 yards passing.

Of course. But those are pretty extreme examples...what about two guys who throw 28 times/game for 209 yards and 37 times/game for 273 yards, respectively?

[26CornerBlitz]

@BleacherReport

The Colts are a mess, and @mikefreemanNFL says NFL execs believe it’s time Andrew Luck demands a trade http://ble.ac/2x5LrBi

[Alphadawg7]

Of course. But those are pretty extreme examples...what about two guys who throw 28 times/game for 209 yards and 37 times/game for 273 yards, respectively?

 

Of course, I used an extreme example just to make the point easier to understand that arguing someones totals to validate skill over another is not close to reliable because every person plays on a different team, different scheme, different situations.

 

You used totals to make the case he was better than Rogers when Luck isn't better than Rogers in any category. All good, I get you like Luck...but MANY people don't feel the same about him. Rogers is unquestionably an absolute Elite QB. Luck does not have that same resume or respect and there is not a team in the NFL that would freely choose Luck over Rogers in any scenario, even if Luck had no health concerns.

 

Look, I get people being enamored with Luck, not like people are discussing Jay Cutler here where that would be absurd. Luck is an extremely talented guy, but its not like he doesn't have some concerns. Highly mistake prone at an alarming rate, significant dip in personal production in the post season, injury concerns, and a massive contract you have to absorb to bet on him getting past those concerns.

 

For me, I just don't feel as comfortable becoming the Saints or Colts part 2 then I do becoming a team like Dallas or Seattle that added a young QB to a more talented team and have a brighter future for it. What future do the Colts have even with Luck? They are not very good with him either nor will they win anything any time soon. I dont know if there is anything move over valued by people than passing yard totals.

Edited September 15, 2017 by Alphadawg7