Jump to content
  • Welcome!

    Register and log in easily with Twitter or Google accounts!

    Or simply create a new Huddle account. 

    Members receive fewer ads , access our dark theme, and the ability to join the discussion!

     

Andrew Luck's Career is possibly over.


JakeDel5674

Recommended Posts

2 minutes ago, HornetsSting said:

Jesus, could you just imagine had he been behind our O line? Hate it for him.

There's absolutely no reason to believe he would have had that same shoulder injury in carolina. 

football is a blood sport where poo happens

the colts problem was how they managed it, forcing him to play on it for two years and letting god knows what happen to it in the meantime. 

colts are a trash organization who lucked in to him

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, electro's horse said:

There's absolutely no reason to believe he would have had that same shoulder injury in carolina. 

football is a blood sport where poo happens

the colts problem was how they managed it, forcing him to play on it for two years and letting god knows what happen to it in the meantime. 

colts are a trash organization who lucked in to him

nice pun

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I read he did what Cam did, knew his shoulder was hurt but kept passing through the pain. Difference was he apparently hurt his in the beginning of the season, like game three and kept playing. Having surgery a week after an injury and 10 months after an injury are two completely different things. He changed his mechanics to lessen the pain which put more stress on different parts of his shoulder which only increased the damage. Hate it for the guy but I find this mentality of "I've got to play through the pain to show the other guys I'm with them" is stupid and in his case possible career ending.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 minutes ago, Dex said:

Poor guy. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Bullet dodged.

Panthers got lucky getting the far more durable Newton because the results would have been largely the same if Luck came to Carolina. The only difference between the Colts and Panthers is, the Panthers know how to build and play defense.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That really sucks. I have no problem with Luck and hold no grudge against him for staying in school for his senior year like some in this community. The guy has always been a class act.

Maybe the Colts can trade him a-la the Chargers with Brees in 2006 and draft Sam Darnold, who I think is the most overrated QB in CFB this year.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, TNPanther said:

That really sucks. I have no problem with Luck and hold no grudge against him for staying in school for his senior year like some in this community. The guy has always been a class act.

Maybe the Colts can trade him a-la the Chargers with Brees in 2006 and draft Sam Darnold, who I think is the most overrated QB in CFB this year.

Yeah, he's not good to me.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, hepcat said:

Panthers got lucky getting the far more durable Newton because the results would have been largely the same if Luck came to Carolina. The only difference between the Colts and Panthers is, the Panthers know how to build and play defense.

Pretty much. If we can say the only decent weapon we have given Cam in Olsen, the Colts can say the only decent weapon they gave Luck is Hilton(to me that is exaggerated). Though they did attempt to draft a 1st round WR from Miami, cant think of his name in which he as already traded to Patriots while we drafted KB. And our o-line has significantly been better than theirs, if anyone can fathom that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.


  • PMH4OWPW7JD2TDGWZKTOYL2T3E.jpg

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • In my opinion Fitterer was probably right about not paying McCaffrey. Now not wanting to "pay RBs" in my opinion isn't something you want to set in stone, to me it all comes down to the individual.
    • Maybe I'm just not understanding, but everywhere that I have read says that signing bonuses go against the cap prorated by as much as five years. The following example uses Andrew Luck's rookie contract as an example. "Take Andrew Luck, the first overall pick in the 2012 NFL draft. Luck signed a four-year contract with the Colts worth $22.1 million and included a $14.5 million signing bonus. Rather than a $14.5 million cap hit in 2012, the Colts spread out his signing bonus over the life of his contract. The hit against the cap would be $3.625 million per year over four years instead of a direct cap hit of $14.5 million directly in 2012. This gave the Colts more leverage and cap flexibility in signing other players." https://www.the33rdteam.com/nfl-signing-bonuses-explained/ I don't know why some of you think that signing bonuses aren't counted against the cap over the length of the contract, but whatever.   "The bonus with a signing is usually the most garish aspect of a rookie contract. Bonus is the immediate cash players receive when they ink a deal. It factors into the cap, but only for the whole contract duration, in terms of salary cap calculations. In the case of Bryce Young’s $24.6 million signing bonus, that’s prorated to approximately $6.15 million per season over a four-year deal. This format allows teams to handle the cap and provides rookies with some short-term fiscal stability, which is important given the high injury risk in this league." https://collegefootballnetwork.com/how-rookie-contracts-work-in-the-nfl/ I understand how signing bonuses can be a useful tool in order to manage the cap, and as one of the article suggests, signing bonuses may become important if you have a tight cap, but the bill is always going to come due. I'm not necessarily referring to you Tuka, but it seems to me that others simply don't want to understand that fact which is why they're reacting to what I'm saying negatively. How odd. In any event, I have a better general understanding of why signing bonuses are used now, and it's generally to fit salaries under the cap. Surely players, whether they be rookies or not, love a signing bonus because they get a good portion of their money up front. This in turn gives them more security and probably amounts to tax benefits as well. I also understand why teams would not want to use signing bonuses, particularly for players or draftees who have a higher probability of being gone before a contract even ends.
    • Get any shot you can at humane society, so much cheaper
×
×
  • Create New...