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!

     

I want Andrew Luck


Ricky Spanish

Recommended Posts

This is not my prediction, it's not who i think you people should want, it's just who i want. I saw the kid play a year back or so and was instantly impressed. I could not wait until he was eligible to be drafted. this year there's a chance we can get him if he declares. I want him (no homo, not that there's anything wrong with that).

yes we have Jimmy, yes we have Matt, and it is waaaaaaaaay too early to declare jimmy a bust, but honestly, i don't want the kid. I was pissed when they drafted him, I wish him the best, but dammit his last name isn't luck so i'm not happy.

think about the possible fan signs we could have-

"All you need is a little LUCK"

"We've got Luck on our side" and then put a shamrock right next to it, is he irish? who cares. It doesn't matter, because it just works.

call me an idiot, a douche, a retard, I don't care. just my personal choice for who i want under center for the next 10+ years.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Bills will have the #1 pick and take him, Hurney is still here and won't take a QB with his first pick in consecutive years, Patrick Peterson is the BPA of the draft, a need, and the best CB prospect to come out since Darrelle Revis.

But yeah, besides that we should totally get Luck.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It still baffles me how so many people think that Luck is the savior for this team after Clausen shredded Stanford in his last college game in 2009. Playing well in college does not guarantee you will light it up on a bad team in the NFL. Go look at Stafford's numbers in Detroit (who by the way I would take any day of the week over Bradford).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It still baffles me how so many people think that Luck is the savior for this team after Clausen shredded Stanford in his last college game in 2009. Playing well in college does not guarantee you will light it up on a bad team in the NFL. Go look at Stafford's numbers in Detroit (who by the way I would take any day of the week over Bradford).

yeah but luck didn't play defense.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This is not my prediction, it's not who i think you people should want, it's just who i want. I saw the kid play a year back or so and was instantly impressed. I could not wait until he was eligible to be drafted. this year there's a chance we can get him if he declares. I want him (no homo, not that there's anything wrong with that).

yes we have Jimmy, yes we have Matt, and it is waaaaaaaaay too early to declare jimmy a bust, but honestly, i don't want the kid. I was pissed when they drafted him, I wish him the best, but dammit his last name isn't luck so i'm not happy.

think about the possible fan signs we could have-

"All you need is a little LUCK"

"We've got Luck on our side" and then put a shamrock right next to it, is he irish? who cares. It doesn't matter, because it just works.

call me an idiot, a douche, a retard, I don't care. just my personal choice for who i want under center for the next 10+ years.

I am inclined to agree with you Cracka McNasty,so what,in your opinion,does Luck bring to the Game that Clausen doesn't and how would you rate his upside compared to Clausen.

The reason i ask these questions is i know very little about Luck and have never seen him play,just heard others talk about him. Thanks

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Bills will have the #1 pick and take him, Hurney is still here and won't take a QB with his first pick in consecutive years, Patrick Peterson is the BPA of the draft, a need, and the best CB prospect to come out since Darrelle Revis.

But yeah, besides that we should totally get Luck.

i see what you're saying, we will have a bigger need at CB and possibly DL, I understand that, I just reaaaaaaally want Luck badly...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I am inclined to agree with you Cracka McNasty,so what,in your opinion,does Luck bring to the Game that Clausen doesn't and how would you rate his upside compared to Clausen.

The reason i ask these questions is i know very little about Luck and have never seen him play,just heard others talk about him. Thanks

kid has great poise, he just looks like a leader (might not actually be one, but if he isn't, he's a great actor). Great Size 6-4", above average arm, and mobile. He's inexperienced but he really just seems to have a tremendous upside. He just seems to have that "it" factor. I didn't see it in Clausen and I don't see it in Jake Locker.

then again, i am not a professional scout nor do i claim to be. Just my opinion of the kid.

more on him here:

http://www.nepatriotsdraft.com/2010/05/andrew-luck-scouting-report.html

http://draftace.com/blog/2010/05/12/a-early-scouting-report-on-andrew-luck/

http://nflmocks.com/2010/06/30/2011-nfl-draft-scouting-report-andrew-luck-stanford/

http://recruiting.scout.com/a.z?s=73&p=8&c=1&nid=2741838

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

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


  • PMH4OWPW7JD2TDGWZKTOYL2T3E.jpg

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • Congratulations do they know who the father is?
    • 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.
×
×
  • Create New...