Andrew Luck just got ALL THE MONEY

[IlluminatusUIUC]

Details on Andrew Luck deal:

5-year extension (6-year deal).

Just north of $139 million (a record).

$87 million in guarantees (a record).

— Adam Schefter (@AdamSchefter) June 29, 2016

I doubt this has a lot of fake money like Kaepernick's deal too

[YardRat]

30 years ago Jim Kelly became the highest paid player in the league, 5 years, between $7.5 and $8mil...TOTAL.

How soon until we see the first billion dollar contract? 15 years? 20?

[sudzy]

Wow those are crazy numbers. I realize Luck is suppose to be the next Peyton, but, so far he hasn't been. Funny you mention Keapernick, because last year, Kap's QBR was higher then Lucks 78.5 to 74.9. Now, would I have been happy if the Bills signed him to this deal? After the last 20 years of QBs? Absolutely!!

[sudzy]

30 years ago Jim Kelly became the highest paid player in the league, 5 years, between $7.5 and $8mil...TOTAL.

How soon until we see the first billion dollar contract? 15 years? 20?

I remember Warren Moon becoming the 1st million dollar player in 1984.

[Frenchman]

Indeed that is such a very huge record there.

[Mace]

Luck is still who he might be imho. I've pointed out he feasted mostly on his previously weaker division and he's .500 outside of it. I don't see him as a deadly force with a game on the line, he's iffy. Seems like a stellar young man with everything you want, but he doesn't take games over for 24.5 million a year (imho).

Granted, they've given him a crap o-line to work behind (I don't even think Castonzo, though regarded for some reason as good, is who you want protecting his blind side), and he gets pummeled too often.

But I don't think he's elite as some QB's have made us accustomed to seeing elite. I don't think any of the younger guys will be, besides maybe Newton setting a different measure. I think the era of Brady, Roethlisberger, Brees, Peyton and Rodgers are winding down for a while.

I'll be surprised if he makes it to a Super Bowl.

[TacklingDummy]

30 years ago Jim Kelly became the highest paid player in the league, 5 years, between $7.5 and $8mil...TOTAL.

How soon until we see the first billion dollar contract? 15 years? 20?

The Yankees will be giving $500 million to Harper. Maybe Trout.

[Joe Fo Sho]

He couldn't even beat the Bills last year.

[Mace]

He couldn't even beat the Bills last year.

He's a .500 crapshoot outside his division. I think in that lead up to the Bills game with everyone all "ooooh Luck !" and me feeling cranky was the first time I really looked at his game splits. 30% of his TD's came against his division and 50% of his wins where he's 17-2. That's alarming for 4 years of track record. He's not even a 60% completion passer.

But he's Andrew Luck. Not sure he doesn't improve exponentially, but it sure scares me how much teams are willing to spend. The thought is that franchise QB's are rare, and they are, but the truth is that their moments in time to dominate are even more rare, and becoming rarer still, and the guys you want to believe are franchise QB's are pretty seasonal for you to mortgage the team on maybe, probably or likely without huge potential that should payoff (Luck) or "for the love of heaven should I" (Taylor).

When you commit, you COMMIT and it changes everything most likely.

[Mouldsie]

Never wanted to tank so badly for a player.

The Colts would be an utter disaster without lucking into two stud QB's

[sukie]

As big a contract as that is...Luck's deal would rank 29th in MLB contracts. Mind blowing

[Joe Fo Sho]

He's a .500 crapshoot outside his division. I think in that lead up to the Bills game with everyone all "ooooh Luck !" and me feeling cranky was the first time I really looked at his game splits. 30% of his TD's came against his division and 50% of his wins where he's 17-2. That's alarming for 4 years of track record. He's not even a 60% completion passer.

Wouldn't the touchdown percentage actually work against your argument? He has 30% of his TDs against his terrible division, but he plays 37.5% of his games against his division. The wins makes sense, that's really interesting. I think his division is catching up to him, though..well maybe not the Titans.

I've always been rooting against Andrew Luck, and it certainly has nothing to do with jealously at all. Definitely not jealous that he's not on the Bills...definitely not. That'd be ridiculous.

But he's Andrew Luck. Not sure he doesn't improve exponentially, but it sure scares me how much teams are willing to spend. The thought is that franchise QB's are rare, and they are, but the truth is that their moments in time to dominate are even more rare, and becoming rarer still, and the guys you want to believe are franchise QB's are pretty seasonal for you to mortgage the team on maybe, probably or likely without huge potential that should payoff (Luck) or "for the love of heaven should I" (Taylor).

When you commit, you COMMIT and it changes everything most likely.

What position would you rather be in right now, the Colts or the Bills? I think we'd all say the Colts.

I'll take the franchise QB with all of the pros and cons that come with him over what we have. Are any franchise QBs in a playoff drought? I guess Eli would be with 4 seasons, Matt Ryan with 3, Cutler with 5. All of the other franchise QBs have been to the playoffs in the past few years.

[Topas]

As big a contract as that is...Luck's deal would rank 29th in MLB contracts. Mind blowing

What? Really? I dont follow the MLB at all, so I had no idea. Why is that? I mean number of fans is way smaller than for the NFL, ist it?
Probably because they have way more games, they get more revenue. And I assume a team has less than 53 players.

[Joe Fo Sho]

What? Really? I dont follow the MLB at all, so I had no idea. Why is that? I mean number of fans is way smaller than for the NFL, ist it?
Probably because they have way more games, they get more revenue. And I assume a team has less than 53 players.

Yeah, those reasons are probably accurate. They have 10 times as many games as the NFL, plus there's no salary cap. There is a tax on teams that spend over a certain amount of money, but that's the only penalty I believe. The Dodgers were taxed almost $44 million last year because their salary was so high. The Yankees only have 25 players on their active roster, with a total 2016 payroll of about $230 million. The NFL salary cap for the 2016 season I believe is around $155 million, and the NFL has more than twice the number of players on the roster. The top 8 salaries for the Yankees would put them over the NFL salary cap.

It's not like that for every team, just the top 9 teams in the MLB would be over the NFL salary cap, with about 10 teams spending around $100 million or less. The Brewers total payroll this season is $71.4 million, less than half of the NFL salary cap and just 28% of what the Dodgers total salary is. This is the biggest reason I don't follow baseball, that and each game means next to nothing.

Playoffs are a huge income earner for the big market teams in baseball, too. If you get to the World Series, you could potentially have 11 home games during your playoff run. That's more homes games than the any team in the NFL can have all season, including the playoffs.

Andrew Luck would rank 29th in total contract money, but 20th in terms of average money per season. Still, quite a big discrepancy.

[Mace]

Wouldn't the touchdown percentage actually work against your argument? He has 30% of his TDs against his terrible division, but he plays 37.5% of his games against his division. The wins makes sense, that's really interesting. I think his division is catching up to him, though..well maybe not the Titans.

I've always been rooting against Andrew Luck, and it certainly has nothing to do with jealously at all. Definitely not jealous that he's not on the Bills...definitely not. That'd be ridiculous.



What position would you rather be in right now, the Colts or the Bills? I think we'd all say the Colts.

I'll take the franchise QB with all of the pros and cons that come with him over what we have. Are any franchise QBs in a playoff drought? I guess Eli would be with 4 seasons, Matt Ryan with 3, Cutler with 5. All of the other franchise QBs have been to the playoffs in the past few years.

You're right about the 30%. I got lost in looking at the total TD's per division, oblivious to the games percentages. I screwed that one up. To be fair about it, he has 34 td's in 19 games in his division. 37 in 22 against the other AFC divisions, and 30 in 14 games against the 4 NFC divisions.

I'm not sure I'd rather be in the Colts position. They can't keep Luck from getting hit and Luck hasn't been able to break out past feasting on his division, to dominate games, and slice up the better teams. As bad as our D looked last year sometimes (19th), the Colts is worse (26th). They can't seem to muster a running game to take some heat off him (29th) and now they've committed the big bucks to him.

We have a better team to plug a QB into and more money (atm) to foster it down the road.

That's not saying we can or will, and it's all up in the air depending on what happens this year. But the Colts after 4 years of having Luck, should have a matured system in place around him and they don't.

We might well be in a better place at the end of this year to go forward than they are.

It's all conjecture anyway. Still too many maybe's. Hard to say how their 4 years to 8-8 compare with our 1 year of 8-8 so far. Are they better off ? I don't think so but don't know yet.

Btw, if anyone has an interest in poking through Luck's splits, here's the handy link to get what you might from it.

http://www.pro-football-reference.co...kAn00/splits//

[Mr. Pink]

I know people don't like Luck or think he's overrated but if you were starting a franchise today and you could have your pick of whichever QB you wanted to be the face of your franchise for the next decade, you'd be hard pressed to name 5 guys you'd do that with over Luck.

[Mace]

I know people don't like Luck or think he's overrated but if you were starting a franchise today and you could have your pick of whichever QB you wanted to be the face of your franchise for the next decade, you'd be hard pressed to name 5 guys you'd do that with over Luck.

That might speak more about the crop of younger QB's not being so good though rather than Luck being that great. Once you take Newton and Wilson out of the mix, none of them are real compelling though it's early in a lot of careers.

[YardRat]

I know people don't like Luck or think he's overrated but if you were starting a franchise today and you could have your pick of whichever QB you wanted to be the face of your franchise for the next decade, you'd be hard pressed to name 5 guys you'd do that with over Luck.

Brady will probably play until he's 60.
Rodgers should still have 10 years left, especially if the rules keep changing.
Wilson, Newton...maybe Ryan, Winston and Bridgewater.

Those are the only ones I would consider, and a few are a stretch (admittedly). IMO Mace nailed it...not necessarily how good Luck is, but how poor the state of NFL QB's are as a group.

[Mr. Pink]

Brady will probably play until he's 60.
Rodgers should still have 10 years left, especially if the rules keep changing.
Wilson, Newton...maybe Ryan, Winston and Bridgewater.

Those are the only ones I would consider, and a few are a stretch (admittedly). IMO Mace nailed it...not necessarily how good Luck is, but how poor the state of NFL QB's are as a group.

I can give 3 easily over Luck...Rodgers, Newton, Wilson but after that I don't think you can take anyone else over him for an extended period. Sure one year and done then you're adding in guys like Brady, Brees, Roethlisberger but you can't expect any of that trio to be around in a decade.

I don't think the QBing of the league is that poor to be honest. It's just the gap between the greats and the somewhat good is massive. We've been subjected to Brady, Manning and Brees over the past decade and when you look at a guy like Joe Flacco, just an example, he pales in comparison. That doesn't make Flacco not a good QB, because he is, it just shows the wide gap between the tiers.

There's really only a handful of teams with just a poor situation at QB. Cleveland, NYJ as of right now, Jacksonville, San Francisco. There are plenty of teams with unknowns and then a group of a good QBs. I'd put Luck near the top of that good QB group and because of his age, he's a guy you'd look to go to if you were building your team and any player was available to do so.

[Topas]

I would only take Rodgers above him. I think Wilson is good, but he needs a good team and he has some limitations. Wilson is very good, but I'd prefer Luck.
Same for Newton. I have to see more greatness from him. Admittedly Luck wasnt great either, but probably this is a gut feeling because Newton is such a whiner. I think Luck is better in 2 years than Newton. I mean compare the supporting cast (including defense) of these two teams and it is night and day.