IBC

The Indianapolis Star reports that there's "nothing imminent" on a contract extension for Andrew Luck.
ESPN reported earlier this week the Colts were working on the framework of a new deal for Luck. Entering the final year of his contract, he should be extended at some point during the offseason. Luck led the NFL in touchdowns (40) and finished behind only Drew Brees and Ben Roethlisberger in passing yards (4,761). He's expected to command a deal that will make him the highest-paid player in the league, likely in the range of $25 million per season.

BWA HAHAHAHAHHAHAAA..
Classic! Walking right in the steps of Manning. You go right ahead and cripple your team Mr Luck with that absurd contract.

Tom Brady restructured his contract to free up $24 million in cash for the Patriots to spend this offseason.
Brady agreed to change $24 million in a "skill" guarantee to an "injury-only" guarantee, meaning he would only now be guaranteed the money in the event of an injury. (The Patriots could cut Brady and be off the hook for that $24 million.) The Patriots need to re-sign Darrelle Revis, Devin McCourty, Nate Solder, and perhaps Shane Vereen. They now have the resources to do it.

There's the difference between a guy who puts himself first and a guy who puts winning and his team first. I hope the numbers estimate is wrong as I rather liked Luck, but if not then this goes to show just what kind of player he really is.

Way to get yours Andrew Buck!
My condolences Colts fans...

This is being painted, again, as an unselfish move by Brady to make it easier for the Patriots to retain their star talent. This time, though, the logic doesn’t pass the smell test. Brady’s cap hit over the next three seasons isn’t reduced by a single penny by making this decision; in fact, with the $1 million raise, he’s actually taking up slightly more cap space than he would have before this renegotiation. It will not be any easier for the Patriots to retain Darrelle Revis, Devin McCourty, or any of the other players for whom this new Brady deal is supposed to facilitate easier contract extensions.

Not sure who you're quoting but I don't think Barnwell got this wrong. http://grantland.com/the-triangle/tom-b ... -contract/

Dodgers wrote:

This is being painted, again, as an unselfish move by Brady to make it easier for the Patriots to retain their star talent. This time, though, the logic doesn’t pass the smell test. Brady’s cap hit over the next three seasons isn’t reduced by a single penny by making this decision; in fact, with the $1 million raise, he’s actually taking up slightly more cap space than he would have before this renegotiation. It will not be any easier for the Patriots to retain Darrelle Revis, Devin McCourty, or any of the other players for whom this new Brady deal is supposed to facilitate easier contract extensions.

Not sure who you're quoting but I don't think Barnwell got this wrong. http://grantland.com/the-triangle/tom-b ... -contract/

I don't pretend to understand the NFL cap rules, I don't have a PhD in finance, which is about what it seems to take at times. Whether this saves the Pats money, whether it frees up cash for the Pats to give signing bonuses to valuable free-agents-to-be, I don't know. I do know that arguably the best QB of the last 15 years is making less than half of what Luck is rumored to be seeking annually, even throwing out any benefit from this restructuring. And even someone without a PhD in finance can see that's something that is going to end up handcuffing the Colts down the line.

Why do you care what Luck makes in free agency? If the Colts Front Office, who are smarter than you, feels like the deal is complicit with them retaining the top young QB in football and allowing them to put together a competing team..why do you give a shit?

The Giants won their second Super Bowl this decade after Eli signed a deal that everyone said would hamstring the Giants. It didn't. What's your point here, Bren?

I know, Bren. Manning would NEVER restructure his deal. http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/news/story?id=2773817

Astros wrote:I know, Bren. Manning would NEVER restructure his deal. http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/news/story?id=2773817

And it only took him 7 years to realize he was hamstringing the team...

Nationals wrote:Why do you care what Luck makes in free agency?

What do you care why I care what Luck makes in Free Agency?

Luck hobbling the Colts, just like Manning did, is freaking hilarious.

Yep, Brady has never done the same http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/09/0 ... 11578.html

Astros wrote:Yep, Brady has never done the same http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/09/0 ... 11578.html

The average cap hit on the years that contract was actually in effect (10-12) was $12.7 million. Oh no!

I think the real issue was actually Dwight Freeney's Cap space.

Largely unrelated, but I came upon it in looking at Brady's contract stuff. Tom Brady owns 10% of UnderArmour and Vitamin Water, which I had never heard before. That makes Tom Brady, by way of UnderArmour, an official sponsor of the NFL.

Padres wrote:

Astros wrote:Yep, Brady has never done the same http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/09/0 ... 11578.html

The average cap hit on the years that contract was actually in effect (10-12) was $12.7 million. Oh no!

Given that nobody has seen the yearly cap impact on the Colts of a contract where Andrew Luck is the highest paid QB in the NFL, do the same principals not apply to Luck's possible future contract as what you are using to defend Brady's past highest paid QB contract?

Everyone knows NFL contracts are primarily smoke and mirrors. It's all about the guaranteed money and all about the cap impact. Outside of those it is all window dressing.

Mariners wrote:

Padres wrote:

Astros wrote:Yep, Brady has never done the same http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/09/0 ... 11578.html

The average cap hit on the years that contract was actually in effect (10-12) was $12.7 million. Oh no!

Given that nobody has seen the yearly cap impact on the Colts of a contract where Andrew Luck is the highest paid QB in the NFL, do the same principals not apply to Luck's possible future contract as what you are using to defend Brady's past highest paid QB contract?

Everyone knows NFL contracts are primarily smoke and mirrors. It's all about the guaranteed money and all about the cap impact. Outside of those it is all window dressing.

I agree, and it may be that the average $25m value is way off. I like Luck and I'd hate to see him cripple the Colts that way. But any way you flex the numbers, if you're taking a Biggest Of All Time contract, you're restricting your team's ability to sign other talent.

One more bit about Brady owning UnderArmour. Brady became a 10% shareholder back in 2010, when the company was worth under $1b. Today, UA is worth a little shy of $15billion, making Brady's portion worth $1.5b. No wonder he doesn't give a shit what he makes in the NFL.

How much of that $1.5 billion do you think Brady is going to pay the ball kid to take a dive for him and Belichick and toss away his career?

Thank you, thank you, thank you. The 2:30 pm show is completely different than the 1:15 pm show...make sure to tip your waitress!

Bren, I think you are looking at the wrong person here. Lets talk about Joe Flacco, wins 1 super bowl signs a mega deal and now in 2016 he will have a cap hit of 28 million dollars, the highest ever and in 2017, 31 million dollars...8 million dollars higher than the next player, Matt Ryan. Talk about being selfish.

These guys play a dangerous sports for a relatively short time under a mostly nonguaranteed contract that seriously damages their life expectancy and quality of life once they retire. They should take every damn nickel they can get.

Oh I'm sure Bren wouldn't take a substantial raise if it meant others at the Denver airport wouldn't get raises or have to be fired to pay for his new salary. After all that'd be selfish and work is just like being on a team, it is what you do for your livelihood after all, just like these guys

Hold up gentlemen. It's almost like paying the most important position on the field, by far, the most amount of money to ensure above average play at that single most important position is a reasonable idea. It's totally unreasonable. Unless his name is Tom Brady. Then everything he does is perfect...until someone else does it, then it doesn't matter. But he owns 10% of Under Armour so game over all over again.

Did I get that flow of logic right? I'm confusing myself.

Nationals wrote:I'm confusing myself.

That seems to happen a lot. Too much Bachelorette and SportsCenter, even someone working in sales needs to keep a few healthy brain cells.

That's the what, 4th straight post with something about The Bachelor or Sportscenter? Watch out folks, he's on a roll, hide your feelings or they'll get hurt!

Jake, I would definitely agree Flacco is crippling his team. However, Flacco IS a SuperBowl winner, he got his payday after winning a SuperBowl. I wouldn't want him on my team, especially with those cap numbers, but there's a reasonable argument to be made that having won a SB, he deserves the dough and if that means a couple rebuilding years as a consequence, then so be it. Andrew Luck on the other hand hasn't won squat (well, not wholly true, he has as many playoff wins in 3 seasons as Manning had in 6). The Colts front office still needs to bring in a lot of additional talent to turn them into genuine contenders, especially on the defensive side of the ball.
What makes it all so damn funny is how familiar this little story playing out in Indianapolis all is, it's almost like the Colts have gone down this path before and never really learned from it.

Cardinals wrote:Oh I'm sure Bren wouldn't take a substantial raise if it meant others at the Denver airport wouldn't get raises or have to be fired to pay for his new salary. After all that'd be selfish and work is just like being on a team, it is what you do for your livelihood after all, just like these guys

As a city agency, that's not a factor, I wouldn't be able to even if I wanted to. However at my previous job I offered to take a pay cut to keep on a staff member that was valuable but whom we didn't currently have billable work for. Fortunately it ended up not being necessary. It's not something I would have done at any other employer, but I joined that firm when there were only two other people and we ended up building it up to a staff of 30 by the time I left, I had a sense of ownership and responsibility to the company and to my coworkers. I could also afford the pay cut and I knew my own boss had done something similar during the lean times in the recession to be able to keep me on.

To be fair to Bren, his massive inferiority complex has seen him make fun of me for watching The Bachelor for years. At this point, I think I just appreciate that he cares beyond a reasonable amount how I spend my free time. That's a good/creepy friend.

Would you wish the Colts good "Luck" with that Luck contract?

Get it? Did you see what I did there?

Orioles wrote:Would you wish the Colts good "Luck" with that Luck contract?

Get it? Did you see what I did there?