Why is Carolina and STL listed? They wont take him even if they did get the #1 pick, well not STL anyways. They have to much money invested in Bradford.
The OFFICIAL Andrew Luck Sweepstakes Thread
Collapse
X
-
-
Originally posted by influenceJust for arguments sake, are you actually telling me that St. Louis would draft luck after they just picked Bradford up with their first in 2010?Comment
-
Feels like a two-team battle now between Miami and Indianapolis.
I give the major edge to Miami.Originally posted by ram29jacksonI already said months ago that Seattle wasn't winning any SBComment
-
Originally posted by influenceThe point is, any first round QB would benefit from sitting behind manning.
Rarely are rookie quarterbacks even capable of starting their rookie season with success,
even Peyton Manning struggled in his first season.
Are you saying that Luck behind Manning wouldn't benefit him, or are you just saying that Rodgers was a late first rounder?
I am saying taking a QB for the future is a luxury pick, and you can't afford to take luxury picks if you have a team that is bad enough to be drafting #1 overall. The value of that pick would not be fully recouped if you are gonna sit the guy for 3-5 years. (And really Peyton could conceivably play for longer.) If you don't plan on playing the guy anyway, you are better off finding yourself a desperate trading partner and stockpiling assets.
If it's the latter, than what the fuck does your comment have to do with anything?
The Colts are drafting a QB in the first round, that much is certain by Irsay's comments at this point in the season.Comment
-
Originally posted by influenceCall it speculation all you want, but the Colt's front office appears to be looking into drafting a QB. Not just a backup for Peyton Manning either, but someone that can take a hold of the franchise in a few years.Comment
-
No fucking shit. And if any first round QB would benefit from sitting behind Manning, why does it have to be the #1 overall? Drafting a guy #1 who will not play for three years at the earliest is kind of a waste of value. If any QB can sit behind Manning and benefit, why not trade back into the middle of the 1st and let Landry Jones or Matt Barkley fall into your lap while also picking up 3-4 other assets?
I am saying taking a QB for the future is a luxury pick, and you can't afford to take luxury picks if you have a team that is bad enough to be drafting #1 overall. The value of that pick would not be fully recouped if you are gonna sit the guy for 3-5 years. (And really Peyton could conceivably play for longer.) If you don't plan on playing the guy anyway, you are better off finding yourself a desperate trading partner and stockpiling assets.
As far as Manning preferring to draft some talent that will benefit him over the last few years of his career, thats a no brainer if you are asking him but management is definitely thinking how shitty of a team the Colts will be (they all ready see) once Manning hangs em up. If the Colts end up with the #1 pick drafting Luck shouldnt even be a question. In fact, the value is too great to pass up considering what he will be paid and the drop off from the 1st and 2nd rated QB's coming out.
Comment
-
Moot point given the rookie pay scale. The value will def be recouped if he manages to give you 10-12 years of top tier QB play once Manning finally retires.
As far as Manning preferring to draft some talent that will benefit him over the last few years of his career, thats a no brainer if you are asking him but management is definitely thinking how shitty of a team the Colts will be (they all ready see) once Manning hangs em up. If the Colts end up with the #1 pick drafting Luck shouldnt even be a question. In fact, the value is too great to pass up considering what he will be paid and the drop off from the 1st and 2nd rated QB's coming out.Comment
Comment