msudaisy26
Footballguy
I doubt it, this team has done what it has done the last 5 years because of Luck. Other than a handful of other qb's in the league (Brady, Brees, Rodgers) this team would be picking top 10 every year since Peyton left.
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums
This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!
Andrew Luck..... Love fest inside.... (1 Viewer)
- Thread starter Carter_Can_Fly
- Start date
Buffaloes
Footballguy
there are a number of teams with functional backups. some teams draft a qb every season just to make sure they are backfilling the position instead of standing pat. the colts didn't learn a number of lessons from the Peyton Manning fallout. not emplying a functional backup is one of them.
Last edited by a moderator:
Slider
Footballguy
Because their roster was such a disaster. QB was the last thing they thought they would need. You really think a lot of teams have guys that would just come in and not miss a beat? They don't.
smbkrypt24
Footballguy
Could it be the ignorance of the owner after having Peyton start for 208 straight games that he just didn't emphasize the backup QB position then, and continues not to? I know the GM is in charge of player personnel, but he takes direction from the owner. Especially post Pollian era.
Buffaloes
Footballguy
no, i didn't say that. didn't even imply it actually. if backup qb (a contingency plan) is the last thing they thought they would need because the rest of their roster was bereft of talent, then it seems they learned nothing from the Curtis Painter year.
Buffaloes
Footballguy
totally disagree
when Manning went down, Brock Osweiler came in and Denver secured HFA en route to a Super Bowl win. when Brady went down, Cassell came in. if Brady goes down now Garoppollo comes in. when Rodgers went down Flynn came in. if Rodgers goes down now, Brett Hundley comes in. if Cam goes down, Derek Anderson comes in. most likely all produce (or have produced) better results than Painter and now Tolzien because their franchises emphasized having a contingency plan.
Last edited by a moderator:
msudaisy26
Footballguy
Manning was God awful that year. Not even close to the same Peyton.
The Patriots are a different beast
Flynn did it for one game against a horrible Loon defense then proceeded to lose a starting job and continue to be horrible.
Derek Anderson was okay.
Last edited by a moderator:
Chaka
Footballguy
Yeah, Tool, Scott Tolzein is capable of taking a team to a Super Bowl. Yup, no doubt Scott Tolzein not only would have capably replaced Alex Smith and carried the niners to the Super Bowl but he most certainly would have won the game.Tool said:
My bad.
No, Tolzein can't hold Barkley's jock and Barkley can't hold Kaepernick's jock.
The Colts front office quit before the season began. At least the Jets tried to, at the very least, put an NFL caliber QB on the field.
The Colts are the most pathetic franchise in the NFL.
Last edited by a moderator:
Buffaloes
Footballguy
i'm not sure if this is disagreeing with my post or not. did those teams make an effort to solidify their backup QB position? and if so, were those backups be a better option than Painter Tolzien? the fact is the Colts are in the same boat they were in 2011 and they could have at least upgraded life preservers.
Denver invested in Brock when Manning was the best QB in the league. the pats (are not a different animal btw) invested (twice...actually thrice if you count Brissett) in productive backups for Brady and fleeced the Colts with one of those investments. The Packers have continually invested in backup QB (including Flynn) and sent Tolzien packing because they upgraded their backup situation. the fact remains, each of those teams invested in quality backups when they had elite QBs and it paid off. Denver, ne, gb remain relevant year after year because they make smart fo decisions, one of which includes having a plan if your qb goes down.
Last edited by a moderator:
msudaisy26
Footballguy
I did misunderstand your point a bit, but those are still different. The Pats and Broncos were grooming replacements. The Colts aren't grooming replacements.
Matt Flynn was a 7th round pick, so the Packers were going cheap, Hundley was a 5th round pick and was 3rd string until someone named Scott Tolzien left.
FreeBaGeL
Footballguy
I can see the argument both ways. The thing with all of those teams is they were still decent teams with their backup. The Colts with Derek Anderson would be a lot better than the Colts with Scott Tolzien, but they'd still be a really bad team.
I guess the Colts biggest problem is that the only people worse at their job than the people trying to pick a backup QB for the Colts are those same people trying to put a good team around their QB. Luck is being wasted there. They need to clean house all the way up and just start over now so maybe they can put a competitive team around Luck by the time he hits his early 30's. As it is right now he's going to have to play at an elite level for as long as Brady does to finally see what it's like to actually have some good teammates by his side.
I guess the Colts biggest problem is that the only people worse at their job than the people trying to pick a backup QB for the Colts are those same people trying to put a good team around their QB. Luck is being wasted there. They need to clean house all the way up and just start over now so maybe they can put a competitive team around Luck by the time he hits his early 30's. As it is right now he's going to have to play at an elite level for as long as Brady does to finally see what it's like to actually have some good teammates by his side.
msudaisy26
Footballguy
Look at the list of teams that go on the cheap with unproven back ups.
Lions, Jets, Ravens, Bengals, Steelers, Seahawks, Rams, the list goes on and on.
Lions, Jets, Ravens, Bengals, Steelers, Seahawks, Rams, the list goes on and on.
Buffaloes
Footballguy
poorly run franchises outside of Balt and Sea....oops and Pitt
but Pitt used a pick on Landry Jones and Josh Dobbs. they are still committing resources to the position. you don't have to invest huge money to invest resources
Seattle has Austin Davis who has won games in the league as a starter
Last edited by a moderator:
32 Counter Pass
Footballguy
As a Luck owner I am not giving any discount for his absence. I would only move him for a ridiculously one sided offer. I can find a 6 week option as needed (currently rolling withWentz).
zoonation
Footballguy
On what basis could you possibly hold this position?
top 2-3 right now? Lmao.
The more interesting question is will he be a total bust?
jtd13
Footballguy
Are you aware he was responding to a question about Dynasty value? Seems like you were talking about redraft in your response.
He is 2 for me in Dynasty. He is the only proven elite QB under 30. Even if it ends up being a lost season, I can't see taking anyone besides Rodgers over him.
zoonation
Footballguy
jtd13
Footballguy
Oh, well, we disagree then. Not sure why having him at 2 or 3 in dynasty would cause such an incredulous response.
Dude, I think maybe you have a problem with reading comprehension as it seems you completely missed my point.
msudaisy26
Footballguy
You did see he said dynasty? Redraft I don't even see him as top 12. In dynasty I would rather only have Rodgers, everyone misses time in the NFL sooner or later. I am not going to down grade him unless it is a career threatening injury.
Last edited by a moderator:
habsfan
Footballguy
I saw a tweet yesterday asking if anyone knew anything about Luck and one of the responses (by an industry/media person) was, "No one who's talking".
From a fantasy POV, hopefully that performance yesterday holds the team's feet to the fire to break their cone of silence. Until he is throwing/practicing, I don't think you can read anything into the decision to keep him off PUP. People might want it to mean he is coming back in week 5 or 6 but there's really nothing concrete that suggests that. If you are into reading tea leaves, there's way more reason to believe something is really, really wrong with him.
From a fantasy POV, hopefully that performance yesterday holds the team's feet to the fire to break their cone of silence. Until he is throwing/practicing, I don't think you can read anything into the decision to keep him off PUP. People might want it to mean he is coming back in week 5 or 6 but there's really nothing concrete that suggests that. If you are into reading tea leaves, there's way more reason to believe something is really, really wrong with him.
Last edited by a moderator:
Slider
Footballguy
I understand you just want to be right but you're going way overboard on the ability of backup QB's. The only difference with teams when their QB goes down is the ability of their D. It's usually a game manager at best at backup QB.
Spike
Footballguy
zoonation
Footballguy
Hankmoody
Footballguy
matttyl
Footballguy
I'm not sure it's "speculation" as much as it is "risk". Plenty of people knock Reed out of their top 5 dynasty TEs because of the risk he carries. I saw some people say the same about Watt in IDP leagues (that he'd never be "the same"). That risk exists here with Luck as well. It may turn out to be nothing, but Luck vs Carr right now with the former's risk is a legit conversation for dynasty. The same could be said of Mariota and Winston. Luck literally went for Dak Prescott and Rex Burkhead in a dynasty league of mine last week.
Buffaloes
Footballguy
nah, having a different perspective isn't always about wanting to be right. it's not that binary. my point is good teams make a point to improve every facet of their roster. Indy hasn't done that. They haven't surrounded Luck with talent, an OL, or a defense and they haven't made any moves to ensure they stay afloat if he goes down.
teams like Pitt have at least spent multiple draft picks and recent fa acquisitions to bolster their depth there. Sea brought in a former starter to bolster their depth there. I agree they are game managers. but my point is they made a point to secure depth there. Indy has set it and forget it until Luck got hurt and only then made a move for depth. that's my only point. imo the fo has done the same thing their old fo did 7 years ago. didn't learn that having a quality backup can be handy.
Last edited by a moderator:
smbkrypt24
Footballguy
I think the error in your thinking is that the front office is trying to improve the areas of the team and didn't view backup QB as the main priority. They don't go into a draft with the idea that they want to get worse. If you have a solid team it makes it easier to address backup positions. The Colts did not have a solid team before this draft.
Chaka
Footballguy
Agreed.
And there is a galaxy of difference between the ability of guys like Derek Anderson, Matt Moore, Josh McKown (typically) and, yes, Colin Kaepernick and Scott Tolzein. I assume the front office had a much better idea about Luck's availability long before training camp started and instead of bolstering what they pretend is a contending team with Luck, they quit and are making a b-line straight for the #1 pick.
FreeBaGeL
Footballguy
Part of it depends on league structure, but in most leagues QB is just such a different beast than other positions that there is no way I would ever consider moving Luck outside the top 5 QBs.
Honestly, in dynasty there is almost no QB outside of Rodgers and Luck that I'm even interested in. Certainly not many that I would invest any resources in. Maybe Dak since he's so cheap and undervalued right now. But in general, they're all just a bunch of replacement level players. There are so few difference makers and Luck is one of the few, and by far the youngest. I think it's about a thousand times more likely that Jameis never develops into an elite consistent top fantasy QB than it is that Luck is the first QB in our lifetimes to have a shoulder injury that turns him into a pumpkin.
And I think that last part can't be stressed enough. I made mention of this a few pages back that I think people are letting baseball cloud their judgments about football. There just isn't the precision and arm stress required in football that an arm injury is going to debilitate someone's ability to play long-term. At least there isn't really a precedent for it. The only other elite QBs to have scary arm-area injuries like this where people thought it was going to ruin their ability to throw a football were Drew Brees and Peyton Manning, and all they did was carry on to set just about every QB record in the book between the two of them.
Honestly, in dynasty there is almost no QB outside of Rodgers and Luck that I'm even interested in. Certainly not many that I would invest any resources in. Maybe Dak since he's so cheap and undervalued right now. But in general, they're all just a bunch of replacement level players. There are so few difference makers and Luck is one of the few, and by far the youngest. I think it's about a thousand times more likely that Jameis never develops into an elite consistent top fantasy QB than it is that Luck is the first QB in our lifetimes to have a shoulder injury that turns him into a pumpkin.
And I think that last part can't be stressed enough. I made mention of this a few pages back that I think people are letting baseball cloud their judgments about football. There just isn't the precision and arm stress required in football that an arm injury is going to debilitate someone's ability to play long-term. At least there isn't really a precedent for it. The only other elite QBs to have scary arm-area injuries like this where people thought it was going to ruin their ability to throw a football were Drew Brees and Peyton Manning, and all they did was carry on to set just about every QB record in the book between the two of them.
Gottabesweet
Footballguy
Was just dropped in a 12 team short bench league (4 bench spots) I only have Rivers at QB... was thinking about it but tough to stash.
6pt per TD.
6pt per TD.
Interseptopus
Footballguy
I dropped him in my short bench league (5 spots). I only have carr. his bye isn't until late so I have time.
I think you're wasting a good roster space. but it depends what your we looks like... Bradford available? I'd rather have him
Gottabesweet
Footballguy
He is, I generally like carrying one QB. With only 4 bench spots, most owners carry two for some reason.
Rivers is just going to piss me off all year. I'll wait a few more weeks. My current bench is (Tate, Watkins, James White, Mixon)
Managing a short bench is tough.
flyingsushi
Footballguy
Mike and Mike reported their is a unconfirmed rumor Luck is unhappy with the Colts and the speculation is he might want out.
Interseptopus
Footballguy
I don't blame him. Since he's been there it's been an entire you-know-what show.
Would be nice to see exactly what he can do with a good OL and good coaching. Most "obvious choices" already have budding QBs (Houston, Cleveland), but the jury's out. Do what GB did... trade him to "Siberia" aka NYJ...
matttyl
Footballguy
Interseptopus
Footballguy
Yes it is. I hate having short benches but it makes the WW fun around weeks 6-10 as people deal with QB/TE/K/DEF byes and have to either drop their starters (K/DEF) or a stash that I might want to pounce on (Last year I nabbed Ajayi!)
Rivers is awful. Bradford might have a better season than him TBH. I liked him going into this season... he was so accurate last year and now has a better OL and RBs. I'd see it at least another week before I'd jump in. I won't until after week 6 (TE bye) but I imagine he'll be gone by then in my league.
Interseptopus
Footballguy
Does his contract state he can't be unhappy with his situation with the Colts?
In all seriousness, I doubt he can opt out, but he can raise a big enough stink, throw a big enough tantrum to get out
matttyl
Footballguy
Just mean that the new team would have to take on that contract, right? And the Colts would have to "ok" it? If they don't go along with it, he's staying right there.
flyingsushi
Footballguy
Gottabesweet
Footballguy
Not to hi-jack but the Brady owner owns Winston. I like that Winston already had his bye. I'd give him Rivers and Mixon for Winston... maybe he bites?
Interseptopus
Footballguy
I see what you're saying.
Luck is the third highest paid QB in the league for total contract value. Assuming no QB is signed over the next 5 years (For example: Cousins and Rodgers will likely disrupt this list big time):
2017: 9th
2018: 4th
2019: 2nd (to Matt Stafford of all players!)
-------potential out in 2019-2020 offseason with only 6.4 mil dead cap space-----------
2020: 2nd (Stafford again)
2021: 4th (but only 6 QBs are under contract this year)
2022: FA
So yes, a team would need to take on a top 5 contract for at least 2 more seasons. He could always restructure it but he just signed this 5 year deal starting in 2017.
I'm not sure a lot of teams have this kind of money to spend at least for this season, but I imagine Luck might be a topic of trade talk this offseason. If teams think they can get a talent like Luck (albeit expensive contract) for a reasonable price, I think many teams would love to do this. You could even see a team like New Orleans go for it assuming Brees retires this offseason.
flyingsushi
Footballguy
I can't find any other source reporting this. I just watched it on Mike and Mike. They did say it was unconfirmed speculation in regards to Luck being unhappy. During this conversation they had, they did say the Colts GM Chris Ballard was quoted in the off season Luck's contract makes it difficult to sign free agents. Also, in the preseason, Gore even said some things about how disappointing the Colts are and this is not why he signed here. I feel like the Colts are going to get worse and the more Luck doesn't play and the Colts lose, this speculation might be given some credibility and a later time.
Last edited by a moderator:
habsfan
Footballguy
This could be perceived as an attempt to deflect blame for how bad this team is. Well paid star athletes in a cap system make it difficult to sign FAs. Water is wet. Not every team that pays their stars is this bad.
Interseptopus
Footballguy
Bull crap...
they have 20 MILLION in cap space right now. You mean they can't prorate some 8 million dollar signing bonus? 20 million is more than Andrew Luck makes this season
Aaron Rodgers and Luck have a very similar cap space for this season. But for some reason Green Bay was able to sign the best OLB on the free agent market last offseason (their own) Nick Perry. Somehow GB has talent oozing from it's offense and has the looks of a better defense this year.
Unless Luck is making 30 million, there's no way they can't sign free agents. Sure, they can't get the top guy. This quote is passing the blame onto Luck for his perceived "greedy" contract. When it's the GM himself who seems to not be able to draft and spend money wisely on priority FAs.
Last edited by a moderator:
Chaka
Footballguy
I'm unhappy with the Colts and want luck out too.
Unfortunately the franchise tag will prevent that from ever happening.
