Orton's Arm Posted March 5, 2011 Posted March 5, 2011 I would much rather go 10-6 this year and not have to worry about Luck. I question his confidence. He will never be more marketable than he is now. I don't want to hear about the value of a 4 year degree. Have to question the decision making here. Is he mentally ready? I'm not sure that he is. Peyton Manning also stayed in school to obtain his degree, even though he likely would have been the first overall pick had he come out early. While there's no guarantee that Luck will be the next Manning, I see no reason to assume that there are serious concerns regarding every highly draftable player who decides against leaving school early.
mjohns85 Posted March 5, 2011 Posted March 5, 2011 Why not spend our 3rd overall pick this year on the rights to Andrew Luck next year. I know it would be a huge gamble, but couldn't we offer him a larger contract if we have his rights, as opposed to a rookie contract that he would sign next year due to the new CBA? Or will the new CBA effect this years rookie contracts also.
karl malones other son Posted March 5, 2011 Posted March 5, 2011 i think its the larry bird rule, you cant draft a player unless they declare themselves eligible for that year.
mjohns85 Posted March 5, 2011 Posted March 5, 2011 i think its the larry bird rule, you cant draft a player unless they declare themselves eligible for that year. Thanks. I wasn't aware of the rule.
disco Posted March 5, 2011 Posted March 5, 2011 (edited) One of the better recent hockey draft stories was along these lines. In the NHL, a player must be 18 by September 15th of that year's draft. This came into play with Ovechkin who turned 18 on September 17th, 2003. This was 2 days late for the 2003 draft. However, the Florida Panthers actually tried to draft him in FOUR different rounds in that 2003 draft. The Panthers GM Rick Dudley tried to argue that during his lifetime, Ovechkin had lived through 4 leap years. A leap year, obviously, has an extra day making those years 366 days rather than 365. By living those 4 extra days, they reasoned he was actually eligible on September 13th, 2003. They kept trying to draft him until the NHL final let them submit his name in the 9th round. He was later ruled ineligible. http://www.post-gazette.com/penguins/20030629nhlnot0629p5.asp I like the creativity. Edited March 5, 2011 by disco
PaattMaann Posted March 6, 2011 Posted March 6, 2011 Thanks. I wasn't aware of the rule. really? you werent aware that you cant draft a player before he declares for the draft??? you should be working in the bills front office, you would probably fit right in!
White Linen Posted March 6, 2011 Posted March 6, 2011 Man I hate to pile on the poster, but cmon did you really think you were the only one in the history of the NFL draft to think of doing this?
NoSaint Posted March 6, 2011 Posted March 6, 2011 You are totally right it is a stupid question Lucky we have you to add this great insight!
Buffalo Barbarian Posted March 6, 2011 Posted March 6, 2011 Why not spend our 3rd overall pick this year on the rights to Andrew Luck next year. I know it would be a huge gamble, but couldn't we offer him a larger contract if we have his rights, as opposed to a rookie contract that he would sign next year due to the new CBA? Or will the new CBA effect this years rookie contracts also. Can't, was discussed on TSW when he decided to go back.
Buftex Posted March 6, 2011 Posted March 6, 2011 As Karl Malones' Other Son points out, in 1978, the Boston Celtics drafted the rights to Larry Bird, in hopes that he would suit up for them in the 1978-79 season. Bird stayed in college another year, and joined the Celtics in for the 1979-80 season. I realize, that is the NBA, and this is no longer allowed, but the original question was not that stupid...there has been a fairly recent, high profile example of it. btw- KMOS, the "Larry Bird Rule" does not refer to this. It refers to free agency. In the NBA, when a vetran player becomes a free agent, his original team can exceed the league salary cap, to retain him. The choice is still the players (Cavs could have offered LeBron whatever money they wanted, if he wanted to stay in Cleveland, but he just wanted out), but it gives the original team the ability to retain that player, without having to destroy the rest of the roster.
Recommended Posts