Kirby Jackson Posted January 27, 2018 Posted January 27, 2018 18 minutes ago, Binghamton Beast said: I think for the price tag you just mentioned we could get the #1 overall pick....at the very least 2 overall. I’d rather do that and take our own guy than Luck. I would think that you could get Darnold or Rosen for that price as well. For me, I’d prefer Luck (if healthy). I have been one of his toughest critics but you can win with him. His Colts team is atrocious. 1
Chuck Wagon Posted January 27, 2018 Posted January 27, 2018 53 minutes ago, bobobonators said: To me it's a no-brainer. The Detroit Lions are in a division where only 1 team appears to be a serious contender year in/year out - the Green Bay Packers. And that will only last a couple of more years with Aaron Rodgers. The NFC East has Wentz in Philly and Zeek/Dak in Dallas, and they all just entered the league. If I'm a coach, I don't want to have to compete vs that 4 games every season. Plus Lions GM Bob Quinn is a Pats lifer (worked for them from 2000 to 2015) so one would imagine he would already be on the same page as Patricia. Lions have Stafford plus some quality pieces on the D, they made the playoffs in 2016 like the Giants, and they had a stiff in the sidelines for the last few years, it's not going to be that hard to get that thing rolling hard in the right direction. IMO if you don't worry about "markets" that's the best job available this offseason.
clayboy54 Posted January 27, 2018 Posted January 27, 2018 I live in Indiana. Irsay is a nut. Its not beyond reason to assume the Colts could do almost anything here. Even though Grigson is long gone, the team is known for their head-scratching moves. It wouldn't surprise me to see them trade luck for a couple of punters. LOL Seriously, if Irsay and his minions are enamored with a shiny new toy, they might just do it. Its clear that Irsay is NOT enamored with Luck.
MILFHUNTER#518 Posted January 27, 2018 Posted January 27, 2018 (edited) 1 hour ago, Paul Costa said: I’m a little surprised that McDaniels is taking the Indy job. There were several higher profile jobs available. It seems that they are in total rebuild and that’s what he wants. I guess he doesn’t want another Denver debacle. That being said they have the third pick in the draft. If their QB is there do they trade Andrew Luck. His future is realistically cloudy. And if this is a possibility do the Bills offer our two first round picks for Luck. It is a big risk giving up that much for damaged goods. Although many will think this is a no brainer for Buffalo or Indy will want a lot more in return. Not sure about that . Doesn’t seem like McDermott and Beene are risk takers? I personally wouldn’t want to give up more than that for Luck and his recent history ? https://www.milehighreport.com/2010/11/27/1838850/denver-broncos-josh-mcdaniels-fined-50000-for-spygate-ii-incident http://bleacherreport.com/articles/529119-spygate-ii-there-is-a-bigger-link-between-the-patriots-broncos-and-mcdaniels https://www.foxsports.com/nfl/story/josh-mcdaniels-spygate-2-denver-broncos-112910 Quote:The hilarious part of this story is that 49ers coach Mike Singletary, whose coaching has been questioned on a lot of levels this season, was smart enough to run nothing but insignificant or dummy plays during this six-minute walk-through. Why? Because he didn’t trust McDaniels. He had a suspicion that he was a cheater. Yes, guilt by association. Edited January 27, 2018 by MILFHUNTER#518 Added links
Chuck Wagon Posted January 27, 2018 Posted January 27, 2018 18 minutes ago, Kirby Jackson said: I would think that you could get Darnold or Rosen for that price as well. For me, I’d prefer Luck (if healthy). I have been one of his toughest critics but you can win with him. His Colts team is atrocious. Luck is a double edged sword. The Colts know more about him than any team. If they are willing to trade him that's a massive red flag and should severely lower his price. If they are comfortable with his recovery and long term outlook, they aren't trading him. 2
LeGOATski Posted January 27, 2018 Posted January 27, 2018 1 hour ago, kdiggz said: he took that job because the ALREADY have a good QB. people forget how good Luck was when healthy because it's been a few seasons but he is still young and with a good offensive coach and some support he can be very good again A few seasons? It's only been one year. He played 15 games in 2016 and had a great year. I don't think anyone forgets. His price should be pretty hefty.
Kirby Jackson Posted January 27, 2018 Posted January 27, 2018 2 minutes ago, Chuck Wagon said: Luck is a double edged sword. The Colts know more about him than any team. If they are willing to trade him that's a massive red flag and should severely lower his price. If they are comfortable with his recovery and long term outlook, they aren't trading him. Probably true and it would be contingent on your medical team’s assessment. The only other consideration is Irsay and his comments this year. That idiot is capable of anything.
Chuck Wagon Posted January 27, 2018 Posted January 27, 2018 8 minutes ago, Kirby Jackson said: Probably true and it would be contingent on your medical team’s assessment. The only other consideration is Irsay and his comments this year. That idiot is capable of anything. I completely agree, but I think it's much more likely they put the #3 pick on the block, frankly I'd be shocked if they didn't. Unless teams really sour on these QBs the Browns / Giants / Colts either have to take a QB or trade their picks for a bounty of picks, to do otherwise is just bad business.
billsredneck1 Posted January 27, 2018 Posted January 27, 2018 1 hour ago, Happy Gilmore said: I agree. Way too expensive for Luck. Maybe a first, a second, and a player (Glenn in this situation). i agree. i'd even give tt the bonus and throw him in too.
BuffaloBillyG Posted January 27, 2018 Posted January 27, 2018 14 minutes ago, Chuck Wagon said: Luck is a double edged sword. The Colts know more about him than any team. If they are willing to trade him that's a massive red flag and should severely lower his price. If they are comfortable with his recovery and long term outlook, they aren't trading him. This right here. If the Colts want to move on I would suspect there is a reason. At that point he's damaged goods to the point where I wouldn't even take a chance sending a 3rd to them let alone 2 1sts.
jr1 Posted January 27, 2018 Posted January 27, 2018 he's missed 26 of the last 48 games. I wouldn't trade for him
Brianmoorman4jesus Posted January 27, 2018 Posted January 27, 2018 1 hour ago, Mr. WEO said: The real question is why Matt Patricia took the Detroit job over the Giants. Staffiord infoors no pressure compared to ny could be the first guy to win in det dont have to deal with Wentz for 15 years
HOF4LOU Posted January 27, 2018 Posted January 27, 2018 I hear bills will be going after luck. Their first choice.
Formerly Allan in MD Posted January 27, 2018 Posted January 27, 2018 2 hours ago, Kirby Jackson said: Total hypothetical: - If you were the Colts would you trade Luck to the Bills for Glenn, 21,22 and a 2019 1st? - If you were the Bills would you do that? I would in a second as a Bills fan. It makes some sense for the Colts too if the Giants or Browns don’t go QB. They can get Rosen or Darnold, their LT and 3 1sts. I don’t think that the Colts would do it but it isn’t that crazy. They are years from winning as their roster is trash. No. Serious shoulder issues can be tricky business. I know that from personal experience. As a quarterback, once he's supposedly healthy the results of healing could include an adjustment of his arm angle for delivering the ball. There may be other possible mechanical problems arising. Also, shoulder injuries can also raise neck mobility concerns, especially when arthritis sets in. It's not worth the price or the chance.
GG Posted January 27, 2018 Posted January 27, 2018 35 minutes ago, HOF4LOU said: I hear bills will be going after luck. Their first choice. Is that from a source or a voice inside your head?
SDS Posted January 27, 2018 Posted January 27, 2018 [This is an automated response]As a courtesy to the other board members, please use more descriptive topic titles. A better title will help the community find information faster and make your topic more likely to be read. The topic starter can edit the topic title line to make it more appropriate.Thank you.
ghostwriter Posted January 27, 2018 Posted January 27, 2018 If Luck's shoulder is healthy, I don't see McDaniels trading him. Luck was probably the main reason he took the job in the first place. If they were open to trading Luck, I'd have questions about Luck's shoulder..
Beast Posted January 27, 2018 Posted January 27, 2018 (edited) 3 hours ago, Kirby Jackson said: I would think that you could get Darnold or Rosen for that price as well. For me, I’d prefer Luck (if healthy). I have been one of his toughest critics but you can win with him. His Colts team is atrocious. I certainly do like your belief that they need to do what it takes to get a QB. It has been way too long. We have the capital to make this purchase. Don’t cheap out. Edited January 27, 2018 by Binghamton Beast
SoCal Deek Posted January 27, 2018 Posted January 27, 2018 The Colts are the same franchise that lost Peyton Manning, who then went on to be just fine with the Broncos. Fast forward a few years and substitute Luck.
NoSaint Posted January 27, 2018 Posted January 27, 2018 5 hours ago, kdiggz said: ABSOLUTELY! don't get my hopes up like that. people forget Luck is only 28 and is fresh assuming his shoulder issues are taken care of. he can play another 10 yrs + easily It would be like getting brees from San Diego... but a little riskier due to the draft picks. id be in.
Recommended Posts