Andrew Luck Staying at Stanford

[Gangster Octopus]

Andrew Luck, the consensus top NFL prospect in college football will not be enterking the NFL draft this year, leaving Carolina fans praying that Jimmy Calusen transforms into an elite QB.

That probably leaves Ryan Mallett as the top pure QB prospect in the draft, with Cam Newton and real wildcard. If the Panthers keep the pick I am guessing they go with AJ Green.

[astorian]

That surprises me, for several reasons: most notably the fact that there will surely be new restrictions on rookie salaries the year after next, which means Luck is sure to make a LOT less money if he waits another season.

[Death of Rats]

Projected #1 NFL draft pick Andrew Luck, QB from Stanford has decided to skip the draft and return for his Junior year to finish his degree. (http://collegefootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2011/01/06/stanfords-lucky-day-qb-to-return-for-another-season/)

How will this affect the draft? Will Carolina go down the list to Jake Locker , Cam Newton or Ryan Mallett? or do they go with a #2 overall guy like A.J. Green?

They need a QB but I do not think anyone else on the list will rate a #1 overall pick. Maybe, they go for Green and hope for one of the three QBs to drop to round 2, but that is doubtful. I think they pull the trigger on either Locker or Mallett and hope for Sam Bradford lightning to strike twice.

[Marley23]

Merged threads by Gangster Octopus and Death of Rats.


So, Luck is not with the Panthers. I'm not sure this is really a bad thing for them. They have a ton of other needs and they're not going to contend next year regardless. I think they might as well see what they can get from Clausen and use their top picks to improve some of their other positions. I guess the top pick will be very expensive regardless, but a non-QB might be a bit less crazy. And if they still have QB needs in the future they'll have a revised draft structure that limits rookie salaries.

[MOIDALIZE]

You know, if Luck was secretly worried about being drafted by a loser team like Carolina, he could have pulled an Eli Manning and just told them up front that he would never agree to sign there.

[Southern Yankee]

Being here in the Panthers market I can tell you that for weeks all I've heard is LUCK LUCK LUCK LUCK. It's a huge blow to this franchise. They are not perennially terrible so the #1 overall pick is rare for them. Luck looks to be a franchise QB and they missed out. Clausen may improve, and they do have a bunch of other needs, but a franchise QB would have really energized the fan base, who have been increasingly frustrated with the team and ownership.

[Barkis is Willin']

Very surprising, especially considering Harbaugh's situation. Or maybe Luck knows something we don't about that.

I agree this is not necessarily bad for Carolina. They've got lots of other needs. I would go with AJ Green if I were them. I had hoped he'd be there for the Browns, though.

[Southern Yankee]

You know, if Luck was secretly worried about being drafted by a loser team like Carolina, he could have pulled an Eli Manning and just told them up front that he would never agree to sign there.

They were awful this year, but I wouldn't call them a "loser team." They were in the NFC championship game a few years ago and lost the Super Bowl by FG a few years before that.

[Lamar Mundane]

Andrew Luck, the consensus top NFL prospect in college football will not be enterking the NFL draft this year, leaving Carolina fans praying that Jimmy Calusen transforms into an elite QB.

That probably leaves Ryan Mallett as the top pure QB prospect in the draft, with Cam Newton and real wildcard. If the Panthers keep the pick I am guessing they go with AJ Green.

I believe Blaine Gabbert of Missouri and Jake Locker of Washington are both projected ahead of Mallett and Newton.

[Southern Yankee]

Without a coach or coordinators in place, it's very difficult to guess what the Panthers will do now. A lot will depend on who they hire.

[MOIDALIZE]

They were awful this year, but I wouldn't call them a "loser team." They were in the NFC championship game a few years ago and lost the Super Bowl by FG a few years before that.

They're looking to cut payroll and they'll have a new coach. They're not going to be a good situation for a young QB for the foreseeable future.

[Southern Yankee]

They're looking to cut payroll and they'll have a new coach. They're not going to be a good situation for a young QB for the foreseeable future.

I agree that they won't be a contender this coming season, but they have some pieces in place to come back fairly quickly. They are way under the cap and Jerry Richardson is not traditionally a cheap owner, despite this year. Once the CBA situation shakes out I don't think he'll continue to operate on a shoestring budget. Of course, I could be wrong...

[mhendo]

Clausen may improve, and they do have a bunch of other needs, but a franchise QB would have really energized the fan base, who have been increasingly frustrated with the team and ownership.Thing is, though, that "energize the fan base" and "build a good team for the future" are not necessarily the same thing. The fans might have loved the shiny trinket of a top prospect QB, but it could be that the Panthers will be just as good, or better, in the long run without Luck.

[Barkis is Willin']

Boy, Mallett looked awfully good in the Sugar Bowl, despite his horrible receivers.

If you believe the Sporting News, Jake Locker might drop out of the 1st round. Their writers inidcate that he may be the most overhyped QB entering a draft since Ryan Leaf. Although, I personally think Jamarcus Russell was at least equally overhyped.

[Omniscient]

I believe Blaine Gabbert of Missouri and Jake Locker of Washington are both projected ahead of Mallett and Newton.

Kiper has them ranked Luck (1), Gabbert (9), Newton (13), Mallett (17), Locker (25).

Scouts Inc. has Andrew Luck (1), Blaine Gabbert (20), Jake Locker (23), Cam Newton (29), Ryan Mallett (31).

Based on my observations I think Mallett and Gabbert will end up competing for the #1 QB rating with Luck off the board and Locker could fall a long ways into the second round.

ETA: This decision could cost Luck a TON of money. The rookie salary scale is going to be one of the biggest changes in the new CBA and with neither owners or existing players having any stake in keeping that overly inflated theres little reason to think it won't be decreased substantially. Even if he remains the #1 overall pick in 2012 he might get $20M+ less overall and $10M+ less guaranteed, who knows rookie contracts might end up being limited to 3 or 4 years meaning an even bigger loss. If he falls into the middle of the 1st round it could be catastrophic, and that doesn't even consider injury.

Stupid, stupid move.

[Gangster Octopus]

Stupid, stupid move.

If money the only thing that matters to you.

[Omniscient]

If money the only thing that matters to you.

If he were niggling over a few percentage points I might agree. He may lose a life changing amount of money. That's not simple greed.

[wolfman]

Although, I personally think Jamarcus Russell was at least equally overhyped.

I don't actually even remember him being all that hyped, until the week of the draft it seemed has was a must take number 1 guy.

[Drain Bead]

Seems to me that there's little to no upside in staying, but a lot of downside. Just look at the difference from Jake Locker's projections last year to now. The same dropoff could easily happen with Luck, especially if there's upheaval in the coaching staff.

[Southern Yankee]

Thing is, though, that "energize the fan base" and "build a good team for the future" are not necessarily the same thing. The fans might have loved the shiny trinket of a top prospect QB, but it could be that the Panthers will be just as good, or better, in the long run without Luck.

No doubt, but by most scouting reports Luck was a "can't miss" franchise QB. Are they always right? Of course not.

[Snooooopy]

I think he secretly wants to stay in the Bay Area and be an Oakland Raider. He would have declared for the draft this year, but the Raiders inexplicably decided to not be embarrassingly awful. So he put out this ridiculous cover story about wanting to finish up his studies in order to give the Raiders time to revert to form. He would also consider the 49ers, but it's hard to imagine they can mess up the good fortune of playing in such a weak division yet again.

[Karen Lingel]

BOOOOOOOOO! Throw out Harbaugh, then!

[Cyberhwk]

Seems to me that there's little to no upside in staying, but a lot of downside. Just look at the difference from Jake Locker's projections last year to now. The same dropoff could easily happen with Luck, especially if there's upheaval in the coaching staff.
Exactly. Locker was a projected Top 3 pick if he came out last year. Now, he's probably going in the mid to late 1st round. He probably cost himself $20-30 million.

There is something to be said for staying in school. Some kids need polishing. Others still have unfinished business in the college ranks. A good suggestion I heard to leave early is "Top 10 pick, or #1 at your position."

But Luck has been described as "more potential at Peyton Manning." He would have been far and away the best player in this draft. Probably the best prospect in years. There's nothing he could possibly do to improve his position and he's only a broken leg or ACL tear away from going from a running-away #1 prospect to damaged goods (and subject to a rookie salary cap after the CBA is renegotiated).

Dumb decision.

[Hamlet]

Exactly. Locker was a projected Top 3 pick if he came out last year.I have to disagree. Locker has always been overhyped based on his measurable, but his production rarely if ever matched it. Even if he came out last year, there is no way he'd have gone in the top 3. Top 3 ROUNDS, maybe, but not even in the top 10. Staying an extra year didn't hurt his draft status much if at all, quite the contrary if you include his last 4 games and bowl game this year.
Dumb decision.It's HIS decision. I get a bit tired of all these people ripping on him for doing what the fuck he wants to do with his life. He's not going to cost himself a ton of dough, he'll be just fine next year. Yes there is a risk of injury, but just ask Sam Bradford how much a season ending injury will crush your stock draft as a QB.

Kudos to Luck for doing what he wanted with his life.

[Omniscient]

It's HIS decision. I get a bit tired of all these people ripping on him for doing what the fuck he wants to do with his life. He's not going to cost himself a ton of dough, he'll be just fine next year. Yes there is a risk of injury, but just ask Sam Bradford how much a season ending injury will crush your stock draft as a QB.

Kudos to Luck for doing what he wanted with his life.

Sam Bradford signed a 5-year, $86 Million deal with $50M guaranteed. A $8.3M bump over the previous years #1 overall QB pick in Stafford who got a 6-year, $72 Million deal with $41.7M guaranteed. 2 years previous JaMarcus Russell got 6-years, $61 Million with $32M guaranteed. In between, 3rd overall pick Matt Ryan signed a 6-year $72 Million deal with $34.75M assured.

Based on recent history it's very safe to say that Luck, who's universally considered a better prospect than all of those guys, would have gotten at least 5-years, $90M with $55M guaranteed. Time will tell where Luck gets drafted in 2012, but if he's the #1 overall prospect it will be very easy to determine how much he lost once a rookie wage scale is in place. I think it's quite likely that the rookie wage scale will settle in with a dramatic pay cut at the top and a more even distribution down through the 1st round, I'll be quite shocked if the new CBA allows the first overall pick to be paid even $30M guaranteed. Luck probably cost himself A LOT of money.

[mhendo]

Luck probably cost himself A LOT of money.
But you're responding to an argument that no-one has made. Not a single person has denied that staying at Stanford could cost him some money.

Do you really think that your financial analysis is lost on Luck? Do you suppose that he isn't aware of the upcoming CBA, and its possible effect on rookie contracts? Do you believe for a moment that he doesn't have a ton of experts advising him about this stuff?

And yet you still persist in ragging on him for making an informed decision. Maybe there are things in life more important to him than that much money, or (shock! horror!) playing in the NFL. Especially since, even if the new CBA changes rookie contracts as much as you are predicting, his first contract will still earn him more than ten times what most Americans earn in a lifetime.

Yeah, fuck that guy for wanting to get an architectural design degree from Stanford University. What sort of selfish moron is he, anyway?

[Ellis Dee]

You're assuming facts not in evidence. How do we know he's got a "ton of experts" advising him? How do we know his decision is informed?

Frankly, from what I can tell, the reason he's staying is because his dad instilled a value system in him that puts a college degree above all other things. To an objective observer, cutting your income from 90 million to 30 million in order to get a college degree is pretty damn stupid, since there is absolutely nothing stopping you from finishing your degree in your 30s after your football career is over. Or even during the offseason during your career.

His defenders sound like his dad, who snidely implies that anyone who values money over anything is low class. That opinion is a luxury only afforded to the rich, which is why it doesn't sit very well with a lot of people.

[Hamlet]

You're assuming facts not in evidence. How do we know he's got a "ton of experts" advising him? How do we know his decision is informed.I admit to assuming the a kid who can get into Stanford, who, by all accounts is highly intelligent, who apparently can handle an architect/student athlete, and who has a helluva lot of to lose, isn't an idiot. Maybe he is a mouthbreathing moron, but I feels safe saying that he's not.

And it's not the difference between 90 and 30 million, so please stop with that crap. Sure he is passing on millions of dollars, but, once again it's HIS fucking decision. Ragging on a kid because he thinks there is more to life than 10 million over ten years when he'll be making ten times that over his career is sad.

People put other considerations before money all th time. I choose a profession that pays a ton less than I could have made had I went corporate. I'm sure you could have gotten a higher paying job, or worked two jobs, but there were things more important to you than money.

To me, ragging on Luck reeks of self righteousness and jealousy. Let the kid live his life.

[mhendo]

You're assuming facts not in evidence. How do we know he's got a "ton of experts" advising him? How do we know his decision is informed?

Frankly, from what I can tell, the reason he's staying is because his dad instilled a value system in him that puts a college degree above all other things. To an objective observer, cutting your income from 90 million to 30 million in order to get a college degree is pretty damn stupid, since there is absolutely nothing stopping you from finishing your degree in your 30s after your football career is over. Or even during the offseason during your career.

His defenders sound like his dad, who snidely implies that anyone who values money over anything is low class. That opinion is a luxury only afforded to the rich, which is why it doesn't sit very well with a lot of people.I know nothing about his father. I knew nothing about Luck himself until i opened this thread. I'm simply astonished that so many people have so much trouble with a decision that:

(a) is his to make
(b) is unlikely to lead to any significant hardship for him in his life
(c) suggests that he might have priorities other than simply making the most money possible

As for whether he has people advising him: even if he doesn't have a team of lawyers or agents or whatever, i think it's pretty likely that he's at least as informed as you and his other detractors are about the possible consequences of his decision. I know about the upcoming CBA and its likely effects of rookie contracts, and i pay almost zero attention to college football and the draft. Do you really think he's making an uninformed decision here?

I have no problem with people who disagree with his decision, or who say "Well, in his position, i'd certainly enter the draft." And if Luck turns around tomorrow and changes his mind, i won't blame him one bit. In his position, i think i'd take the money.

But all the people calling his decision "dumb" and "stupid" seem to be assuming that he hasn't thought these things through. I also think it's hilarious that you slam him for not taking the money, while also taking cheap shots at him for coming from a wealthy family.

[sitchensis]

Luck will be subject to the rookie wage scale whether he goes this year or next. The draft will still happen as normal but no players will be signed until the new CBA is in place. The argument of 90 million to 30 million is mute.

[Ellis Dee]

I also think it's hilarious that you slam him for not taking the money, while also taking cheap shots at him for coming from a wealthy family.I don't follow. Little help?

[Omniscient]

But you're responding to an argument that no-one has made. Not a single person has denied that staying at Stanford could cost him some money.

I'm responding to the comment I quoted. The one that said Luck "isn't going to cost himself a ton of money". By most accounts he is going to cost himself "a ton" of money even if his draft stock stays put. Read before you start taking snide pot shots.

Do you really think that your financial analysis is lost on Luck? Do you suppose that he isn't aware of the upcoming CBA, and its possible effect on rookie contracts? Do you believe for a moment that he doesn't have a ton of experts advising him about this stuff?

I'm sure he's aware. I'm sure he's so confident in his ability that he thinks he'll get paid like Peyton Manning for 15 years. Unfortunately many athletes have that confidence and end up bankrupt. There are perilously few opportunities for life changing money and he's turning one down for an uncertain future. It might work out for him, the odds are not in his favor on that account though. The list of athletes who overestimated their future earning potential is a long one even with sound advice.

And yet you still persist in ragging on him for making an informed decision. Maybe there are things in life more important to him than that much money, or (shock! horror!) playing in the NFL. Especially since, even if the new CBA changes rookie contracts as much as you are predicting, his first contract will still earn him more than ten times what most Americans earn in a lifetime.

I've never ragged on him. I just said he threw away a life changing amount of money. That's rarely sound business sense, and if he'll be happy an fulfilled as a architect earning $120K a year good on him, but I suspect that football is his plan and he's taking a huge gamble with that opportunity.

Yeah, fuck that guy for wanting to get an architectural design degree from Stanford University. What sort of selfish moron is he, anyway?

You're the only one saying selfish.

Luck will be subject to the rookie wage scale whether he goes this year or next. The draft will still happen as normal but no players will be signed until the new CBA is in place. The argument of 90 million to 30 million is mute.

Not likely. Unless the CBA gets agreed upon and ratified before the April Draft he'll be completely unbounded by anything. The current CBA is in effect until March and no one thinks the new deal will be worked out prior to August. Virtually every agent and draftee will be signed before a new CBA is in effect and due to the uncapped league will be able to negotiate any contract they want and the players will have all the leverage in that scenario.

Unless there's some insider info that indicates collusion between the teams or a impending agreement Luck will be missing his payday.

[Hamlet]

I'm sure he's aware. I'm sure he's so confident in his ability that he thinks he'll get paid like Peyton Manning for 15 years. Unfortunately many athletes have that confidence and end up bankrupt.I have yet to see a rookie contract for 15 years. We are talking about his rookie contract, right?

There are perilously few opportunities for life changing money and he's turning one down for an uncertain future. It might work out for him, the odds are not in his favor on that account though.Really? It's not like he's going from 50 million to working at McDonalds. Barring a catastropic injury, he'll likely be at the top of next years' draft too. Is it a risk? Sure. But I really think you're overestimating the likelihood he'll end up with nothing.

Unless there's some insider info that indicates collusion between the teams or a impending agreement Luck will be missing his payday.Again, you say "missing his payday"; he (and I) thinks its simply deferring his payday for a year. Again, I think you're overestimating what he is passing on.

[sitchensis]

Not likely. Unless the CBA gets agreed upon and ratified before the April Draft he'll be completely unbounded by anything. The current CBA is in effect until March and no one thinks the new deal will be worked out prior to August. Virtually every agent and draftee will be signed before a new CBA is in effect and due to the uncapped league will be able to negotiate any contract they want and the players will have all the leverage in that scenario.

Unless there's some insider info that indicates collusion between the teams or a impending agreement Luck will be missing his payday.

You are incorrect here, the players are bound to the team that drafted them and no team will sign any player until the new CBA (with rookie wage scale) is in place. The absence of a CBA for a few months does not make all players free agents.
You can call it collusion if you want but it is legal, it’s called the NFL Draft. This will work the same way as a player that holds out, but in reverse, it will be the owners that are holding out. The only way the rookie players can become effectively free agents is if the a new CBA can’t be agreed on and the season is cancelled, then I have no clue what happens.

[sitchensis]

I also want to add that this is an ongoing negotiation, the NFL and the players could negotiate a rookie wage scale that will not become effective until 2012, which would change everything I said above. In that case Luck would be out millions.

[SenorBeef]

The current CBA ends in March. The draft is in April. Wouldn't the draft fall under the rules of the new CBA, so if there's a rookie slotting system, they'd have it this year anyway?

[SenorBeef]

Sorry, I responded to an old instance of this page I loaded this morning and didn't notice the posts that addressed mine.

[Omniscient]

I have yet to see a rookie contract for 15 years. We are talking about his rookie contract, right?

If Luck is a Pro Bowl franchise QB ala Peyton Manning he'll get a huge second and third contract. Therefore any money forgone on his initial deal will be a drop in the bucket even if it is at $30M discount. That's probably what he's assuming. Unfortunately most NFL QBs don't ever get a second contract of any note. I suspect the confidence in a long, lucrative career is clouding his judgment. One in the hand is worth two in the bush and all.

Really? It's not like he's going from 50 million to working at McDonalds. Barring a catastropic injury, he'll likely be at the top of next years' draft too. Is it a risk? Sure. But I really think you're overestimating the likelihood he'll end up with nothing.

He might be going from $100M to $30M. Who knows what this new CBA will hold. I think it's very safe to assume that there'll be far less money involved on a guaranteed basis and if he's the next Tim Couch that could be horrific if the new rookie wage scale eliminated huge signing bonuses and makes those contracts more incentive or merit based. I'm not saying he could get nothing. I'm saying he could go from $50M guaranteed to maybe nothing beyond his first year guaranteed. Maybe they limit signing bonuses to 10% of the overall contract, who knows, but I think all signs point to some large reduction, and that's if he's still a top pick. If he's a late second rounder he could be settling for $2.5M. Compared to $100M that is working at McDonalds.

Again, you say "missing his payday"; he (and I) thinks its simply deferring his payday for a year. Again, I think you're overestimating what he is passing on.

Under normal circumstances it's a deferment. Under normal circumstances it's entirely defensible and even laudable. The uncertainty of this CBA calls that "deferment" into question.

You are incorrect here, the players are bound to the team that drafted them and no team will sign any player until the new CBA (with rookie wage scale) is in place. The absence of a CBA for a few months does not make all players free agents.

The absence of a CBA means there's again no salary cap. Teams can lock up talent and front load deals to avoid an impending cap hit. Last season everyone got big contracts with tons of guaranteed money. If there's no CBA after the draft teams will continue that trend.

You can call it collusion if you want but it is legal, it’s called the NFL Draft. This will work the same way as a player that holds out, but in reverse, it will be the owners that are holding out. The only way the rookie players can become effectively free agents is if the a new CBA can’t be agreed on and the season is cancelled, then I have no clue what happens.

If all teams decide not to negotiate with drafted rookies that's collusion and the NFL will get raped in court for it. The draft is protected by the anti-trust exemption. Collusion on contracts is not. If the new season is canceled or postponed making the draft moot (not mute) it's the teams who will suffer since they'll be robbed of their draft picks. There's no standard for dealing with that that I'm aware of, but you can bet teams will be looking to get a competitive advantage by signing players before the new CBA is in place in order to free up money before the new cap kicks in.

The current CBA ends in March. The draft is in April. Wouldn't the draft fall under the rules of the new CBA, so if there's a rookie slotting system, they'd have it this year anyway?

No, the draft and the contracts signed would fall under neither unless the CBA is agreed upon before or shortly after the draft. There'll be massive uncertainty on both sides. The lack of a salary cap motivates the teams to work before the draft as opposed to after. Teams that sign their players before the CBA and aren't forced to include the signing bonuses in their cap figures will have a major competitive advantage over those who wait. Anything else would be a sign of owner collusion and a nasty court battle.

[sitchensis]

The absence of a CBA means there's again no salary cap. Teams can lock up talent and front load deals to avoid an impending cap hit. Last season everyone got big contracts with tons of guaranteed money. If there's no CBA after the draft teams will continue that trend.

Teams can and will lock up talent with front loaded deals on veterans, but there is no reason to pay a rookie $100 million when all you have to do is wait a few months and you can pay them $30 million.

If all teams decide not to negotiate with drafted rookies that's collusion and the NFL will get raped in court for it. The draft is protected by the anti-trust exemption. Collusion on contracts is not. If the new season is canceled or postponed making the draft moot (not mute) it's the teams who will suffer since they'll be robbed of their draft picks. There's no standard for dealing with that that I'm aware of, but you can bet teams will be looking to get a competitive advantage by signing players before the new CBA is in place in order to free up money before the new cap kicks in.

No, it is not collusion, it is good business sense. The drafted rookies have to negotiate with the teams that drafted them. They are not free agents. Drafted rookies cannot shop around with other teams. So you cannot have collusion.

No, the draft and the contracts signed would fall under neither unless the CBA is agreed upon before or shortly after the draft. There'll be massive uncertainty on both sides. The lack of a salary cap motivates the teams to work before the draft as opposed to after. Teams that sign their players before the CBA and aren't forced to include the signing bonuses in their cap figures will have a major competitive advantage over those who wait. Anything else would be a sign of owner collusion and a nasty court battle.

They will work hard to sign players before the new CBA, veteran players. Why would they front load a deal to pay the #1 draft pick $100 million vs. $30 million to clear cap space when all they have to do is front load their veteran contracts, wait for the new CBA and save $70 million dollars.

[Cyberhwk]

I have to disagree. Locker has always been overhyped based on his measurable, but his production rarely if ever matched it. Even if he came out last year, there is no way he'd have gone in the top 3. Top 3 ROUNDS, maybe, but not even in the top 10.

In making that decision [to stay in school], Locker gave up a chance to possibly be the No. 1 overall pick in the 2010 draft -- as some pundits predicted -- instead returning to Washington on the gamble that a 5-7 team can make another huge stride and find itself back in the postseason about a year from now.
(Cite (http://sports.espn.go.com/ncf/news/story?id=4809944))

I agree he under performs which is why I wouldn't want him, but he was a hot prospect that I highly doubt would have dropped past the Top 10.

[Ellis Dee]

He was hardly a consensus #1 overall. The endorsement you quoted sounds very similar to how Aaron Rodgers was touted, and he fell to ~22nd.