Jump to content

  • Welcome!

    Register and log in easily with Twitter or Google accounts!

    Or simply create a new Huddle account. 

    Members receive fewer ads , access our dark theme, and the ability to join the discussion!

     

Colts do not want Luck to outgrow Indy

TheGreatestOfAllTimeCam

Recommended Posts

TheGreatestOfAllTimeCam Newbie

TheGreatestOfAllTimeCam

Posted
Posted

http://sports.yahoo.com/news/luck-balks-colts-marketing-restrictions-195006432--nfl.html?utm_source=twitterfeed&utm_medium=twitter

Wow, makes you realize that Irsay is going about the man after Peyton Manning as "we have to keep him for as long as we can and keep him relatively small" rather than being the way JR has been with Cam and allowing him to be who he is and market the poo out of him.

Glad we are not the Colts. Despite how the owner refutes it in tweets, this has to be true. It sounds true and makes sense.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
xerxes Newbie

xerxes

Posted
Posted

http://sports.yahoo...._medium=twitter

Wow, makes you realize that Irsay is going about the man after Peyton Manning as "we have to keep him for as long as we can and keep him relatively small" rather than being the way JR has been with Cam and allowing him to be who he is and market the poo out of him.

Glad we are not the Colts. Despite how the owner refutes it in tweets, this has to be true. It sounds true and makes sense.

Where did you get that from the article? The closest thing was:

"One source with knowledge of the talks even suggested that Luck would 'have to clear' marketing proposals with the club."

​So a multi-billion dollar organization wants to control it's marketing image with the face of it's organization. What's weird about that?

I doubt the Colts want to limit Luck's exposure too much, but they do want to make sure he doesn't start endorsing products that would not be consistent with the image the Colts want to project.

If you'll recall:

(Richardson talk with Cam Newton):

"Do you have any tattoos?’” Richardson told Rose. “He said, ‘No, sir. I don’t have any.’ I said, ‘Do you have any piercings?’ He said, ‘No, sir. I don’t have any.’ I said, ‘We want to keep it that way.’ . . . .

“We want to keep no tattoos, no piercings, and I think you’ve got a very nice haircut.”

Sounds about the same if you ask me.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
xerxes Newbie

xerxes

Posted
Posted

Well why did Peyton Manning not have a similar agreement in his contract then? Kind of odd to say the least.... and negotations over a contract that is pretty much determined and set shouldn't drag out this long

Not at all. When Peyton signed his rookie contract, the negotiations were all about money. For subsequent contracts, Peyton had enough leverage to make a marketing clause unfeasible.

For a contract like Luck's, where the money is mostly predetermined, the only thing to negotiate are secondary things like endorsement control.

I think people are reading way too much into this. As far as I can tell, this is just business as usual. Each side is trying to get as much as they possibly can. They can't argue that much about money, so they have to negotiate on other items with monetary value attached like public image.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Sean Payton's Vicodin Grand Master

Sean Payton's Vicodin

Posted
Posted

They won't have to really worry about keeping him small... When he busts, that will all take care of itself. 10 years from now we'll be on the interwebs reading stories about him breaking and entering to steal people's prescription drugs.

I'm pretty sure his degree from stanford will take care of him

The Luck hate on this board is hilarious. You guys are like 16 year old girls who had her boyfriend leave her and now you bitch bitch and bitch

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Go to topic listing
×
×
  • Create New...