KRAVITZ: Luck's agent on rumors the QB wants out of Indy: 'No truth to that comment at all'

Injured Indianapolis Colts quarterback Andrew Luck watches from the sideline during the first half of an NFL preseason football game against the Detroit Lions, Sunday, Aug. 13, 2017, in Indianapolis. (AP Photo/Darron Cummings)
Published:
Updated:
Bob Kravitz

INDIANAPOLIS (WTHR) - I was at the Colts’ facility, scrolling through my contacts and looking for the number for Will Wilson, Andrew Luck’s agent, when the cellphone rang.

It was Wilson, who is either a mind-reader or was tipped off by Colts GM Chris Ballard, and he had something to say about the ESPN/Mike Greenberg rumors involving Luck. Earlier Wednesday, Greenberg suggested that there was scuttlebutt throughout the league that Luck was disgruntled with the way the Colts have handled his injuries and he wanted out of Indianapolis.

Not true, Wilson said. Not even close.

“Quite simply and succinctly, there’s no truth to that comment at all,’’ Wilson told WTHR.com. “Andrew did a long-term deal and he did it for a reason: He wants to be with the Colts and he’s committed to the Colts. It’s as simple as that. He looks forward to the opportunity to play when he’s ready. He wants to get out there when he’s ready, obviously. He’s just going through rehab; it’s the process he’s going through.’’

In case you missed it, Greenberg said there’s been a lot of talk, none of which local reporters have heard, that Luck is frustrated with the way the Colts have dealt with his many injuries and is distancing himself from the organization. He added that members of Luck’s family, and I’m assuming we’re talking about his father, Oliver, and his uncle/agent, Wilson, are dismayed with the way Luck has been treated and that Luck may want out of Indy.

Here’s the meat of what Greenberg said:

“I’m not sure if I want to use the word 'rumor,' but there’s a general sense that you hear from people around the league if you talk to people who cover the sport of football that there is an ever-widening gap between Andrew Luck and the Colts,’’ Greenberg said. “That there is some unhappiness and some familial unhappiness…that maybe he was [pushed] to play when he wasn’t 100 percent, that…we could be seeing the end of the Andrew Luck Era in Indianapolis…"

Later in the show, Greenberg seemed to more fully comprehend that he’d touched off a firestorm, and started to backtrack – BEEP! BEEP! BEEP! – saying it wasn’t a report or a newsflash, but it was the general consensus of people who follow the National Football League that Luck wanted out of Indy.

General consensus of people who follow the National Football League?

I follow the NFL. I haven’t heard it. And I’m in Indianapolis.

Now, I’m not going to say this is completely beyond the realm of comprehension. More than a year ago, before he signed his big contract, I emailed someone close to Luck to ask if the quarterback was losing faith in management (Ryan Grigson at the time) and if he was giving any thought to forcing a trade or leaving in free agency. I never got a response.

But if you’re Luck, and you’ve gotten your brains beat in since 2012, and you’ve been hurt the better part of two seasons, why would you want to stay with an organization that has summarily failed to protect you?

If this was true – and Wilson insists that it’s not -- I wouldn’t blame Luck. He has a chance to be a generational quarterback, and the Colts have failed him in too many ways to fully quantify. No offensive line. No defense. All the injuries. It’s been bad, and based on what we saw last Sunday in Los Angeles, it appears it’s going to get much worse before it gets better, so bad, in fact, that some folks are suggesting Luck be shut down for the rest of the season. (Um, no.)

That said, Luck has never struck me as a guy who runs from a bad situation. Remember what he walked into here in Indy? Remember 2-14 in 2011? Archie Manning didn’t want his son, Eli, playing for the Chargers and forced a trade to the Giants. That never happened with Luck. There was never even a conversation along those lines. He was going to be a Colt, and he’s going to remain a Colt.

So does that clear up anything? Probably not.

Nor are we clear, not in the least, about the identity of Sunday’s Colts’ quarterback in the home opener against the Arizona Cardinals. All Chuck Pagano would say – and he didn’t say much, at all, during his weekly Wednesday meeting with the media – is that both Scott Tolzien and Jacoby Brissett would get reps this week and the team will decide on a starter later this week.

That could mean:

  1. They really don’t know who the starter is going to be, in which case, I’d question their sanity.
  2. They know who’s going to start – I say Brissett – and simply don’t want to give Bruce Arians and the Cardinals a head start on their preparations.
  3. They’re going to bring Stephen Morris back while nobody is looking, and have him start Sunday.

I’m going with 2.

If the Colts could get Josh Freeman and Ryan Lindley to play in just five days, they can surely have Brissett ready to roll after two full weeks of practice.

Nobody is insisting that Brissett is the answer, but we know Tolzien isn’t the answer. And honestly, it could get very ugly at Lucas Oil Stadium if the Colts start Tolzien again and he struggles again. This is a fan base on edge despite the fact the Colts have had just two losing seasons out of the last 20. They’re frustrated, not just about the Luck injury, but about the way the team has handled – or mishandled – the backup quarterback situation.

Eventually – and we don’t know when – Luck will be back, will be a Colt and will remain a Colt for a very long time.

We think.

Want more Kravitz? Subscribe to The Bob Kravitz Podcast on iTunes, Google Play, Stitcher or TuneIn. If you have a good story idea that's worth writing, feel free to send it to bkravitz@wthr.com.