[Merge] Colts Sign Denico Autry

[NewColtsFan]

13 minutes ago, Alex22 said:

 

They were very expensive on a production basis quite clearly - I do not need stats to show that to you. 

 

In the NFL it is very expensive to pay players that dont play. 

 

Case closed.......

 

Case closed?    Watch how fast I open and crush it...

 

Johnson..  3/21...  7 mill is not expensive. 

 

Landry...   4/24...  6 mill per is not expensive.

 

Thomas....  4/14...  3.5 mill per is not expensive...

 

Cole...    2/14....   7 mill per is not expensive...

 

RJF...   3/10.5...   3.5 mill per is not expensive..     the money wasn't the problem,  who they gave it to was.   And THAT was my point.  Grigson was a poor judge of talent.

 

NOW the case is closed.

[Albaby]

I happen to live in “Raider country” and the people around here know who he is and most of them are upset for losing him.  I really like this signing.

[TomDiggs]

Autry is basically the type of guy you hope for in an UDFA

 

He signed and spent years developing. He developed into a very solid and valuable rotational piece along the Oakland DL.

 

He is the type of guy the Colts would typically reward themselves. A guy they get as an UDFA who they develop and then when he pans out they pay him.

 

This was just a case of Oakland really having to decide if they could pay two DTs that came due for contracts this off-season. They opted for Justin Ellis at 3 yrs $15M.

 

Most fans saw the potential and the development of Autry and wanted to keep him. He also had the ability to apply some pressure to the QB. He needed work on his ability to stop the run so he could see the field more. He did that between 2 years ago and last year.

 

He is worth what we gave him and is the type of guy you do reward.

 

Heck in the last 3 years as a part time player he has 10.5 total sacks.

 

Compare that to Poe (5.0 total), Suh (15.5) and S.Richardson (7.5).

 

That is pretty telling. I am not saying he is on their level. I am simply saying that his ability to get to the QB on a part-time basis over the last three years puts him above Poe and Richardson and at around 2/3 of the production of Suh in that department.

 

He doesn't totally impact the game like those guys. If he did he'd be making double what we paid him. But for what he does he is worth this money and he is still progressing.

[Alex22]

39 minutes ago, NewColtsFan said:

 

Case closed?    Watch how fast I open and crush it...

 

Johnson..  3/21...  7 mill is not expensive. 

 

Landry...   4/24...  6 mill per is not expensive.

 

Thomas....  4/14...  3.5 mill per is not expensive...

 

Cole...    2/14....   7 mill per is not expensive...

 

RJF...   3/10.5...   3.5 mill per is not expensive..     the money wasn't the problem,  who they gave it to was.   And THAT was my point.  Grigson was a poor judge of talent.

 

NOW the case is closed.

 

Johnson..  3/21 

41r 503yrds  4tds

 

Landry...   4/24 

47 tkls 2.5 sacks no picks

87 tckls no sacks or picks

 

Thomas....  2/7.5

Played one game

 

Cole...    2/14

5 sacks in 2 years

 

RJF...   2/11

5.5 sacks in 2 years 

 

Based on what they gave the team, it sure looks like Grigson overpaid. UDFAs would give you more production for way less. 

 

[Buck Showalter]

7 hours ago, SteelCityColt said:

Sorry to all about the slight confusion, much like people wanting to be the first to post on the signing in the rush to get first dibs on merging posts we got a little over excited. Should all be fixed now.

Thanks for fixing my mishap SteelCity!!!

 

& as far as Autry goes I like the signing, its some evidence that Ballard has a vision & is sticking to it...

 

Signing youngerish guys to prove it deals.

Giving improving depth players a chance to compete for a chance to start.

Not breaking the bank which he has discussed as a locker room building issue, as to not create resentment.

 

Solid plan in theory, hope it pans out.

 

[WoolMagnet]

I haven't heard anyone mention it, but Ballard may have helped get guys like Norwell, Huthchins,Robinson,etc their very lucrative paydays.  Ballard may have been in the auction, but decided the $ they were getting to didnt equal perceived future value.

  Hey, i'd like an Aston Martin, but.......: , well......::, i'd just like an Aston Martin, it really has nothing to do with the Colts.

[stitches]

7 hours ago, NewColtsFan said:

 

Huh?

 

So far, Ballard and Grigson have approached free agency in mostly the  same way.   Be price sensitive.

 

Both GMs have targeted mid-level and more inexpensive players that will hopefully out-perform their contract.

 

The only expensive guy Grigson ever bought was Gosder Cherilus who he made the highest paid RT in football.   Otherwise....?

 

They both have avoided the expensive guys that rarely work out.

 

Now...   you can say Grigson favored more veteran type of players and Ballard is focusing on getting younger -- if that's your argument then I'm with you.   But price-wise they are the same.   And I'm ok with that.

 

What I'm hoping for is that Ballard and his team are better judges of talent than Grigson.   If that holds up -- and I think it did in Ballard's first year --  then we're going to be good going forward.

 

I like the approach.   I just want it executed better.   

 

 

 

 

Grigson was getting way over their prime vets who were on the way down for quick returns. Without regard to the long-term health of the team. Throwing away first round pick on 3d/4th receiver and running back. When you are getting guys on the way down you can expect them to keep going down and that's what happened with most of those signings. (He also was giving them 4-5 year deals). 

 

What Ballard is doing is accumulating picks(I expect him to trade down in this draft too), paying bargain players in their prime low-risk contracts with outs after 1 year. It is no coincidence that Ballard has more hits in his first FA last year than Grigson had in 5 years of free agency. 

 

Edit: BTW keep in mind that the salary cap was about 50-60 million lower in the 2012-2014 period. So 6M contract in 2012 is equivalent to 9M contract this year. 7M contracts are  equivalent to 10.5-11 this year. 

[LJpalmbeacher2]

10 hours ago, Southside Hoosier Fan said:

Quite underwhelming and appears we didn't even do it right and filed paperwork incorrectly.

 

Lol....thats our Ballard!

[LJpalmbeacher2]

12 minutes ago, stitches said:

 

Grigson was getting way over their prime vets who were on the way down for quick returns. Without regard to the long-term health of the team. Throwing away first round pick on 3d/4th receiver and running back. When you are getting guys on the way down you can expect them to keep going down and that's what happened with most of those signings. (He also was giving them 4-5 year deals). 

 

What Ballard is doing is accumulating picks(I expect him to trade down in this draft too), paying bargain players in their prime low-risk contracts with outs after 1 year. It is no coincidence that Ballard has more hits in his first FA last year than Grigson had in 5 years of free agency. 

 

Im not a Fan of Griggs.... But griggs team put up records pf 11-5, 11-5, 11-5 plus 3 post season wins in his first 3 seasons.

 

Ballard's first season teams record was 4-12. And we may be looking at a Top 10 draft pick, or better, in 2019 draft.

[NewColtsFan]

3 hours ago, LJpalmbeacher2 said:

 

Lol....thats our Ballard!

 

 

POST REMOVED BY AUTHOR...

[stitches]

10 minutes ago, LJpalmbeacher2 said:

 

Im not a Fan of Griggs.... But griggs team put up records pf 11-5, 11-5, 11-5 plus 3 post season wins in his first 3 seasons.

 

Ballard's first season teams record was 4-12. And we may be looking at a Top 10 draft pick, or better, in 2019 draft.

Yes, and those teams had healthy Luck in a much worse AFC South. Luck could sleepwalk to 10 wins in 2012-2015 AFC South. We still were mediocre against outside of the AFC South talent. 

 

It also doesn't meant any of those signings were good, or any of the 2017 Ballard signings were bad. Look at them individually and assess what each of them has given you for the buck. The reason this team was horrible last year is because of the complete lack of talent Grigson left behind - zero players left from the 2013 draft, Only constantly injured Mewhort and Moncrief left from the 2014 draft, etc  and because Pagano had a masterful tank job performance without actually tanking. Warren Sharp's thread is especially illuminating on that point.

[coltsfeva]

  I think Barkley will be gone but Chubb might be there, even at 6. 

  The things that impress me about Chubb are his non-stop motor and using his hands to break free. If he can learn a spin move (hopefully Mathis will still be there) he would be a difference maker. 

   I guess this move gives the Colts options to go for another position, should somebody else grab Chubb. I still hope he’s their pick. Having someone you have to double team creates opportunities for other players.

[NewColtsFan]

5 hours ago, Alex22 said:

 

Johnson..  3/21 

41r 503yrds  4tds

 

Landry...   4/24 

47 tkls 2.5 sacks no picks

87 tckls no sacks or picks

 

Thomas....  2/7.5

Played one game

 

Cole...    2/14

5 sacks in 2 years

 

RJF...   2/11

5.5 sacks in 2 years 

 

Based on what they gave the team, it sure looks like Grigson overpaid. UDFAs would give you more production for way less. 

 

 

YES,  overpaid for poor performance.     But these were NOT high-priced buys.    They were low and mid-priced buys.      Again,  it goes back to what I said....     Grigson picked the wrong players.    The money wasn't the issue.   The players were.

 

[JColts72]

Type of player could have gotten for les money in the 6th or 7th round of the draft.

[DougDew]

5 hours ago, stitches said:

 

 

Grigson was getting way over their prime vets who were on the way down for quick returns. Without regard to the long-term health of the team. Throwing away first round pick on 3d/4th receiver and running back. When you are getting guys on the way down you can expect them to keep going down and that's what happened with most of those signings. (He also was giving them 4-5 year deals). 

 

 

Its bothersome when people skew their perception of facts to fit their point.  Just for the record:

 

Dorset was drafted #30 with sub 4.3 speed.  He was intended to be Reggie's #2 replacement or even challenge TY for #1.  This was right after we lost 45-9 in the AFCCG (and people wrongly blamed the D) because the O went 3 and out so much.  It didn't work out, but the intent was sound. Griff Whalen and Chester Rogers were signed for the intent to be the 3rd/4th receiver and were just as effective, if not more, in that role than Ballard's Aiken.

 

The running back, TRich, was traded for with the intent to be the bell cow RB and a repaired Vick Ballard to replace Donald Brown.  It didn't work out, but the intent was sound.  At the time of the trade, nobody on this forum or the football community knew TRich was not good.  Even Polian liked the trade.  But I'm sure CB was quietly sitting in his office chuckling at how stupid the Colts were.

 

During this FA period, please check the structure of the contracts.  The details are important, and many comments will point out that some deals are really deals that are much shorter and cheaper than their gross numbers.  These 4-5 year deals you speak of could be jettisoned after year 2 with no consequences to the team.  Because the contracts were not really 4-5 year deals is why the Colts currently have $70 million in cap space and had a lot last year and the year before.

[DougDew]

7 hours ago, Alex22 said:

 

Johnson..  3/21 

41r 503yrds  4tds

 

Landry...   4/24 

47 tkls 2.5 sacks no picks

87 tckls no sacks or picks

 

Thomas....  2/7.5

Played one game

 

Cole...    2/14

5 sacks in 2 years

 

RJF...   2/11

5.5 sacks in 2 years 

 

Based on what they gave the team, it sure looks like Grigson overpaid. UDFAs would give you more production for way less. 

 

Landry was a very good player when signed.  Then he fell in love with his biceps.

 

Thomas was regarded as a very sound signing by nearly everyone on this forum and in the football community. Then he tore his quad.

 

RJF, sacks?  Why judge a runstopping DT on his ability to get sacks?  He wasn't signed to be Warren Sapp.  RJF was a solid signing, a solid player here, solid for the Redskins, and still is solid for NE on a rotational basis (getting old).

 

AJ and Cole were signed to get us over the hump from the AFCCG to the SB.  They were two players signed for that purpose and were never thought to be part of the building of the team, and the contracts reflected that.

[lollygagger8]

I'm slowly getting on board with the signing. 

 

Yesterday I went from: 

 

To today: 

[stitches]

47 minutes ago, DougDew said:

Its bothersome when people skew their perception of facts to fit their point.  Just for the record:

 

Dorset was drafted #30 with sub 4.3 speed.  He was intended to be Reggie's #2 replacement or even challenge TY for #1.  This was right after we lost 45-9 in the AFCCG (and people wrongly blamed the D) because the O went 3 and out so much.  It didn't work out, but the intent was sound. Griff Whalen and Chester Rogers were signed for the intent to be the 3rd/4th receiver and were just as effective, if not more, in that role than Ballard's Aiken.

 

The running back, TRich, was traded for with the intent to be the bell cow RB and a repaired Vick Ballard to replace Donald Brown.  It didn't work out, but the intent was sound.  At the time of the trade, nobody on this forum or the football community knew TRich was not good.  Even Polian liked the trade.  But I'm sure CB was quietly sitting in his office chuckling at how stupid the Colts were.

 

During this FA period, please check the structure of the contracts.  The details are important, and many comments will point out that some deals are really deals that are much shorter and cheaper than their gross numbers.  These 4-5 year deals you speak of could be jettisoned after year 2 with no consequences to the team.  Because the contracts were not really 4-5 year deals is why the Colts currently have $70 million in cap space and had a lot last year and the year before.

I bet they were all intended to be all pros. Why would you give up first rounders otherwise? First round picks for a RB of any sort is a waste majority of the time. TRich had a season of 3.6ypc and started the second season at 3.4ypc before we traded for him. Now tell me again exactly how this was a good move. I don't care if Polian liked the trade at the time. Polian has been so wrong on so many things after he left football that I would almost disregard his opinions altogether. Some of the worst takes in football in the last 5 years have been his. He's not paid to evaluate players right now. He's paid to talk on TV/Radio. 

 

Dorsett was not sub 4.3 player and even if he was this shouldn't have been a reason to draft him this high. 

 

No contract is really 4-5 years in the NFL, but most of them still carry a burden and dead cap past year one even if you cut the players.

 

And after all of this noone has managed to point to me how I was wrong in pointing out that Ballard hit more in his FA1 than Grigson hit in FA1-FA5? 

[Myles]

2 hours ago, coltsfeva said:

  I think Barkley will be gone but Chubb might be there, even at 6. 

  The things that impress me about Chubb are his non-stop motor and using his hands to break free. If he can learn a spin move (hopefully Mathis will still be there) he would be a difference maker. 

   I guess this move gives the Colts options to go for another position, should somebody else grab Chubb. I still hope he’s their pick. Having someone you have to double team creates opportunities for other players.

I think this may be aligning itself to have the Colts taking Nelson.   I hope so.   That is my first choice. 

[Jaric]

9 hours ago, NewColtsFan said:

 

Case closed?    Watch how fast I open and crush it...

 

Johnson..  3/21...  7 mill is not expensive. 

 

Landry...   4/24...  6 mill per is not expensive.

 

Thomas....  4/14...  3.5 mill per is not expensive...

 

Cole...    2/14....   7 mill per is not expensive...

 

RJF...   3/10.5...   3.5 mill per is not expensive..     the money wasn't the problem,  who they gave it to was.   And THAT was my point.  Grigson was a poor judge of talent.

 

NOW the case is closed.

 

Along that same lines, those contracts are only "expensive" if the players they're given to don't perform.

[hoosierhawk]

59 minutes ago, Myles said:

I think this may be aligning itself to have the Colts taking Nelson.   I hope so.   That is my first choice. 

Especially if the Colts sign Clayborn I truly believe we will trade down a few spots and take Nelson. Seems to be the way the cards are falling. I believe if Ballard would have been able to get Norwell he would have gone a different way and tried to end up with Chubb. 

I believe Ballard definitely had a plan for whichever way FA went and I think we will be just fine in the end. Patience.Hope we can sign Jenson today.

[King Colt]

This is a fill-in signing until they decide on a starter

[Swan Ronson]

7 hours ago, LJpalmbeacher2 said:

 

Im not a Fan of Griggs.... But griggs team put up records pf 11-5, 11-5, 11-5 plus 3 post season wins in his first 3 seasons.

 

Ballard's first season teams record was 4-12. And we may be looking at a Top 10 draft pick, or better, in 2019 draft.

We may be, yes. At the minute though that comment amounts to the sum total of nothing.

[DougDew]

1 hour ago, stitches said:

I bet they were all intended to be all pros. Why would you give up first rounders otherwise? First round picks for a RB of any sort is a waste majority of the time. TRich had a season of 3.6ypc and started the second season at 3.4ypc before we traded for him. Now tell me again exactly how this was a good move. I don't care if Polian liked the trade at the time. Polian has been so wrong on so many things after he left football that I would almost disregard his opinions altogether. Some of the worst takes in football in the last 5 years have been his. He's not paid to evaluate players right now. He's paid to talk on TV/Radio. 

 

Dorsett was not sub 4.3 player and even if he was this shouldn't have been a reason to draft him this high. 

 

No contract is really 4-5 years in the NFL, but most of them still carry a burden and dead cap past year one even if you cut the players.

 

And after all of this noone has managed to point to me how I was wrong in pointing out that Ballard hit more in his FA1 than Grigson hit in FA1-FA5? 

I'm not arguing your overall point.  I'm disputing the facts you told us for how you got there.  

 

So every GM knows that RJF has limitations and only Grigson thinks he's the next Warren Sapp?  RJFs contract reflected a steady player with limitations that would be cut at some point if...if...a replacement would be drafted.  Which is highly dependent upon where we would be drafting and who would be available in the ensuing years.  RJF lasted longer than some of the other FA signed under this same strategy.  Same thing Ballard is doing now with Sheard, Woods, et Al.

 

At the time, yes, TR was traded for the purposes of being an all-pro.  It was heavily said that his low YPC at CLEV was due to him being the only offense they had since they had no passing game.  Teams stacked the box.  And, BTW, you know the sassy comments...Its the BROWNS after all.

 

After the mild DHB and Nicks FA contracts and strategy (see above), Grigson thought he found a long term starter in Dorset,  which is why he was drafted 30.  He wasn't meant to be Griff , Chester, or Aiken.  RG signed UDFA Griff and Chester to be Griff and Chester.

 

You can criticize GMs for not evaluating talent correctly. and ultimately picking the wrong players.  But most of the time their strategy for picking the player is sound, as was RGs and how the contracts reflected it.

[coltsfeva]

2 hours ago, Myles said:

I think this may be aligning itself to have the Colts taking Nelson.   I hope so.   That is my first choice. 

   If Chubb is there, they might be able to grab him at 3 or 6 and get a guy like Henandez or Winn later. 

   From what I’ve heard, there’s a bigger drop off between Chubb and the rest of the DEs than between Nelson and the rest of the interior Olinemen

[NewColtsFan]

1 hour ago, Jaric said:

 

Along that same lines, those contracts are only "expensive" if the players they're given to don't perform.

 

The poster I'm responding to said the deals were expensive.    I'm trying to make clear that, financially speaking, these deals were not expensive, they were just bad.  

 

There's a difference between those two issues.    I'm not defending the quality of the deal.    They were bad.   But they were mostly the average cost of doing business in the NFL.

 

[Jaric]

7 minutes ago, NewColtsFan said:

 

The poster I'm responding to said the deals were expensive.    I'm trying to make clear that, financially speaking, these deals were not expensive, they were just bad.  

 

There's a difference between those two issues.    I'm not defending the quality of the deal.    They were bad.   But they were mostly the average cost of doing business in the NFL.

 

You're not wrong although that's kinda the story of free agency.  It costs a lot and if it doesn't pan out it's "expensive"

 

Joe Flaccid for example is set to count around 25m against the cap this year.  (Let's all pause to let out the lulz). If Joe was the elite qb he was sold as, that contract is fine.

 

But he's Joe Flacco so that contract is laughable expensive.  

 

If Landry turned out to be more than a steroid induced bicep we're loving his contract.  Unfortunately that was not the case so we aren't.

 

In the end, free agency comes down to the very simple thing of "did the guy perform?"

[MacDee1975]

17 hours ago, Horse Shoe Heaven said:

Do we really need DL? We currently have Stewart, Woods, Hankins, Mbu, Anderson, Hunt, Sherad, and Basham, Now that I see this, hum maybe we did need a DE, maybe and indictment of Basham, or that we are not drafting Chubb & moving down in the draft?

 

Did you really list Mbu as someone who is anywhere near a viable part of a good defensive line......lol

 

Replacing him with Autry is a huge upgrade.

[Trueman]

Lol... so many people were against Grigson’s moves at the time.

 

Revisionist history is a hell of a drug. Check out what Jim Brown said about T-Rich at the time of the trade. But no Colts fan wanted to hear it. People knew he couldn’t read the game. 

 

Again , who cares what Polian thought? Are people not figuring out how wrong he is all the time?

 

Dorsett was a dreadful pick. And dreadful rationale. I wanted Brown or Collins. Thank god Ballard got something from it. 

[Jaredfor3]

18 hours ago, Horse Shoe Heaven said:

Do we really need DL? We currently have Stewart, Woods, Hankins, Mbu, Anderson, Hunt, Sherad, and Basham, Now that I see this, hum maybe we did need a DE, maybe and indictment of Basham, or that we are not drafting Chubb & moving down in the draft?

Autry is an upgrade over Marcus Hunt and Mbu. Plus, you can never have enough pass rushers. 

[indyagent17]

19 hours ago, Horse Shoe Heaven said:

Do we really need a lot of DL help?

Anderson has been injured in the past and lost a lot of games, Rotational D lineman with a busy motor, not bad

[TKnight24]

 

[1959Colts]

 

Matt Conti‏ @ColtsConti 57m57 minutes ago

 

Welcome DE-Denico Autry. In four previous seasons with Oakland, totaled 114 tackles (74 solo), 10.5 sacks, 12 passes defensed and two fumble recoveries. In 2017, set single-season career highs in sacks (5.0) and passes defensed (seven).

 

[TKnight24]

 

[DougDew]

1 hour ago, Jaric said:

You're not wrong although that's kinda the story of free agency.  It costs a lot and if it doesn't pan out it's "expensive"

 

Joe Flaccid for example is set to count around 25m against the cap this year.  (Let's all pause to let out the lulz). If Joe was the elite qb he was sold as, that contract is fine.

 

But he's Joe Flacco so that contract is laughable expensive.  

 

If Landry turned out to be more than a steroid induced bicep we're loving his contract.  Unfortunately that was not the case so we aren't.

 

In the end, free agency comes down to the very simple thing of "did the guy perform?"

The problem here is that you are using the benefit of hindsight to make that call, at the same time expecting the GM to know what will happen in the future.  They are professional evaluaters only.  They're not Ghandi.

 

That's why when I hear criticism of any player selection by this board, I try to go back to the situation at the time the decision was made to see if it was sound or not.  Almost every time, it was.

 

And what should the ravens have done with Flacco?  Not sign him the year they almost went to the SB, and instead, replace him with whom?  Who was available?  Could they have taken Garrapalo? (not even sure he came out then)  Maybe they just should have said that Joe was average and let another team sign him for half the price.  Fine.  But how does that help your team the following season?

[Jaric]

42 minutes ago, DougDew said:

The problem here is that you are using the benefit of hindsight to make that call

Correct.  And I'd argue that's not a problem, but the proper way for a layperson (like myself) to form opinions on these subjects.

 

Quite frankly, even the most savvy among us is still fumbling blindly in the dark compared to an experienced NFL personnel guy.  So yeah, I'm using hindsight.  Otherwise I'm probably gonna be wrong.

 

Edit: one thing though, it's not so much that I expect a GM to have the power of hindsight, but rather I expect a GM who gets results.  So continually making the wrong decision (even if I can show the math how they got there) will eventually cause a problem (like it did with Grigson.)

 

[Jaric]

2 hours ago, Trueman said:

Lol... so many people were against Grigson’s moves at the time.

 

Revisionist history is a hell of a drug. Check out what Jim Brown said about T-Rich at the time of the trade. But no Colts fan wanted to hear it. People knew he couldn’t read the game. 

 

Again , who cares what Polian thought? Are people not figuring out how wrong he is all the time?

 

Dorsett was a dreadful pick. And dreadful rationale. I wanted Brown or Collins. Thank god Ballard got something from it. 

 

I was crunk for T-Rich when we first traded for him.  Thought the price was high, but I was promised a physical punishing running back and if there's one thing I love it's a physical punishing running back (Earl Campbell highlights still make me swoon).

 

This is of course further evidence that the opinions of fans shouldn't be taken all that seriously.

[Horse Shoe Heaven]

2 hours ago, MacDee1975 said:

 

Did you really list Mbu as someone who is anywhere near a viable part of a good defensive line......lol

 

Replacing him with Autry is a huge upgrade.

1. I think you underestimate Mbu when he played he was productive.

 

2. Who says he replaces Mbu a DT,  Autry is more of a DE. They have a different skill set.

 

3. My point when I wrote the statement was, we have LOTS OF DLmen in general. Unless you are an ELITE pass rusher bring in another DLmen, I would rather have seen a CB, OL, LB, WR, or even a safety were I feel there are holes both in talent, and sheer numbers at those positions. 

 

4. I am not against the signing, just a head scratchier to me.

[Jason_]

18 hours ago, P'Son said:

Honestly, I don't think I've ever heard of this guy.  When I think of good free agent signing guidelines, the first requisite is that you have to have heard of the player.  How many of you can say you've heard of this man?  Ballard better show me something soon or he'll be Grigson2.

 

that should be the LAST requisite

 

 

**edit...I take that back.  It shouldn't be a requisite at all

[bleevit]

Upgrading the D-line is very important when your 31st on D and are switching defenses from 3-4 to 4-3. Autry is a 4-3 specialist and has had good results. With the Oakland fans bemoaning losing this guy, I really like the deal.