TKnight24

CB Bashaud Breeland likely to sign with Colts

Recommended Posts

43 minutes ago, chad72 said:

 

He could very well be the GM that always gave a good offer but never good enough to seal the deal. Being prepared and courteous, plus giving a good offer is all nice and dandy, but if you cannot seal the deal, it does not mean much to me as a Colts fan, just being honest here.

 

To be honest, Andrew Luck and his lack of availability will continue to hurt the Colts in several ways, including FA interest, and until that changes on the field to being back to winning ways, this is something we Colts fans need to get used to. Jags realized they had to throw money at folks to get FAs to sign there, and once the right management (Coughlin) came in, the assembled talent was steered in the right direction to produce results. 

Your 2nd paragraph was good, except for 1 thing: Luck hasn't really been hurt frequently. It's just that his recovery schedule regarding his shoulder took longer than anticipated requiring a season away from game action. I totally agree with your Tom Coughlin point. The right front office personnel changes everything for the better. Ballard is the GM we have been waiting for since Bill Polian left. Chris will take us to the Promiseland eventually. 

 

Okay, you did use the term availability & Andrew has missed considerate action football wise sure. Now that Chewbacca has better OL protection upfront that makes a huge difference. Peace of mind if nothing else. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I doubt we'll sign him but I like that Ballard is at least looking.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, NewColtsFan said:

 

Regarding Ballard and his multiyear plan...    I've been thinking about something and I want to run it past you...

 

We didn't spend a lot of money last year.   Weren't we way below the 89 percent cap figure last year?

 

And whether or not we sign Breeland, it looks like we'll be way, way below that figure again this year.

 

And Ballard has already hinted that his approach to FA in 19 will be pretty much what we did this year.   So even with another big haul of draft talent next year it feels like we'll be way under the 89 percent figure for the third straight year.

 

I know this is all legal.   But doesnt that  pretty much commit us to spend pretty close to all the way to the cap limit in 2020?!?    If it's a 4-year rolling average, aren't we going to be on the spot in '20 to spend, Spend, SPEND!! 

 

Your thoughts?   

 

Maybe hes saving up to pay our own guys when rookie contracts and all of the 1-3 yr contracts are due to expire. Then a couple of big fish.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, PrincetonTiger said:

Don’t let him get to Arizona

i have a feeling they'll shove more money in his face in Arizona than Ballard is willing to part with (to keep the locker room stable). Ballard may also be hesistent due to Breeland being a known weed smoker.

 

 

  • Like 1
  • Sad 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Superman said:

 

I got nothin. 

 

There seems to be some who think it may have something to do with Ballard trying to drive down the price for Eric Reid. Not sure I’m buying that, but at the same time, I wouldn’t be surprised. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Steamboat_Shaun said:

 

Thoughts about this one?

 

 

All i can think of with this is that we essentially brought in two guys at the same time for one of two reasons:

 

1) to have them in at the same time to see them essentially side by side and see if one of them was a better fit than the other in terms of their answers, wants, etc

 

2) to see if one of them blinks when knowing there is competition in the building and takes a below market deal

 

 

Honestly I was skeptical w all the recent visits in thinking that the Vaccaro and Boston and now Breeland visits were done to just gather info and kick the tires on guys.

 

Basically find out what they are about and then see if they are willing to come in at our number after they linger longer and longer.

 

Austin Howard visited and left without a deal only to sign w us after the draft when the dust settled.

 

This could be so that if these guys are willing to sign bargain deals, we know what we need to know so we can pounce or it can be to simply have profiles on these guys and their fit based on their visit, interviews, interactions, etc in the event that injuries happen or guys like Geathers, Hooker, etc have health issues that require acquiring another vet down the line.

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, Colts_Fan12 said:

I wanted him too but with his lawsuit and stuff hes prolly not going anywhere for a lil bit if he would come here then by all means lol

Aside from the lawsuit and stuff, would you say you're.......all in?

 

7 hours ago, TomDiggs said:

Absolutely.

 

I enjoy really any set of rankings for entertainment and conversation purposes. I just have grown to dislike PFF more and more because people are starting to use them as gospel and as the end-all be-all of rankings to say how good a player is or isn't.

 

Some of that is on the NFL, though. They started using PFF rankings in their intros on primetime games where they show how a guy ranks at his position during his intro using the PFF system.

 

My biggest issue is a lot of times the "eye test" doesn't coincide with the PFF ranking.

 

I can sit there and say "Player A had a good game" or "Player B had a great season" and then when i check their rankings it basically says what I saw was wrong and that some other guy (sometimes even on the same team) vastly outperformed Player A or B.

 

I know that's how it goes with subjective rankings, but still it can be frustrating.

 

Either way, in terms of Breeland, I feel comfortable at least saying that I feel he would be the best CB on our roster if we did sign him. That we be based on just my opinion and no actual rankings or metrics. But i would feel better w him in the fold for sure.

One issue is that people like to cite the overall PFF rating without any of the context of their advanced stats. For example, Ryan Jensen had an overall PFF rating of 74.9 last season, which was very solid amongst most of the FA OL. If you actually looked at his per-game ratings, he would have a game where he rated really well and played like a pro-bowler, then he would have a game where he looked like he shouldn't even be on an NFL roster.

 

Data is all about how you use it. If you're using it without proper context, it can definitely seem useless.

 

To the bolded:

This was a topic of conversation on the latest PFF podcast. The point they made is one I feel is very valid. The eye test is great, but it's not consistent and there's no set methodology or criteria. PFF looks at every single snap, charts every one of them, analyzes each player using a set criteria for each position, then ranks the players based on that criteria that is applied to each and every player. It's not perfect by any means, but it's the most objective way anyone has been able to analyze the game of football.

 

7 hours ago, Superman said:

 

Like you, my beef isn't with PFF at all. My beef is with people who refer to PFF as if they are infallible. But no one else offers the service they offer to the public (I continue to debate whether I want to buy their new offering; I was one of the old subscribers when it was $25/year). They get treated like they're the gold standard, but really, they're the only standard right now.

I've been debating the same thing. They have some offers that can get you a year subscription by starting a new Fan Duel or Draftkings account with a $10 deposit. https://www.profootballfocus.com/pff-offers. Not a terrible idea if you're wanting to try out one of those 2 sites anyhow.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Shive said:

Aside from the lawsuit and stuff, would you say you're.......all in?

 

One issue is that people like to cite the overall PFF rating without any of the context of their advanced stats. For example, Ryan Jensen had an overall PFF rating of 74.9 last season, which was very solid amongst most of the FA OL. If you actually looked at his per-game ratings, he would have a game where he rated really well and played like a pro-bowler, then he would have a game where he looked like he shouldn't even be on an NFL roster.

 

Data is all about how you use it. If you're using it without proper context, it can definitely seem useless.

 

To the bolded:

This was a topic of conversation on the latest PFF podcast. The point they made is one I feel is very valid. The eye test is great, but it's not consistent and there's no set methodology or criteria. PFF looks at every single snap, charts every one of them, analyzes each player using a set criteria for each position, then ranks the players based on that criteria that is applied to each and every player. It's not perfect by any means, but it's the most objective way anyone has been able to analyze the game of football.

 

I've been debating the same thing. They have some offers that can get you a year subscription by starting a new Fan Duel or Draftkings account with a $10 deposit. https://www.profootballfocus.com/pff-offers. Not a terrible idea if you're wanting to try out one of those 2 sites anyhow.

If not for all that crap I'd be 100% for signing him I think he would easily start for us opposite Hooker. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 hours ago, Jared Cisneros said:

Ballard probably offered something like 1 year, $5 million, or 2 years, $10 million. Love Ballard as a GM, but I trust him very little to get a deal done with FA's. With the Cards as competition and us getting first crack at Breeland, I was thinking he'd sign here, could of used him at CB. I'll admit, I'm disappointed here. The Safeties I'm fine with not signing, this one will bite us in the rear end come the regular season IMO.

 

Very interesting that he is the Colts GM for one year (only), and how differently we see him already. I actually love his calm, relaxed approach. He has proven himself that he can bring in cheap alternatives who then, perform well. Woods, Mingo, Melvin, Desir, Farley and so on. Not world beaters, but neither Breeland is. They are serviceable to good starters or rotational pieces.

 

Of course, in time the Colts will have to sign a few top dollar veterans, true, elite players. But they still need to pay the right price for the right guy, and I trust Ballard that he knows the right price and the right time better than all of us combined.

 

To be honest, if we look back to this years free agency and those names most of us wanted, Ballard already proved us wrong. At least in my eyes. I WANTED Jensen 2 months ago. Now? I am glad we did not sign him. Yes, I do. I WANTED Jarvis Landry 2 months ago. Now? I am glad Ballard did not pay him. This young new WR corp looks more exciting to me than Landry would've looked. I WANTED Carlos Hide. Now? I am glad Ballard didn't. I WANTED Hitchens. Now? I am not sure... maybe. Maybe he is the only one I'd still like. But I don't like his 9mills contract, and I am more than OK with Leonard. We will see. Anyway, my point is, Ballard proved me wrong in 2 month so I am glad he is the GM and not me lol :D

 

And one more thing. When Ballard's being critized not being able to get a deal done, very frequently the Jaguars come up as a counter-example. Yes, they signed Norwell. But they also signed Moncrief for 9.6 mill and let Hurns and Robinson go. And they signed D.J. Hayden for a 3 years 20 million deal. Spending all those money they did this year, they got better at OL - for a fortune - but got worse at multiple positions. The team as a whole, got worse than it was imo. Not to mention, that their only big need was the QB, and they didn't even try to sign Cousins. (They could've overpayed him 35 mills/year and still come out cheaper than what they spent on Norwell and those other guys.)

 

So I am not a big fan of what Coughlin does there - financially. He is a brilliant HC (and probably a good leader and might a good scout), but he is a terrible "GM". He has led that franchise into cap hell once before (and then left them rot there). I think he is doing it again. They'll be in big trouble in 2 years. I don't want Ballard to walk on that path. We must be smarter (which requires a bit of a patience, but so be it).

  • Like 5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, Peterk2011 said:

 

Very interesting that he is the Colts GM for one year (only), and how differently we see him already. I actually love his calm, relaxed approach. He has proven himself that he can bring in cheap alternatives who then, perform well. Woods, Mingo, Melvin, Desir, Farley and so on. Not world beaters, but neither Breeland is. They are serviceable to good starters or rotational pieces.

 

Of course, in time the Colts will have to sign a few top dollar veterans, true, elite players. But they still need to pay the right price for the right guy, and I trust Ballard that he knows the right price and the right time better than all of us combined.

 

To be honest, if we look back to this years free agency and those names most of us wanted, Ballard already proved us wrong. At least in my eyes. I WANTED Jensen 2 months ago. Now? I am glad we did not sign him. Yes, I do. I WANTED Jarvis Landry 2 months ago. Now? I am glad Ballard did not pay him. This young new WR corp looks more exciting to me than Landry would've looked. I WANTED Carlos Hide. Now? I am glad Ballard didn't. I WANTED Hitchens. Now? I am not sure... maybe, maybe not.actually, I the's not here. And so on an so on.

 

And one more thing. When Ballard's being critized not being able to get a deal done, very frequently the Jaguars come up as an example. Yes, they signed Norwell. But they also signed Moncrief for 9.6 mill and let Hurns and Robinson go. And they signed D.J. Hayden for a 3 years 20 million deal. Spending all those money they did this year, they got better at OL - for a fortune - but got worse at multiple positions. The team as a whole, got worse than it was imo. Not to mention, that their only big need was the QB, and they didn't even try to sign Cousins. (They could've overpayed him 35 mills/year and still come out cheaper than what they spent on Norwell and those other guys.)

 

So I am not a big fan of what Coughlin does there - financially. He is a brilliant HC (and probably a good leader and might a good scout), but he is a terrible "GM". He has led that franchise into cap hell once before (and then left them rot there). I think he is doing it again. They'll be in big trouble in 2 years. I don't want Ballard to walk on that same path. We must be smarter (which requires a bit of a patience, but so be it).

The build through the draft approach is also my approach as an "armchair GM". It's the right approach, and it does take patience. However, I also believe in sprinkling around 1 year deals in FA as well for two reasons. You gain compensatory picks if they perform, which benefits the "build through the draft" approach that Ballard talks about, and if someone young is a big hit, you can even re-sign them if you want and use them as a building block. That was the intention I was hoping Ballard had with Breeland, and it seemed odd we let him go when he was young, at a position of need, didn't cost a compensatory pick, and we had plenty of cap to take a risk on him. I would of bet we signed him over any other individual FA this offseason if given the chance to bet.

 

Luckily, the draft seemed really good, I'm just worried about the CB depth at this point, and I believe Breeland was by far the best option, whether he was a starter or a great depth piece. We'll see what Ballard does. We also have the #3 waiver slot, so we can sign players at will that get released.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 hours ago, Superman said:

 

I got nothin. 

I think it was definitely to gauge these guys level of interest in us. That you will have to earn it....there is going to be competition throughout...before you sign...after you sign. Neither is going to get a position handed to them. How bad do you want it. How bad do you want to play. Not only does it allow us to look at guys and compare but also gauge their attitude towards competition for the job. Some huff and puff and get their feelings hurt...some get more competitive...so on top of both maybe to have to lower their salary expectations because there are quality guys available I think this was about us looking at two previous high profile guys or starters...and that this team has some good depth at safety. To make it you might not start...or get a job handed to you. So show us how bad you want it. Just my thought.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Peterk2011 said:

So I am not a big fan of what Coughlin does there - financially. He is a brilliant HC (and probably a good leader and might a good scout), but he is a terrible "GM". He has led that franchise into cap hell once before (and then left them rot there). I think he is doing it again. They'll be in big trouble in 2 years. I don't want Ballard to walk on that path. We must be smarter (which requires a bit of a patience, but so be it).

 

I think they'll be fine on the cap. They'll have some decisions to make, but I don't think those decisions will be particularly difficult. I expect Calais Campbell to regress, and he'll be a cap consideration after 2018. Malik Jackson and/or Marcell Dareus could be in the same boat. It will be interesting to see what they do with Fowler and Ngakoue. 

 

I bet they have no intention of keeping Moncrief past one year. If Myles Jack's knee starts acting up, he probably won't be re-signed for big money. The only RB that might get a second contract will be Fournette, and that's several years into the future. 

 

Their commitment to Bortles is interesting, but after 2019 they can shed that contract also. They'll have a tight situation in 2019, but they can tear things down pretty easily if they want/need to along the way, and wind up somewhere around $60m under the cap in 2020. I think they saw an opening and decided to take a big swing for the next two years while they still have some really good players ascending and on rookie contracts. 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If he is 100%, why wouldn't he and Carolina get together again and see if that contract can be put back on the table?  I hope a physical is part of his visit. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
40 minutes ago, cbear said:

If he is 100%, why wouldn't he and Carolina get together again and see if that contract can be put back on the table?  I hope a physical is part of his visit. 

 

Apparently the thinking in Carolina is that ship has sailed and they moved on by picking a corner early in the draft. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 hours ago, Jared Cisneros said:

Ballard probably offered something like 1 year, $5 million, or 2 years, $10 million. Love Ballard as a GM, but I trust him very little to get a deal done with FA's. With the Cards as competition and us getting first crack at Breeland, I was thinking he'd sign here, could of used him at CB. I'll admit, I'm disappointed here. The Safeties I'm fine with not signing, this one will bite us in the rear end come the regular season IMO.

 

I have to agree regarding Ballard and FAs. His desire for one-year deals and unwillingness to pay FAs any more than he thinks they should be paid likely won't play well with FAs overall. (Neither does having a propensity to cut them after one season even if they have a long-term deal...so let's hope Hankins was an outlier).

 

But that seens to be Ballard's approach (based on what we have seen)...and I doubt it will change. I am fully onboard with trying to get talent through the draft...it's not a new approach (every team does it). But I do think there are times when you should pull the trigger on impact talent in FA. I just don't know if I see Ballard doing that...but we will see.   

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A reminder....   Ballard had no trouble signing free agents last year.

 

One.    Whole.     Year.     Ago.

 

Ballard signed 10 free agents and people here have forgotten.

 

Now what I read is....  "Ballard can't close the deal.   I don't like Ballard's style.   Ballard is going to anger the players and the agents."

 

Come on...   Ballard knows what he's doing.   I'm not happy we didn't sign Breeland, but I have confidence that Ballard has a plan and a vision even if I don't always understand it.   Like now.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
33 minutes ago, NewColtsFan said:

A reminder....   Ballard had no trouble signing free agents last year.

 

One.    Whole.     Year.     Ago.

 

Ballard signed 10 free agents and people here have forgotten.

 

Now what I read is....  "Ballard can't close the deal.   I don't like Ballard's style.   Ballard is going to anger the players and the agents."

 

Come on...   Ballard knows what he's doing.   I'm not happy we didn't sign Breeland, but I have confidence that Ballard has a plan and a vision even if I don't always understand it.   Like now.

It's not really that he can't sign any FA's, it's more the fact that he can't sign any high quality FA's. Either he can't sell them on coming to the team (which could have something to do with Luck), or he's not offering enough. I think part of it is the fact that the high quality FA's want multi-year deals, which isn't in Ballard's plans. I want Breeland for a year so we can turn him into a compensatory pick and then draft a CB next year in his spot. It's possible he doesn't want to sign for a year though. It's even more frustrating when we don't get him and he's at our weakest position overall on the team.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, NewColtsFan said:

A reminder....   Ballard had no trouble signing free agents last year.

 

One.    Whole.     Year.     Ago.

 

Ballard signed 10 free agents and people here have forgotten.

 

Now what I read is....  "Ballard can't close the deal.   I don't like Ballard's style.   Ballard is going to anger the players and the agents."

 

Come on...   Ballard knows what he's doing.   I'm not happy we didn't sign Breeland, but I have confidence that Ballard has a plan and a vision even if I don't always understand it.   Like now.

 

I don't think that many people are questioning Ballard's plan...yet. But his approach does have some drawbacks. And we have seen that play out in his pursuit of a few top FAs...unless he wasn't really pursuing those FAs.

 

Setting aside the Hankins signing, which was somewhat of a unique situation (much like Breeland)...the past two offseasons have actually been fairly similar strategies.

 

Last offseason, Ballard signed a second-tier FA (Sheard), a mid-level FA (Simon)...and a bunch of 1-2 year flyer deals (unless I am missing someone). He was overturning the roster and the Colts had so many holes in the roster.

 

Fast forward to this offseason...and he signs a second-tier FA (Ebron) a mid-level FA (Autry) and a couple more 1-2 year flyer deals. But this time he didn't need all of those flyer FAs like last year because Ballard knew he was going to be able to supplement the roster through draft picks (he was always going to trade out of #3).

 

Thinking back on it, he actually alluded to this when asked why he wasn't signing FAs with so much cap space. He said they decided to trade back instead. At the time, it didn't make sense...because the two aren't mutually exclusive. But it sort of makes sense now. In Ballard's mind, the extra draft picks just replaced a few FAs in his offseason strategy. Had the Colts been picking in the middle of the 1st round, I think we would have seen a nearly identical offseason as last year.

 

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, Jared Cisneros said:

It's not really that he can't sign any FA's, it's more the fact that he can't sign any high quality FA's. Either he can't sell them on coming to the team (which could have something to do with Luck), or he's not offering enough. I think part of it is the fact that the high quality FA's want multi-year deals, which isn't in Ballard's plans. I want Breeland for a year so we can turn him into a compensatory pick and then draft a CB next year in his spot. It's possible he doesn't want to sign for a year though. It's even more frustrating when we don't get him and he's at our weakest position overall on the team.

 

Yep...this is my take as well. Obviously, Ballard can get some FAs to sign...but when it comes to competing with other teams for a top FA...we haven't seen it yet. Instead, we get quotes about backing out because the prices got too high (which could money or years...or both)...or that 2-3 big names wouldn't have filled all of the roster holes...or that the focus is the draft.

 

It's not all on him though...the Colts are a tough sell right now. Still, it seems he wants to only sign guys to very team-friendly deals...and that shrinks the FA pool a bit. But maybe next offseason he will surprise us. I just think he seems too principled for that. Which isn't a bad thing...it just is what it is.

  • Like 4
  • Sad 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
25 minutes ago, Jared Cisneros said:

It's not really that he can't sign any FA's, it's more the fact that he can't sign any high quality FA's. Either he can't sell them on coming to the team (which could have something to do with Luck), or he's not offering enough. I think part of it is the fact that the high quality FA's want multi-year deals, which isn't in Ballard's plans.

 

I think there is something else at play here. Building the locker room culture the right way is a key pursuit for Ballard, so bringing in FA for high pay that might not end be leaders in performance is bad, If he pay top dollar, Ballard want to be sure they also earn top dollar respect on the field from the other guys. He is not willing to take any risk here. So it is not really about being cheap at all, but he can’t over spend without loosing some credibility in the locker room.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, NewColtsFan said:

A reminder....   Ballard had no trouble signing free agents last year.

 

One.    Whole.     Year.     Ago.

 

Ballard signed 10 free agents and people here have forgotten.

 

Now what I read is....  "Ballard can't close the deal.   I don't like Ballard's style.   Ballard is going to anger the players and the agents."

 

Come on...   Ballard knows what he's doing.   I'm not happy we didn't sign Breeland, but I have confidence that Ballard has a plan and a vision even if I don't always understand it.   Like now.

Its like, Why waste the time of inviting so many players and not sign them? At some point you have to sign somebody. We need bodies (Hopefully with experience  to fill the roster, especially at DB. I mean we still have TJ Green on the roster at DB and that isnt much to be excited about. ijs... 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Boiler_Colt said:

 

Apparently the thinking in Carolina is that ship has sailed and they moved on by picking a corner early in the draft. 

 

Did not know they picked up an early dB in draft.  Thanks. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Jared Cisneros said:

It's not really that he can't sign any FA's, it's more the fact that he can't sign any high quality FA's. Either he can't sell them on coming to the team (which could have something to do with Luck), or he's not offering enough. I think part of it is the fact that the high quality FA's want multi-year deals, which isn't in Ballard's plans. I want Breeland for a year so we can turn him into a compensatory pick and then draft a CB next year in his spot. It's possible he doesn't want to sign for a year though. It's even more frustrating when we don't get him and he's at our weakest position overall on the team.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's 8pm eastern time and no word of the Cardinals signing him. Could be announced later, or could be he's not seeing the $ he saw in the spring. Then again, perhaps his foot is still an issue? There are many possibilities.

 

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, shastamasta said:

 

Yep...this is my take as well. Obviously, Ballard can get some FAs to sign...but when it comes to competing with other teams for a top FA...we haven't seen it yet. Instead, we get quotes about backing out because the prices got too high (which could money or years...or both)...or that 2-3 big names wouldn't have filled all of the roster holes...or that the focus is the draft.

 

It's not all on him though...the Colts are a tough sell right now. Still, it seems he wants to only sign guys to very team-friendly deals...and that shrinks the FA pool a bit. But maybe next offseason he will surprise us. I just think he seems too principled for that. Which isn't a bad thing...it just is what it is.

 

Silliness.
It isn't time to spend serious $$$ on FA.
We MUST see what our young players can do first.
Of course he will add 1-2 quality FA next off season and again in 2020, and we will be off to the races.
 This is so Basic it embarrassing to read these posts.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
38 minutes ago, Douzer said:

It's 8pm eastern time and no word of the Cardinals signing him. Could be announced later, or could be he's not seeing the $ he saw in the spring. Then again, perhaps his foot is still an issue? There are many possibilities.

 

 

Just reported he left AZ without a deal.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Boiler_Colt said:

 

Just reported he left AZ without a deal.

Could be good news for us. We'll have to see if he comes back and re-signs with us. Best news possible at this point anyway.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, Jared Cisneros said:

Could be good news for us. We'll have to see if he comes back and re-signs with us. Best news possible at this point anyway.

 

Yeah, could be better for us but we have no idea if an offer was even made. We'll have to see if he lines up other visits in the coming days. Wouldnt shock me.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Boiler_Colt said:

 

Yeah, could be better for us but we have no idea if an offer was even made. We'll have to see if he lines up other visits in the coming days. Wouldnt shock me.

Yep. If there's other visits, then it probably means he isn't signing here. If he doesn't visit with anyone within 72 hours or so, we probably have that timeline where he may sign with either us or the Cardinals afterwards. I'd put our odds of signing him at 33%. 33% we get him, 33% the Cards get him, and 33% that he visits with other teams. It's better than yesterday though, when he left here without a contract to visit the Cardinals.

 

Of course, he could still be hurt. We don't know at this point. Could be a reason lots of teams are staying away from him.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 minutes ago, Jared Cisneros said:

Yep. If there's other visits, then it probably means he isn't signing here. If he doesn't visit with anyone within 72 hours or so, we probably have that timeline where he may sign with either us or the Cardinals afterwards. I'd put our odds of signing him at 33%. 33% we get him, 33% the Cards get him, and 33% that he visits with other teams. It's better than yesterday though, when he left here without a contract to visit the Cardinals.

 

Of course, he could still be hurt. We don't know at this point. Could be a reason lots of teams are staying away from him.

Or he could be a total knob lol.

  • Haha 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, throwing BBZ said:

 

Silliness.
It isn't time to spend serious $$$ on FA.
We MUST see what our young players can do first.
Of course he will add 1-2 quality FA next off season and again in 2020, and we will be off to the races.
 This is so Basic it embarrassing to read these posts.

 

We will see. I don't think anyone can know that for sure. Yes, Ballard will sign players...but whether he can (or is willing to pay to) get a top FA to sign here remains to be seen. So far that hasn't been the case, despite obvious interest from Ballard.

 

I disagree about this not being the time to spend some money in FA. They don't need to spend it all...but they are in a great situation to sign impact FA (or trade late picks for impact players under contract if a deal presents itself). The Colts have literally 0 players of note with rookie contracts expiring for at least three years. Three years is a lifetime in the NFL...as even the Colts have shown. And a big part of that quick turnaround was Andrew Luck...who is (supposedly) returning this season. 

 

I think the further along the Colts get into the Ballard era, the less likely it is that Ballard will sign top FAs. Maybe next year...but after that they will start thinking about keeping pieces of that core 10-12 players in tact...not to mention extending Luck as well.

 

Like I said, we will see...but it's far from a guarantee.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Rap's tweet still seems far from a definite. Also sounds like maybe his foot is not fully healed?

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't see where Breeland has more visit's scheduled and it certainly does look like AZ may have moved on ?

 

 

Cardinals getting CB Jamar Taylor from Browns

Cardinals acquired CB Jamar Taylor from the Browns.

The Browns were shopping Taylor in the lead-up to the draft but found no takers on draft weekend. Cleveland completely overhauled at cornerback this offseason, adding Denzel Ward with the No. 4 overall pick after signing Travis Carrie, E.J. Gaines, and Terrance Mitchell in free agency. Taylor and fellow 2017 starter Jason McCourty, who was dealt to the Patriots, were the odd men out. Taylor was a second-round flop in Miami but rebounded for the Browns the past couple seasons. He figures to take over as the starter opposite Patrick Peterson in Arizona.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So his foot isn’t actually fully healed yet apparently. Good sign that it’s on the mend if Ballard is still interested though.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.