stitches
-
Posts
15,511 -
Joined
-
Days Won
111
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Gallery
Events
Blogs
Posts posted by stitches
-
-
Quote
Taylor failed his physical, the source said, because of a combination of a previous ankle injury for which surgery was performed earlier this year and the back injury. The team's medical staff had not previously discussed a back issue with Taylor, and the Colts were unaware of the problem until Taylor reported on Tuesday, the source said.
There's some belief that the back issue stems from an old injury, but Taylor continues to complain of discomfort, according to the source.
This is really really specific and has details that wouldn't be known to just any insider. This must be coming directly from the team... I have no idea why they would be lying about this. If they are lying this has crossed a line IMO. I'm good with playing hardball with a player in contract dispute, but lying in order to make Taylor look bad would be horrible. And I still don't get what the Colts would gain from this report... it's not like it's giving them any leverage... If they actually want to put him on NFI, they have to actually have proof that he's injured and that it happened away from the team. I guess it can be a warning shot towards Taylor to not try doing anything stupid like trying to fake an injury... but you can do that without straight up fabricating a whole elaborate story about him reporting back pain.
Taylor now refuting all those reports is weird too. Did he really report back pain and is now lying? He won't be the first player to report back pain when in contract dispute in order to avoid practicing with the team(remember Jalen Ramsey?). But did he really think the team won't call that bluff?
Someone IS LYING... who? is the question?
-
5
-
-
3 hours ago, Restinpeacesweetchloe said:
I don’t think zack understands here that all Taylor has to do is complain his back hurts and tell a story. There is really no proof needed other then that is my guess.
The Colts are not trying to not pay Taylor this year. They are trying to protect themselves against frivolous (*cough* fake *cough*) claims of injuries by Taylor so he would sit instead of play. The Colts wish now and even from before this dispute has been that Taylor shows up healthy and plays. If he does, the Colts would be happy with it.
-
5
-
-
7 hours ago, w87r said:
Pretty sure the bolded has been handled.
Told not getting traded
Not getting extension
I suspect they let it play out a little longer. If he continues to stand over there looking sad, being a big distraction, send him home.
I think this will come to a head sooner than later. He knows he isn't getting a deal or traded.
Gonna have to make a decision
I'm sure everyone else on PUP is at camp.
You don't think they have talked to him?
He been told we want him here and that we always take care of our own.
IMO most probably what happened is
1. Ballard told Taylor and his agent about their decision to not offer an extension at this point because they want to see him healthy and they want to see how he fits in with the new HC and in the new offense with AR. Probably told him an extension during the season is not out of the question ( pretty much what he told the media)
2. Agent and Taylor then told Ballard if he's not getting paid he wants out. He fakes not being physically ready and is put on PUP so he won't practice.
3. Irsay tweets about RBs. Agent trying to catch the owner's attention on Twitter with hopes Irsay puts his thumb on the scale and influences Ballard to give Taylor a new contract.
4. Taylor and Irsay meet in the trailer at training camp and Irsay probably told Taylor that he's behind Ballard in his decision to hold off on extension talks.
5. Taylor has no more levers to pull with the Colts, so they leak to Schefter and Rapoport that he's requested a trade.
-
3
-
-
I continue returning to this Dolphins thing... that agent is either really stupid and reckless or he's conniving and reckless...
It's really really weird seeing his likes of suggestions for JT getting traded to the Dolphins.
Those are ALL tweets that Malki Kawa has liked since this whole fiasco started. He has not liked any tweets suggesting any other team trade for him. We know the Dolphins tampered with Brady before. Is it really beyond belief they would do it again? If I'm the Colts I would be monitoring this one.
-
3
-
1
-
-
2 minutes ago, Restinpeacesweetchloe said:
Wow I did not know this. Taylor’s first agent is being sued for mail practice. Taylor sure knows how to pick agents. Lol
He's well on his way to join that law suit in a year time...
-
1
-
-
Even if the Colts are willing to trade Taylor, the best posture right now is to project that we are not willing to trade him. You win nothing by telling everyone you can't wait to satisfy his request.
-
6
-
1
-
-
1 hour ago, w87r said:
Yeah read that a little bit ago.
Usually can't stand Doyle, but that article was decent.
Meh, I didn't think this was a good article. Strong on pathos, very weak on substantive arguments. And there are tons of substantive arguments to be made in this whole situation.
-
2
-
-
2 hours ago, NewColtsFan said:
Honestly, I think your idea of a trade to Buffalo for Cook and pick(s) is really good. If something changes I think your idea has real possibilities.
Taylor's agent has been liking TONS AND TONS of tweets suggesting we trade him to the Dolphins. No idea if it's just where he's situated or if he has some background info about potential interest. If the Dolphins want Taylor... Get Achane + a second or a 3d and lets roll...
On JT's trade request in more general terms - at least now we know where he stands. Saw Josina suggesting he has no other option since the Colts won't pay him now. I VEHEMENTLY disagree. In this market, his best option is to play this year, show he's healthy and get an offer after the season. Right now (before this trade request) the Colts were his best option to get a big payday bar none, simply because we are the team that already has him so the price for us will be the lowest - we don't need to give up significant assets in addition to giving him, reportedly, 16M a year. For any other team the price includes both money and draft compensation.
Now, like with other scenarios - it only takes one team... so maybe it's possible. But the market for the RBs so far has been so dry that I doubt it... And it won't get any better in the future, like others have pointed out with a great class becoming FAs in 2024.
-
2
-
-
Kevin Bowen brought up something. When Darius Leonard was up for extension(same agent), he missed the first 10 days of training camp, then they extended him then he was back practicing 2 days later. This is most likely this agent's modus operandi.
-
6 hours ago, crazycolt1 said:
No matter what the RBs want they are under the collective bargaining agreement that they and their fellow players negotiated and voted on.
Something those RBs are not ready for - the NFL market is a zero-sum game. Do they really think every other position will sacrifice their own potential pay in order to artificially raise the money RBs are getting? Some of those proposals they are floating will do exactly that. Other proposals seem incredibly misguided and will actually hurt RBs in the long-term IMO(for example shorter term rookie contracts for RBs... what do they think will happen? This will lower the value of RBs in the draft even more. Teams would just never draft a RB in the first 3 rounds... and then when negotiations for contracts come, they will be less likely to invest in players they haven't spent big draft capital... and MORE IMPORTANT - why would you spend 15M when you will be able to get the best of the new crop of RBs in the 3d-4th round because their rookie contract value has been devalued)
I honestly don't know what the solution is. It sucks for the players that the position is getting devalued and the teams are actually catching up to the value they are giving up by paying top of the market value... but I'm honestly not sure any of the newly proposed "solutions" are actually solutions at all or if they would even be accepted by the rest of the league.
-
2 hours ago, Restinpeacesweetchloe said:
Was listening to a podcast. They said Ballard could use a couple trump cards. One he could tell his agent if your so sure you can find a team willing pay him more then us you have permission to go find it. Then come back to us. Chances are he won’t find it. He could also tell the agent we aren’t negotiating with a injure player. Then bring Pittman in and pay him and tell Taylor he has to wait.
Yeah, I think it was @Superman that mentioned yesterday that by what Ballard said it seems like we probably haven't even offered an extension and we are waiting to see how the new coaching staff uses Taylor. I think it's reasonable for a player coming off an injury that is "serious" enough to keep him on PUP 6 months after surgery.
-
18 minutes ago, w87r said:
You're telling me that the agent with a profile pic of himself double pointing as his chain has a bad reputation?
No way, even Rodgers wouldn't bet on that. ~ Sarcasm ~
Seriously though, I don't know why this guy double pointing at his chain bugs me so much, but it just doesn't display much professionalism, imo.
Have no problem with chains, but that isn't how my agent would be presenting himself.
There is definitely some importance to appearance when you are representing other people in front of their employers, but his actions not his twitter picture is what really bugs me. Liking tweets saying Taylor should ask for a trade... engaging frivolously with the owner of the team of
one(two - Leonard is his client too) of your players. I have no idea what he thinks he's doing and does he really think this is in his client's best interest? If I'm Taylor I would be seriously considering what the hell am I doing being associated with and represented by someone like this... just boggles the mind.-
4
-
-
For whatever it's worth it seems like this agent has quite a reputation for being a horrible manager and costing his clients tons of money. He's an MMA agent and has pulled some nonsense with his clients... tried to pull hustles on his clients too... he got fired on live TV by one of his fighters too:
His behavior on twitter makes perfect sense when you read just a tiny bit about him...
-
3
-
1
-
-
2 hours ago, NFLfan said:
That's true. That does not mean that quality RBs like JT and Barkley should not be paid their value. (I know that is not what you are intimating but others are.)
I like that RBs are strategizing on ways to get teams to recognize their value to football.
They should be paid their value. It's just that the value is not what many think it is. For whatever it's worth, I think teams finally are recognizing the real value of RBs... which is not very high.
-
1
-
-
2 hours ago, NFLfan said:
I agree.
Are you sure? Rookie Bijan Robinson is getting the 4th highest guaranteed money (more than Barkley and other RBs).
Rookie scale contracts are fixed by draft position, not by playing position. Whoever was drafted at 8 this year would have gotten the exact same deal. It's not affected by the RB market at all.
-
2
-
-
3 hours ago, w87r said:
He should trade his agent.
This whole thing started when he changed his agent. He never said anything about contract and stuff until end of March of this year when he changed his agent and then the negotiation through the media started the VERY FIRST time he got a chance to speak in front of the media at OTAs.
I guess his agent is doing his job the way he understands it and the way he thinks will best serve his client. I just don't think this is the best way to go with Irsay. Irsay LOVES his players, especially the best of them. He absolutely loved Taylor before all this %storm was going on... maybe he still does. But undermining Irsay a week after he said in front of everybody that Taylor is healed up and ready to go, especially having in mind the sensitivity this franchise has with communications about injuries of star players is very VERY far from ideal course of action IMO.
BTW I would leave for everyone to make their own judgement about this agent's actions... does he really think liking tweets about Taylor needing to ask for a trade is what's best for his client? Does he even understand that BY FAR the best chance Taylor has of getting paid long lucrative deal is with the Colts? Because for ANY other team the cost of having Taylor would be not just the salary but also draft compensation of some sort?
-
2
-
-
Am I the only one who gets progressively annoyed with the way players handle themselves during contract disputes? I would much rather him just state that he's holding out than do ... whatever it is that he's doing now.
-
3
-
-
-
4 hours ago, Superman said:
Don't know if you meant to quote me or not...
To be nitpicky, I'd push back slightly on the "interchangeable" part. I think there's a difference between a great runner and a good runner, and there's a difference between a playmaking back and a 'we can run the offense with him' back. And then there are specialty guys, who can't handle a full time role, but can be effective when used in a very specific way. I don't necessary agree that the players are interchangeable.
But I do agree that there is a diminishing return in the overall impact to the offense. If you have a great every down back who can produce at a high level, it's a good thing. But is it worth paying 4-5 times more for that player, compared to a replacement level player + a change of pace player to supplement? Does the great back actually improve your offense enough that it's a competitive advantage for your team to pay him $12-15m/year?
Yep... there is difference in skill... but at RB specifically that difference in skill does NOT manifest in huge difference in production/winning. I've seen some studies that suggest the quality of the RB is about the 3d-4th most important factor for the quality of the run game... the quality of run blocking being the most important, then quality of ... the QB's passing... and then comes the RB's skill. And this in addition to the running game in general not being highly correlated with wins adds even more to the case for not overpaying RBs.
And it's a bit of a shame, because the RBs are among the most fascinating athletes on a football field. Some of the things they do are truly freakish... but it just... doesn't provide the value that would command huge paydays... Here's one from today...
No comment.
4 hours ago, Superman said:If we're talking about the difference between a great QB and a replacement level QB, yes, pay the franchise level guy $50m/year, and figure out the rest, because he makes your team that much better. That's not true of RBs. The Falcons had an amazing rushing attack last year, with the most random collective of backfield players imaginable.
Yeah... for some positions the even marginal difference in skill might manifest in big differences in winning. RB is just not one of those...
4 hours ago, Superman said:And that's setting aside the discussion about longevity. Let's just say you could go year to year with a player like JT. We still need to answer the question about how much he can actually improve your offense.
I really like JT. Just like a lot of other RBs, he's maybe the best overall athlete on the roster (Richardson might give him a run for his money), his H/W/S is outstanding, he can handle a heavy workload, etc. But like @stitches said earlier, it's probably a competitive disadvantage to pay any RB elite money (whatever that is anymore). And that's even assuming said RB is producing at a high level, let alone if he starts breaking down.
I wonder if we would have already paid Taylor had he not suffered that injury last year and had he had a full productive healthy season? I think part of Ballard seemingly not rushing into a Taylor extension is that precisely... once a RB starts breaking down, his value drops significantly. And Taylor himself has taken tons and tons of snaps already. He had someting like 1000 rushing attempts in college. And has now had 750 in his first 3 years for the Colts. A lot of RBs start breaking down when they reach that type of accumulated workload... Maybe that's part of the consideration.
-
1
-
-
On 7/19/2023 at 6:28 PM, Superman said:
You think he looks slow in that video??
I didn't like how he moves either...
Not sure I would call it slow... but he definitely doesn't look as sharp and explosive as he used to. But that's just my subjective view... no idea what benchmarks he's trying to hit at this point.
-
The very fact that Taylor seems to be negotiating through the media should tell us that the talks on the negotiating table with Ballard are probably not going the way he thought they would. I have very mixed feelings about this. I would love for a player who's been great when healthy and has worked hard to get there, to get paid, but at the same time the league is telling us what they think the value of the RB position is and it would probably be competitive disadvantage for the Colts to pay him record setting numbers or anywhere close to that...
-
2
-
-
-
-
1 minute ago, chad72 said:
I knew you wouldn't give us a glowing video on Levis, come on man!!!
I am sure every rookie QB will have a "what was that throw" moment this year including our AR. The bigger issue for Levis is cracking the Top 2, let alone becoming the starter.
I'm just being silly
I posted one of Bryce earlier too..
-
2
-
Not sure I would call it slow... but he definitely doesn't look as sharp and explosive as he used to. But that's just my subjective view... no idea what benchmarks he's trying to hit at this point. 
I posted one of Bryce earlier too..
Jonathan Taylor comments on his contract/Request trade (Merge)
in Colts Football
Posted
I keep coming back to Miami. That agent and Taylor have to be REALLY stupid to be pulling off this thing unless they knew someone out there would give him the contract he wants. I'm looking at Miami's salary cap sheet. They have about 13.5M of capspace available. It's very much within reach for them to extend him without even doing anything extraordinary with their contracts.