Superman

I want Stroud, but I think we'll draft Richardson. Stroud is my QB1. He's accurate, strong arm, good footwork in the pocket, good balance, decent size with the ability to get stronger, and I think he can still get better as a passer. He's not the most exciting guy, but he can make all the throws, and despite his limited athleticism I think he's good enough to be a top ten QB in the NFL. The S2 stuff doesn't move the needle for me. But it's a fact that he's not a dual threat guy, and that he had a very favorable situation at Ohio State, more favorable than any other QB in this year's draft, IMO. Still, I think he's more than capable of being a better pocket passer in Year 1 than most QB prospects ever become. So he's my first choice. Richardson seems to be the guy the Colts would want. I'm extrapolating a lot from the history of the coaching staff, the trends in the league, the Colts' openly acknowledging that they'd consider Lamar Jackson (although that could be diplomacy more than anything else), Ballard's historical attraction to athletic prospects, and a few other bread crumbs. Richardson is super gifted, as physically impressive as any QB prospect ever (maybe the most impressive). He has a great arm, great size, he's super strong, he survives contact, both in the pocket and on the move. And as good as he can be as a scrambler/runner, he doesn't panic and run every time he's pressured; yet he still has an incredible pressure:sack ratio. Of course, he's extremely raw, and his current limitations are so drastic that, worst case scenario, he might not even be able to function in an NFL offense. But our coaching staff has experience with slowly working a gifted QB into the game, and I think they'd be very confident that they could do the same with Richardson. One little gem of info: the Eagles QB coach last season was Brian Johnson, who was rumored to be in consideration for the Colts OC position when Steichen got hired (Steichen all but admitted he wanted Johnson, but the Eagles made Johnson OC). Johnson was at University of Florida when they recruited Richardson. So just another tangential connection between Richardson and the Colts. Levis: I don't know about him. Physically gifted, has some technical issues that seriously bug me, and I feel oddly suspicious of him. This is not about unpeeled bananas, mayo coffee, or shirtless pics. I don't even mind the "I have a cannon" comment. But something about the way he talks and interacts, he seems really rehearsed, and even when he's trying to be down to earth and sincere, it comes off as a performance. I keep coming back to Bo Callahan (curse you, Kevin Costner!) There are rumors that he's arrogant, maybe entitled; I don't think my opinion is compromised by Internet whispers, I generally don't put stock in stuff like that, but when I watch/listen to him, something seems questionable. At this point, I don't think he would be the Colts choice at #4. Young: Simple for me, he's too small, and doesn't have other physical traits to make up for it. His arm is mid, and he has a reputation for being able to make plays with his legs, but he's not as fast or as quick as people seem to think he is. I think he can have some success, but I think the odds of him excelling and lasting long in the NFL are pretty low. Hooker: Lots of physical talent, but I don't think he's been tested in college in any way that proves he can perform in the NFL. The Tennessee scheme is a cheat code. You need a strong arm and some accuracy to run it, so credit there, but it's really unconventional. Also, he barely looked like even a college QB until he connected with Josh Heupel, and by then, he was 23 years old, playing against guys who were 3-4 years younger than him. I think he has a lower ceiling than everyone else.

Draft is less than a week away. Ballard has done his pre-draft presser, and all the visits are done. So let's weigh in. First, which QB do you want the Colts to draft? Second, which QB do you think the Colts will draft? I'm including the top five guys, plus an option for "none of these." I'm listing them in alphabetical order. Your vote will be public. Poll will close Thursday at 12 noon, Pacific.

It's like Aaron Donald and the cast of Jersey Boys.

This is a good point. Every fan wants to see their team win. But as a Colts fan for the last couple decades plus, I get a measure of joy out of seeing guys who were around in the early 2000s and beyond being closely associated with the team. Having a Ring of Honor and celebrating that core of players is special, and some of them are even HOFers. I think those memories and the joy and excitement around them are a big part of being a fan. Compare that with fans of the Miami Heat, who enjoyed seeing their team go to the Finals four years in a row, but they probably don't connect with LeBron James and Chris Bosh (maybe?) and Ray Allen and Shaq that strongly. Their guy is Dwayne Wade, and almost everyone else was hired guns. Udonis Haslem is probably more celebrated by Heat fans than LeBron. Or Pats fans who appreciate Kevin Faulk far more than they appreciate Corey Dillon, who was a much better player, but was only there for a short time. So having a team that kind of grows together and has several years of success together, etc., has a different kind of appeal than just throwing a team together that has a short burst of success, even if the short burst results in a Super Bowl. I think the Eagles are trying to do what you're suggesting -- lock down the QB, and try to extend a short but intense window of contending, with the expectation that you're going to need to retool within a couple years. The Hurts contract apparently has low cap hits in the first four years, then explodes in the last two. They obviously want to keep this core together and try to maximize what they have now, and then they'll restructure what they need to moving forward, but their intention is to support the QB as much as possible. And that's probably what every team should do, once they're confident they have the right QB. It's just important to acknowledge that the bill always comes due, and I don't think the people who claim the cap isn't real actually pay attention to what these teams wind up doing to settle the bill. The Rams are a pretty extreme example right now. The Bucs also, and I think they kind of fly under the radar because of all the other changes they've made -- new coach, QB retired, other short term players are gone -- but they're pretty severely restricted this season also, which is why Baker Mayfield and Kyle Trask are their QBs right now, while they have a $35m cap penalty for Tom Brady.

Yeah, the Mahomes contract is huge in total value, but there's nothing else about it that seems like a win for Mahomes. Through the first three seasons, he's been paid just under $75m (so an average of $25m/year, at a time when the yearly average for top five QBs is between $45-50m). The staggered guarantees (and restructures) effectively ensure him $207m in the first five years, which is still a discounted rate, during a period in which he has been the league's best QB. And he basically has no leverage, because he's under control through the 2031 season, when he'll be 36. So his entire prime, he's locked into a below market contract. And if the Chiefs refused to renegotiate (or honor whatever wink-wink understanding may have been implied when the contract was initially done), Mahomes would have to either hold out, or threaten to retire, to get them back to the table. For some perspective, before the Colts and Andrew Luck agreed to his big contract, Jim Irsay was talking about how Luck would be paid close to half a billion dollars over the next decade. That was sometime before the 2016 season. Four years later, Mahomes (who already had an MVP and a SB ring) signed for $450m over ten years. Three years later, Mahomes is now the sixth highest paid QB in yearly average, and Lamar Jackson, Justin Herbert, and Joe Burrow are waiting in the wings. So yeah, that contract might be the most team friendly QB contract of all time. Now, if the Chiefs maximize their remaining cap space and continue to win SBs, it might put Mahomes in the conversation for greatest player of all time. I think that's the vision that he'd have to be sold on to agree to this deal. And he'll still make a ton of money along the way, just not quite as much as he probably could.

The Bucs are pretty tight this year and next year. They have $74m in dead cap in 2023 ($35m for Brady alone), and right now they're only $3m under the cap, with the draft class accounted for. They're projected to have less than $30m cap space next year, so they'll have some work to do. But they aren't struggling to put together a complete roster. While they did some restructures in 2021, that was mostly because the cap went down for the first time in a decade, out of nowhere. And they lost some players to FA last year. And they didn't trade away a bunch of first rounders, multiple years in a row. So even now, they have some flexibility that the Rams don't have. But 2024 is gonna be rough, they only have 29 players under contract next year. There's more flexibility with the longer contracts, but the Mahomes/Allen contracts are starting to look like bad deals for the players. The Mahomes contract was always slanted toward the team, and they've done two restructures already. Allen just did his first restructure. Schefter reported the Hurts contract has relatively low cap hits for the first FOUR years, leaving about $180m to account for in the last two seasons, so it's pretty obvious they'll be doing a restructure by 2027, and that's best case scenario. He could fall apart or seriously regress before then, and there's basically nothing the Eagles can do. And Mahomes will still have FIVE years left on his contract, at a yearly average less than what today's market value is. And what's going on with the Rams (and Bucs) is only partly about the QBs.

There was a lot of discussion about this last year. The Rams won the SB, then spent a bunch of money. The response from a lot of people was that the salary cap isn't real, because if the Rams can manipulate the cap rules to keep their core together AND add good players, then what good is the cap? They had a cap figure of about $200m, but spent $284m in cash. Fast forward to today. First, the Rams had an injury plagued season and only won five games. This would usually pay off with a high draft pick; the Rams would have owned the 6th pick, but they traded that pick to the Lions for Matt Stafford (along with their 2022 first rounder, 2021 third rounder, and Jared Goff). Then, the Rams were projected to be well over the 2023 salary cap, and to be compliant, had to make cost-saving moves. They released Leonard Floyd and Bobby Wagner -- two contributing members from their 2021 SB team. They traded Jalen Ramsey for a third rounder and a ST TE. Today, they're trading Allen Robinson -- one of the high profile players they signed in 2022 -- to the Steelers, swapping 7th round picks, and paying $10m of his $15m salary in 2023. In total, they're paying Robinson $25m over two years, for one year of service, 33 catches, and three TDs. They've easily lost 15 notable contributors from the Super Bowl team. (Sean McVay contemplated walking away because he was not sure he wanted to stick around for a multi-year rebuild.) This season, including their projected draft class signings, their projected cap figure is $214m, and they are $10m under the cap. But their cash spending is only projected around $175m, so far. The discrepancy is because of the dead money from restructures, trades, and releases that they've done over the last two years to manipulate the cap. And the worst part? They only have about 44 players under contract today! That means they still need 9 more active roster players, plus a practice squad. Their starting QB is pretty good when healthy, but he's coming off a weird arm injury at 35 years old, and they don't have a backup QB on the roster. They lost several other starter level players to free agency this year. And they're going to have work to do again in 2024 to field a complete roster while staying under the cap. (So after they restructure Kupp, probably, to get their 2023 roster on the field, they will have pushed some of his cap hit into 2024, when they'll have a similar cap/player problem. How long until Aaron Donald or Matt Stafford are like 'I'm done'?) People mocked Jim Irsay a few weeks ago for offering the Rams as a cautionary tale, because after all, their gambles helped them win the Super Bowl. Their fans -- and most people -- would take this trade without a second thought. But two things need to be acknowledged. (1) Going "all in" does not guarantee a SB; the Rams got VERY lucky in 2021. (2) The current state of the Rams is what "consequences" looks like. They still have some good players, and a good staff. It's possible they can still compete, but they are now a shell of what they were even before they won two years ago, and they're light on draft stock to replenish their roster cheaply. (If they still had #6 this year, they'd be trading back and getting 3-4 players for the price of one.) This is full blown FALLOUT from their very aggressive moves to acquire highly paid players. This is an extreme downside to very aggressive cap management. I would have just bumped the other thread, but it's archived. Just wanted to continue the discussion on this, a year later, when we've seen how things can turn out.

I see the two very differently than you do.

Tell me what happens with the first three picks... At this point, I think Stroud and Young will be off the board, and Levis will be the best one left. And I'd be fine with drafting him. I'd also be fine with trading out and picking up a 2024 first.

I don't get it, either. He's a bridge level guy who could easily be the starter for half a season or more, or be QB2 all year. We already knew the intention is to draft a QB. I don't see this signing as an indication in any direction.

I don't mind the signing, it makes sense, I was just never down with the mania.

This is a dream come true for so many of you.

I wonder if he's done with the Ravens way of operating, on and off the field. Struggle to get/keep good receivers (always, not just recently), constant changes to the offensive staff, and maybe some behind the scenes personal stuff. But that's entirely speculative on my part.

I get that. I think it's relevant at LG, ILB, if we pay JT it will be relevant there. It's an ongoing conversation, and there are several elements to consider there. I don't think it's relevant at kicker. Spotrac says McLaughlin's value is $4.1m/year. Matt Gay signed for $5.625m/year. The difference doesn't affect anything else the team wants to do, and 'highest paid FA kicker' isn't a meaningful designation in any way, IMO.

The league year starts tomorrow. This isn't even really a consideration if they intend to move off of any of the big money guys.

I was initially "meh" on this signing, mostly because I thought McLaughlin was pretty good and would have been easy to retain. But Matt Gay is still young, he's already proven in big time situations, he's a top five kicker right now, and should be rock solid for the life of his contract. He's also a good kickoff specialist, should that be needed. We've been shaky at kicker since 2019, and now we can (presumably) check that box off, not just in 2023, but for the foreseeable future. This is a good signing, IMO. Not exactly earth shattering news for FA Day 1, but I like it.

I'm dumb. I thought that's who the Bears signed, the names had me mixed up... My bad.

"The Next Brian Urlacher" is only getting $6.5m/year?

Merged.

Yeah that's what it seems like. But not only did the ESPN crew report it on TV, other outlets (Spanish, and radio) were saying the same thing. Maybe they're repeating what ESPN said? Or maybe someone on the field was saying 'we have five minutes to warm up' because that's protocol, while the refs and coaches were still figuring out what to do. But if we're taking Troy Vincent at his word, the coaches never discussed resuming play. So it was all likely a miscommunication.

It took a while to make an official statement, but it sounds like the game being postponed was the obvious outcome pretty early on...

Could be some people were saying that on the field, and it made it up to the booth. But we never saw any of the players warming up, right? I think maybe Burrow threw a couple warm up passes, but everyone else was just standing around from what I saw.

The "five minutes" thing is starting to look like a misunderstanding...

I don't even think the refs were 'instructed' to give them five minutes. I that was just their initial 'how do we handle this' reaction -- five minutes after an extended stoppage -- and the coaches immediately said 'that won't work.' Taylor and McDermott talked, and said 'we're going to the locker room,' and at that point there wasn't really any decision to be made. It was done, they weren't playing. The way it was presented on social media was like the NFL was trying to get them to keep playing and the teams had to win an argument to get the game postponed. I mean, it might technically be accurate that the teams made the decision, but that doesn't mean they were opposed in any way.

Yeah, the fact that the statement included the update on Hamlin's condition -- he's in critical condition -- shows that they wanted to provide that information in an official capacity. Had to wait for it, though.