dw49

I think we could contend next year but I agree that we can't this year. I think who's argument (yours or mine) is the more valid boils down to Richardson's development . Does giving him more weapons this year , help his overall development ? If he had Taylor this year , there's little doubt that he'll have more success. That said , does this result in AR 's development or does it really not matter that he has a miserable first year ?

Looks to me the odds are highly in favor of the Colts trading Taylor. IMO , this is a big mistake. There is no way say... 2nd round compensation from a good team is worth 2 years of J Taylor. Colts have all the leverage ... just as Oakland and the Giants have. One year at 4 mill and the next year at around 10 mill is a bargain price for a RB of his caliber.

Problem trading him is that it would no doubt be to a very good team. Even a first is not that great of compensation if it a pick in the late 20's. I would just as soon make him play this year and either trade , extend or tag him in 2024.

Make him play out his contract and give him a nice franchise tag next year. If he sits out , he gets nothing.

Got it.

Around 4 posts above this , I agreed that I was mistaken. But if you need it again... I am wrong .

Yes , you are correct.

I'll stand by my post . That's an obvious typo by the Stampede Blue writer. I'll provide a little more of the article which should leave little doubt. It is a little ambiguous but "not decided to play AR etc" is not how you would express that you are undecided. After Saturday’s 24-17 win over the Chicago Bears, Steichen told reporters he has not decided to play rookie quarterback Anthony Richardson, or any starters, in the final preseason game against the Philadelphia Eagles. The Colts’ 2023 first round draft pick will wait to make his home debut on Sept. 10, when the Colts host the Jacksonville Jaguars. “I think we had those two joint practices against the Bears back-to-back days,” Steichen said. “To me, I look at those as legit games. He got all those reps and a lot of starters didn’t play on both sides of the ball and that was the decision that was made.”

According to Stampede Blue , that's not the case. "After Saturday’s 24-17 win over the Chicago Bears, Steichen told reporters he has not decided to play rookie quarterback Anthony Richardson, or any starters, in the final preseason game against the Philadelphia Eagles. "

Regardless of what the fans want , the starters are sitting out game 3. Just read it on Stampede Blue.

Everything was bad last year. O Line , QB and coaching included. Throw 2022 out the window. He hardly played and what WR looked good last year.

I agree with some of what you have but I think you are understating the value of a RB like Taylor. There really is not a lot to go back and forth on this. I guess I could try to point out that 12-13 million is not a lot of money in today's NFL. Ryan Kelly is costing 10 mill , Braden Smith 19 mill , seems to me Taylor should be paid . I guess teams value backs differently. This year we had 2 RB's go in the top 12. Other years really good college backs go much later than projected. I guess we just have a different viewpoint on this one.

Hank Aaron's 240K salary in 1976 would only represent about 1.3 million today. In 1970 Aaron was paid 120K. In 1976 gas was about 60 cents , the average car was $5500 and the average home was 46K. Bottom line is in 1976 , athletes were paid a fraction of what they are paid today. Aaron would be earning around 30 mill per year in today's market. Here's the number I found on his 1976 salary adjusted to inflation in 2023... In 1976, core inflation was 6.57%. When using the core inflation measurement, $240,000 in 1976 is equivalent in buying power to $1,278,307.10 in 2023, a difference of $1,038,307.10.

Pay the man. Taylor in 2021 was no doubt the best at running the football.in the NFL. Led the league in about every category. Long runs , yardage after contact plus way more yards than his competition.. He was hurt in 2022 and still was pretty good. He played with 2 horrible QB's and the O line regressed. Those that say he didn't elevate the offense beyond what it was the year before , bewilder me a bit. Reminds me of what Branch Rickey told Ralph Kinder in 1952. Kiner after leading the league for the 7th straight time asked the Pirates GM Brach Rickey for a raise. Brach Rickey asked ,"where did we finish last year." Kiner replied "last." Ricky then said "well , we can finish last without you" and refused the request for a raise. It's called a "rabbit hole." So I pretty much agree with your side of the argument and yes Superman is correct when he states a team cannot win with bad QB play. BUT... why should Taylor be punished for the Colts bringing in horrible QB's ? How is say Pittman worth 20 million a year and Taylor not woth 12-13 ? I guess it come down to some of us think we can replace Taylor with some 3rd round rookie. Or some will point to the short "lives" of RBs in the NFL. I'm not going to research it but IMO , the really good backs certainly can last 7-8 years. Taylor takes care of his body and other than the high ankle sprain has held up well.

True

The new rule pretty much kills that strategy .Teams now get the ball placed at the 25 yard line if they FC the kickoff inside their 25. It's pretty obvious they think the kickoff play is too dangerous.

Would you consider being my wingman ?

About the same chance as I have getting a date with Scarlette Johansson

This better got 250-1 on his bet. If the book where he bet this has the correct odds that would mean the odds are .004 of him winning the bet. that would team he has less than 1/2 of 1% .

The prop bet would work something like this . The rushing yards for the RB say is 85 yards. The side that looks like it's the better would be something like .. you bet $120 to win $100. Say that was over 85 yards. Then if you bet "under" 85 yards , you would wager $100 to win $100. So likely that $1000 bet returned at most $1000 and at least around $800.

I didn't see that report and I'm happy to hear that. Also , I guess if this involved more than one Colt player , Rodgers , it would be reported differently. So , I agree that my worries are more than likely unfounded.

I'm just hoping that the 4-5 other players being suspended for gambling do not include any Colts other than Rodgers. The "couple low 4 figure bets" would seem to open the possibility that those bets were not all Rodger's wagers. His normal bet was said to be 50 to $100.

Hopefully not as I posted earlier that those large bets might mean more Colt players placed a bet... https://nfltraderumors.co/breaking-colts-cb-isaiah-rodgers-expected-to-be-suspended-for-entire-season/ Mod update: Two Colts players suspended, waived https://www.espn.com/nfl/story/_/id/37934061/nfl-suspends-four-players-gambling-violations

Not necucesaay but appreciated.

I'm just throwing stuff out there . The information we get is really limited . However , IMO , just the fact that he bet on NFL games from the Colt facility and the fact that his bets included at least 1 or 2 Colt games , he's in for something more than a 1 year suspension. Hopefully I'm wrong but seems like Ridley got a year for less .