Colts offseason forecast from NFL.com

[21isSuperman]

The Around the League guys on NFL.com have been doing an offseason forecast for every team.  Today, they did the Colts: http://www.nfl.com/news/story/0ap2000000330487/article/offseason-forecast-indianapolis-colts

 

Summary:

They comment on free agents, noting Vontae (who they say we should/will re-sign), Bethea (they say he's solid in run support, but will soon be 30 and a liability in coverage; some on here have said Bethea was a liability in coverage this year), and Brown.

Needs are future #1 WR across Hilton, even though Wayne is coming back.  Interior OL needs to be improved.  Run defense will need to be improved.  Secondary will require attention is Bethea and Davis leave.

On the way out is Satele.  They also don't expect DHB or Bradshaw back.

Future moves include a potential run at Decker, re-signing Davis, and Grigs drafting best player available

[Beauregarde]

The Around the League guys on NFL.com have been doing an offseason forecast for every team.  Today, they did the Colts: http://www.nfl.com/news/story/0ap2000000330487/article/offseason-forecast-indianapolis-colts

 

Summary:

They comment on free agents, noting Vontae (who they say we should/will re-sign), Bethea (they say he's solid in run support, but will soon be 30 and a liability in coverage; some on here have said Bethea was a liability in coverage this year), and Brown.

Needs are future #1 WR across Hilton, even though Wayne is coming back.  Interior OL needs to be improved.  Run defense will need to be improved.  Secondary will require attention is Bethea and Davis leave.

On the way out is Satele.  They also don't expect DHB or Bradshaw back.

Future moves include a potential run at Decker, re-signing Davis, and Grigs drafting best player available

Sounds right on the money to me.

[BProland85]

I would hate a WR signing other than Damian Williams or another lower tier WR in free agency. There is too much WR talent in the draft so we can get one there.

 

Would much rather spend the money on defense and center.

[TKnight24]

If we sign Eric Decker I'm becoming a Seattle fan. #BookIt

Signing WR's who trip over their own 2 feet in the open field

[arkana04]

Nothing nobody knew already 

 

not much of an article. 

[Johnny Bui]

Sounds about right.  I'm surprise Satele didn't get cut yet; I don't know what we're waiting for.  Davis says he wants to stay and I don't think we can afford to let him go considering how bad our secondary is.  Besides Davis is young and can improve dramatically.  Even tho Mack is out, there are centers and guards out there in FA.  Don't know what we gonna do on ST with no Punter and Kicker, but thats a whole different matter.

[BPM_Colt]

I would hate a WR signing other than Damian Williams or another lower tier WR in free agency. There is too much WR talent in the draft so we can get one there.

 

Would much rather spend the money on defense and center.

Couldn't agree more. I would rather spend $$$$ Decker would want on Byrd

[BLUEx40]

I would hate a WR signing other than Damian Williams or another lower tier WR in free agency. There is too much WR talent in the draft so we can get one there.

 

Would much rather spend the money on defense and center.

yes please damian Williams. ive been doing some research on him hes a solid WR that would fit great in our system and add some size 

[BLUEx40]

Sounds about right.  I'm surprise Satele didn't get cut yet; I don't know what we're waiting for.  Davis says he wants to stay and I don't think we can afford to let him go considering how bad our secondary is.  Besides Davis is young and can improve dramatically.  Even tho Mack is out, there are centers and guards out there in FA.  Don't know what we gonna do on ST with no Punter and Kicker, but thats a whole different matter.

probably his replacement it may look like he sucks really bad but trust there is a lot worse

[MikeVander]

The phrase "best player available" needs to be banned. It was too much last year.

[neug3246]

No doubt we need to bring Vontae back but I think we should let Bethea walk. Dont get me wrong I love Bethea and think he was a good player in his prime but that time has past. I also think we should resign Pat and let him handle all three duties, punting, kickoffs, and kicking extra points/field goals. The oline scares me now with Mack receiving that tag today, looks like we could be in for another season of subpar oline play. As for wide receivers, I dont think Decker is our solution, yes he is good but so are our other receivers, DaRick and Brazill dont get enough credit and I believe they will both become players like Garcon once they are done playing for the colts. Plus, dont forget that we will be getting Allen back and he is a receiver in himself along with Fleener. I hope Toler can grow a pair of balls and play a whole season this next year. With him in plus what ever addition we add to replace Bethea, our new CFL product in Muamba, and the rest of FA and the draft I think our D can be top 10 for sure. This up and coming season could be our year we just have to be aggressive and go get it. We got all the pieces on offence to do it, besides the line. We just need to build up that monster a little more on D and we will be super bowl bound in Arizona next year!!!!!! Go Colts

[jb17]

No doubt we need to bring Vontae back but I think we should let Bethea walk. Dont get me wrong I love Bethea and think he was a good player in his prime but that time has past. I also think we should resign Pat and let him handle all three duties, punting, kickoffs, and kicking extra points/field goals. The oline scares me now with Mack receiving that tag today, looks like we could be in for another season of subpar oline play. As for wide receivers, I dont think Decker is our solution, yes he is good but so are our other receivers, DaRick and Brazill dont get enough credit and I believe they will both become players like Garcon once they are done playing for the colts. Plus, dont forget that we will be getting Allen back and he is a receiver in himself along with Fleener. I hope Toler can grow a pair of balls and play a whole season this next year. With him in plus what ever addition we add to replace Bethea, our new CFL product in Muamba, and the rest of FA and the draft I think our D can be top 10 for sure. This up and coming season could be our year we just have to be aggressive and go get it. We got all the pieces on offence to do it, besides the line. We just need to build up that monster a little more on D and we will be super bowl bound in Arizona next year!!!!!! Go Colts

I agree with everything youve said my friend. We do not need offensive help like ive said a million times already. Donald thomas, Vick ballard, reggie wayne and dwayne allen will be back for next season. Need to get rid of satele, find a solid center, maybe Holmes is the guy...who knows? The article is right in that we need to bolster our D... DE/DL,ILB and corner! Draft, ILB-Borland or Skove and DB-Jean-Baptiste, sign DE-Red Bryant.

[DoubleE Colt]

Can someone clear up the Mack situation for me in terms of it being said he's not an option now. I thought being transaction tagged meant another team could still give him an offer that the Browns had 5 days to match. Or is it not as clear cut as that?

[lollygagger8]

Can someone clear up the Mack situation for me in terms of it being said he's not an option now. I thought being transaction tagged meant another team could still give him an offer that the Browns had 5 days to match. Or is it not as clear cut as that?

 

That's exactly how I interpret it.

[Smonroe]

If we sign Eric Decker I'm becoming a Seattle fan. #BookIt

Signing WR's who trip over their own 2 feet in the open field

 

I really hope they don't overpay (or even underpay) for Decker.  He's a decent complimentary receiver, but nothing special.

[Valpo2004]

Can someone clear up the Mack situation for me in terms of it being said he's not an option now. I thought being transaction tagged meant another team could still give him an offer that the Browns had 5 days to match. Or is it not as clear cut as that?

 

The problem is not that we couldn't make an offer but there are 2 other problems.

 

1. The transition tag is 10 million.  I believe we would have to make an offer in excess of 10 million.  (Maybe I'm wrong.)  The current highest paid center is making 8 million.  Mack just isn't worth that much money.

 

2. The Browns are one of a few teams that have more cap space then we do.  They can match easily any offer we make for Mack.  Which means we would have to make an offer that the Browns are just not willing to pay.  

 

Basically in order to get him we would have to pay him Franchise QB level money.  He's just not worth that much.  Besides there are other centers on the market that are options.  They arn't as good as Mack but they would be vast improvements over Satele.  And they won't cost nearly as much as Mack.

[Valpo2004]

I really hope they don't overpay (or even underpay) for Decker.  He's a decent complimentary receiver, but nothing special.

 

I don't get the heavy opposition to Decker.  

 

Granted I hope they don't over pay for Decker either.  But underpay?  You act like he couldn't help this team at all. 

 

Outside of an aging and returning from injury Wayne and Hilton we have a good amount of potential at WR on this team but we just don't have a polished receiver.  Decker is a polished receiver and could help this team quite a bit if we get him for the right price.  

 

No I don't want him at 8 million a year.  But if we got him at like 4 million a year (I doubt that would happen) it would be great.

[Dark Superman]

Luck and Decker could tear it up..

[BrentMc11]

Thanks for sharing, 21is.

 

Which one of us wrote that?  Or did they plagiarize off of the forum?  

[Smonroe]

I don't get the heavy opposition to Decker.  

 

Granted I hope they don't over pay for Decker either.  But underpay?  You act like he couldn't help this team at all. 

 

Outside of an aging and returning from injury Wayne and Hilton we have a good amount of potential at WR on this team but we just don't have a polished receiver.  Decker is a polished receiver and could help this team quite a bit if we get him for the right price.  

 

No I don't want him at 8 million a year.  But if we got him at like 4 million a year (I doubt that would happen) it would be great.

Personally, I don't want him. So that's my opinion. But if we do get him, we will overpay. That's the nature of free agency for tier one players. I'd rather draft a guy and let him compete with Rogers.

[DoubleE Colt]

The problem is not that we couldn't make an offer but there are 2 other problems.

1. The transition tag is 10 million. I believe we would have to make an offer in excess of 10 million. (Maybe I'm wrong.) The current highest paid center is making 8 million. Mack just isn't worth that much money.

2. The Browns are one of a few teams that have more cap space then we do. They can match easily any offer we make for Mack. Which means we would have to make an offer that the Browns are just not willing to pay.

Basically in order to get him we would have to pay him Franchise QB level money. He's just not worth that much. Besides there are other centers on the market that are options. They arn't as good as Mack but they would be vast improvements over Satele. And they won't cost nearly as much as Mack.

10 mill is a heck of a lot for a C yeah, but some people might say the ability the keep Luck upright and less harrassed might be priceless. At some put a C is gonna be paid that well. Personally I agree with the belief for now we can get a bit less of a quality C but for less money upgrading of Satele.

[Mameluc]

Can someone clear up the Mack situation for me in terms of it being said he's not an option now. I thought being transaction tagged meant another team could still give him an offer that the Browns had 5 days to match. Or is it not as clear cut as that?

it probably means that the browns will give him a fair offer since they can really see what his market will bel ike... he is gone i think

[1yrdandacloudofdust]

Trade next yrs 1 for Bay Bay. Bronvos probably wouldnt even take that trade. Screw Decker. Beyond overrated. Especially at the salary he's going to get

[1yrdandacloudofdust]

A hungry Hakeem Nicks for cheap is way better than Decker.

[Stephen]

forget decker or nicks give me some game changing defensive players they are what win championships.

[pgt_rob]

Do we still have Deion Branch? Or was that just a end of last season thing?

[esmort]

The problem is not that we couldn't make an offer but there are 2 other problems.

 

1. The transition tag is 10 million.  I believe we would have to make an offer in excess of 10 million.  (Maybe I'm wrong.)  The current highest paid center is making 8 million.  Mack just isn't worth that much money.

 

2. The Browns are one of a few teams that have more cap space then we do.  They can match easily any offer we make for Mack.  Which means we would have to make an offer that the Browns are just not willing to pay.  

 

Basically in order to get him we would have to pay him Franchise QB level money.  He's just not worth that much.  Besides there are other centers on the market that are options.  They arn't as good as Mack but they would be vast improvements over Satele.  And they won't cost nearly as much as Mack.

 

I don't think the $10 million has any bearing on what contracts other teams can offer ... teams can offer him any contract they choose  $6, $7, $8, etc   million a year ... but Cleveland gets the right to match any offer.  The $10 million number only comes into play if he doesn't sign with another team, and does not come to a long term contract with Cleveland. In that situation than Mack plays for 1 year $10 million for Cleveland.

[BOTT]

Would be shocked if the colts pursued Decker

[Patagonia Chris]

I seriously hope we don't sign Erick Decker. But if there is one thing Grigson has shown thus far it's that he's willing to overpay for marginal players, so you can't rule it out.

[Valpo2004]

I don't think the $10 million has any bearing on what contracts other teams can offer ... teams can offer him any contract they choose  $6, $7, $8, etc   million a year ... but Cleveland gets the right to match any offer.  The $10 million number only comes into play if he doesn't sign with another team, and does not come to a long term contract with Cleveland. In that situation than Mack plays for 1 year $10 million for Cleveland.

 

Ok thanks for the clarification.  However that being said the Browns can easily match any number we put out there for Mack.  

[ÅÐØNϧ 1]

I don't get the heavy opposition to Decker.  

 

Granted I hope they don't over pay for Decker either.  But underpay?  You act like he couldn't help this team at all. 

 

Outside of an aging and returning from injury Wayne and Hilton we have a good amount of potential at WR on this team but we just don't have a polished receiver.  Decker is a polished receiver and could help this team quite a bit if we get him for the right price.  

 

No I don't want him at 8 million a year.  But if we got him at like 4 million a year (I doubt that would happen) it would be great.

 

Excerpt from ESPN NFL

 

 

In two seasons playing with Peyton Manning, Decker has caught 172 passes for 2,352 yards and 24 touchdowns.

Decker has flourished playing with the best quarterback of this generation.

 

He has had consecutive 1,000-yard seasons. He has been to the Pro Bowl. He has caught double-digit touchdowns in consecutive seasons.

 

Decker is a nice receiver and a solid No. 2. He is not the physical freak that his teammate Demaryius Thomas is. He doesn't excel at gaining separation from defenders and he has a tendency to drop passes.

 

The last image of Decker was from the Super Bowl, and general managers across the league took note. Decker caught just one pass against Seattle's stifling defense. He was so ineffective in the first half that Denver's coaches moved him to Richard Sherman's side of the field in the second.

 

They weren't going to have Manning throw at Sherman, so they essentially stashed Decker on Sherman's side as nothing more than a not-so-subtle decoy.

 

While the Broncos likely aren't willing to franchise Decker, much less give him a comparable contract to the two-year, $12 million deal they gave Wes Welker last year, some team will be wiling to pay Decker. And when that happens, the 26-year-old will have to become something he has never been: A true No. 1 receiver capable of putting up 100 yards receiving every time he steps onto the field.

[esmort]

Ok thanks for the clarification.  However that being said the Browns can easily match any number we put out there for Mack.  

 

That's true, but just because they can don't mean they will be willing to.  Also if Mack does not want to go back to Cleveland we can make parts of the contract very hard for Cleveland to match, even without the poison pill option anymore.

[Valpo2004]

That's true, but just because they can don't mean they will be willing to.  Also if Mack does not want to go back to Cleveland we can make parts of the contract very hard for Cleveland to match, even without the poison pill option anymore.

 

Ehh I think if they are willing to pay him 10 million on the tag they would be willing to match any realistic offer.

 

What things could we do (without a poison pill) that would make it hard for Cleveland to match? 

[Valpo2004]

Excerpt from ESPN NFL

 

 

In two seasons playing with Peyton Manning, Decker has caught 172 passes for 2,352 yards and 24 touchdowns.

Decker has flourished playing with the best quarterback of this generation.

 

He has had consecutive 1,000-yard seasons. He has been to the Pro Bowl. He has caught double-digit touchdowns in consecutive seasons.

 

Decker is a nice receiver and a solid No. 2. He is not the physical freak that his teammate Demaryius Thomas is. He doesn't excel at gaining separation from defenders and he has a tendency to drop passes.

 

The last image of Decker was from the Super Bowl, and general managers across the league took note. Decker caught just one pass against Seattle's stifling defense. He was so ineffective in the first half that Denver's coaches moved him to Richard Sherman's side of the field in the second.

 

They weren't going to have Manning throw at Sherman, so they essentially stashed Decker on Sherman's side as nothing more than a not-so-subtle decoy.

 

While the Broncos likely aren't willing to franchise Decker, much less give him a comparable contract to the two-year, $12 million deal they gave Wes Welker last year, some team will be wiling to pay Decker. And when that happens, the 26-year-old will have to become something he has never been: A true No. 1 receiver capable of putting up 100 yards receiving every time he steps onto the field.

 

I'd say he's worth the 6 million a year they gave Welker that's just me.  Actually i think that's about the right price for him even as a #2.  

 

I would say he ranges between a good #2 and a poor #1.  

 

The whole thing about him putting up 100 yards every time he steps on the field.  Only elite receivers can do that.  

 

In fact D Thomas - the guy that the Broncos consider their #1 only did that in 6 out of 16 regular season games he played in.  Eric Decker did it in 5 games.

 

So a #1 doesn't have to put up a hundred yards every game.  But he has to be productive when facing the team's #1 CB and it remains to be seen if Decker can do that.  

[esmort]

Ehh I think if they are willing to pay him 10 million on the tag they would be willing to match any realistic offer.

 

What things could we do (without a poison pill) that would make it hard for Cleveland to match? 

 

I don't think they want to pay the $10 million, they are hoping to match a lower contract or work out a long term contract.

 

Without really researching it I would say a loop hole would be something like this:

 

The Colts putting a guarantee in the contract that Mack would be their highest paid OL and if at any point in time another OL player is making more the Colts would increase Macks salary as to become the highest paid OL.

 

Technically this appears to pass the "no poison pill rule" ... Cleveland has Joe Thomas' contract which would make it very hard for them to match the terms of the Colts contract.

 

I am sure there are much more technical or devious examples that a good contract attorney could come up with.  You just cant be blatant like the Hutchinson deal.

[Iancolts]

Can we afford Monroe, Saffold, and Puente?

[Valpo2004]

I don't think they want to pay the $10 million, they are hoping to match a lower contract or work out a long term contract.

 

Without really researching it I would say a loop hole would be something like this:

 

The Colts putting a guarantee in the contract that Mack would be their highest paid OL and if at any point in time another OL player is making more the Colts would increase Macks salary as to become the highest paid OL.

 

Technically this appears to pass the "no poison pill rule" ... Cleveland has Joe Thomas' contract which would make it very hard for them to match the terms of the Colts contract.

 

I am sure there are much more technical or devious examples that a good contract attorney could come up with.  You just cant be blatant like the Hutchinson deal.

 

I'm guessing that the NFL would nix the idea.  And I wouldn't blame them.  It's still a poison pill even if it works around the current rules.  

[esmort]

I'm guessing that the NFL would nix the idea.  And I wouldn't blame them.  It's still a poison pill even if it works around the current rules.  

 

There are all kinds of laws and rules that are technically one thing, but are not prohibited because they don't meet the official definition.  There are new PEDs that come out all the time that are not technically against the rules... until the NFL adds them to the rules; it did not make them not PEDs when they were taken legally before the NFL added them. They may not like it, but as long as it follows the rule I don't know they can deny it.  And Like I said someone good at coming up with contracts could probably make it look and sound much more legit, with the same end effect for Cleveland.

[Superman]

I don't think they want to pay the $10 million, they are hoping to match a lower contract or work out a long term contract.

 

Without really researching it I would say a loop hole would be something like this:

 

The Colts putting a guarantee in the contract that Mack would be their highest paid OL and if at any point in time another OL player is making more the Colts would increase Macks salary as to become the highest paid OL.

 

Technically this appears to pass the "no poison pill rule" ... Cleveland has Joe Thomas' contract which would make it very hard for them to match the terms of the Colts contract.

 

I am sure there are much more technical or devious examples that a good contract attorney could come up with.  You just cant be blatant like the Hutchinson deal.

 

I don't think that kind of stipulation is allowed in any contract.

 

And I believe the poison pill clauses were altogether nixed, with the NFL Management Council having the authority to make final decisions before contracts are approved.

 

What you can do is frontload a contract to a transition player. If the team with the matching rights is short on cap space, you can load the contract up with Year 1 salary so that it's prohibitive for them to match. That probably wouldn't work with Mack, since the Browns have as much cap space as anyone else.

[esmort]

I don't think that kind of stipulation is allowed in any contract.

 

And I believe the poison pill clauses were altogether nixed, with the NFL Management Council having the authority to make final decisions before contracts are approved.

 

What you can do is frontload a contract to a transition player. If the team with the matching rights is short on cap space, you can load the contract up with Year 1 salary so that it's prohibitive for them to match. That probably wouldn't work with Mack, since the Browns have as much cap space as anyone else.

 

That was just off the top of my head ... the new rule does is not in depth and its vagueness leaves creative loop holes ... it mainly plugs the obvious ones: "if a player plays more than 2 games in Cleveland he gets $50 mil bonus" etc ....

 

I have not read word for word any nfl players contract, but I will almost guarantee that there are clauses, bonuses, etc ... that are commonly used that could be mixed and matched to produce a contract favorable to Indy and much less favorable to Cleveland yet avoids actually being a "poison pill" .... accounting, and legal documents can always be creatively crafted without officially breaking any laws/rules.