Jump to content
Indianapolis Colts
Conversations are moderated for civility. We ask that you please stay on topic. For more info, see our Community Guidelines ×
Indianapolis Colts Fan Forum

Report: Colts in talks for Alex Mack (mega-merge)

vitoaf27

By vitoaf27
in Colts Football

 Share

Recommended Posts

Superman Ring of Honor

Superman

Posted
Posted

I've said this before but worth repeating... the only way we sign him is to give Cleveland something in the 2015 draft. Or we would have to sign him to a contract that far exceeds his worth and that makes no sense. Don't know about the highest bidder thing. Lets say a team gave him a deal that averaged 8.5 mill with 20 mill guaranteed. Cleveland and the rest of the league could have him valued at 7 mill per. It would be pretty dangerous for them just to match a bad contract and hope to get anything close to the risk they might feel they were taking. 

 

Problem is Cleveland's interior line is bad and they probably will have a rookie QB. So they too have a big need for a solid C and they have cap money to match anything they feel like matching.

 

I mean the highest bidding trade partner, to Cleveland's advantage. And I don't think it would be us, since we don't have a first rounder this year.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
  • Replies 960
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Posted Images

AgentOrange Walk On

AgentOrange

Posted
Posted

Personal opinion.  I wouldn't compare getting paid million of dollars to play a game to slavery in any shape or form. 

I don't think anyone would, I simply quoted the word the previous poster used. I'm sure he meant something more along the lines of "it's unfair to the player" or whatever.

 

I've said this before but worth repeating... the only way we sign him is to give Cleveland something in the 2015 draft. Or we would have to sign him to a contract that far exceeds his worth and that makes no sense. Don't know about the highest bidder thing. Lets say a team gave him a deal that averaged 8.5 mill with 20 mill guaranteed. Cleveland and the rest of the league could have him valued at 7 mill per. It would be pretty dangerous for them just to match a bad contract and hope to get anything close to the risk they might feel they were taking. 

 

Problem is Cleveland's interior line is bad and they probably will have a rookie QB. So they too have a big need for a solid C and they have cap money to match anything they feel like matching.

I think the Browns would match the contract you suggest without much hesitation, depending on the number of years.

As an aside, Cleveland isn't like to start an QB they draft. Hoyer will most likely resume that role for this season at least.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
dw49 Team Captain

dw49

Posted
Posted

I don't think anyone would, I simply quoted the word the previous poster used. I'm sure he meant something more along the lines of "it's unfair to the player" or whatever.

 

I think the Browns would match the contract you suggest without much hesitation, depending on the number of years.

As an aside, Cleveland isn't like to start an QB they draft. Hoyer will most likely resume that role for this season at least.

 

 

Maybe and could be. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Superman Ring of Honor

Superman

Posted
Posted

But he's a WR and Mack is a C think it would be a little different

 

It's definitely different, and I think Seattle overpaid anyways. But I don't doubt that there's a team that would give Cleveland a first rounder for Mack. And even if we're probably talking about a second, us not having a first makes it even harder for us to entertain giving up a second. And it's a late second. So if it came to that, I'm pretty sure we'd be outbid.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
dw49 Team Captain

dw49

Posted
Posted

It's definitely different, and I think Seattle overpaid anyways. But I don't doubt that there's a team that would give Cleveland a first rounder for Mack. And even if we're probably talking about a second, us not having a first makes it even harder for us to entertain giving up a second. And it's a late second. So if it came to that, I'm pretty sure we'd be outbid.

 

 

Cleveland is loaded with picks in this draft. So it's possible they could agree to something from next year's draft.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Superman Ring of Honor

Superman

Posted
Posted

Cleveland is loaded with picks in this draft. So it's possible they could agree to something from next year's draft.

 

If they had a choice between picks this year or picks next year, I can't imagine that they wouldn't take the picks this year. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
dw49 Team Captain

dw49

Posted
Posted

If they had a choice between picks this year or picks next year, I can't imagine that they wouldn't take the picks this year. 

 

 

Yep , that's true but I think what everyone might be missing is that teams are not going to be lined up to make Mack the highest paid center in the league and give Cleveland draft picks to boot. Fact of the matter is that probably Cleveland and Indy have the biggest need for him. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Superman Ring of Honor

Superman

Posted
Posted

Yep , that's true but I think what everyone might be missing is that teams are not going to be lined up to make Mack the highest paid center in the league and give Cleveland draft picks to boot. Fact of the matter is that probably Cleveland and Indy have the biggest need for him. 

 

True.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
mintor Walk On

mintor

Posted
Posted

I've said this before but worth repeating... the only way we sign him is to give Cleveland something in the 2015 draft. Or we would have to sign him to a contract that far exceeds his worth and that makes no sense. Don't know about the highest bidder thing. Lets say a team gave him a deal that averaged 8.5 mill with 20 mill guaranteed. Cleveland and the rest of the league could have him valued at 7 mill per. It would be pretty dangerous for them just to match a bad contract and hope to get anything close to the risk they might feel they were taking. 

 

Problem is Cleveland's interior line is bad and they probably will have a rookie QB. So they too have a big need for a solid C and they have cap money to match anything they feel like matching.

 

 

tag  get automatic 10 m colts go higher , if done franchise tag he got 11.3 m  .

Link to comment
Share on other sites
MrNLM Walk On

MrNLM

Posted
Posted

I would like for someone to clarify what I am thing about right now...

 

With the addition of Nicks we are down to what, about 16 million?

 

If that is the case, I don't see us being able to simply just sign Mack to an offer sheet to get him on the team AND have the money we need to handle the draft/season pickups.

 

Correct me if I am wrong but, the way it looks right now... I have to believe that the easiest path to travel if we REALLY want Mack is to sign and trade. I don't see us trading any players in a deal or at least nothing obvious.

 

So, are we prepared to come to grips with the scenario of giving Cleveland our 2nd rounder this year and maybe a conditional pick in 2015? I am.

 

This team appears ALMOST ready to win now... so why not use our picks in a way that is more advantageous to that train of thought? At this point in time a rookie is less likely to come in and make a big enough difference to really matter this season... maybe even next season as well.

 

You know what I am trying to say so don't blow it out of proportion... the right vet is going to trump ANY rookie the way things are shaping up already this season. If it were any other Center besides Mack I would laugh myself out of here but, WE ARE TALKING ABOUT ALEX MACK BEING A FREAKING COLT! Send the picks and then Grigson can negotiate a tolerable contract that leaves all the room we need for what picks we have left plus mid-season pickups.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Dustin Walk On

Dustin

Posted
Posted

I would like for someone to clarify what I am thing about right now...

With the addition of Nicks we are down to what, about 16 million?

If that is the case, I don't see us being able to simply just sign Mack to an offer sheet to get him on the team AND have the money we need to handle the draft/season pickups.

Correct me if I am wrong but, the way it looks right now... I have to believe that the easiest path to travel if we REALLY want Mack is to sign and trade. I don't see us trading any players in a deal or at least nothing obvious.

So, are we prepared to come to grips with the scenario of giving Cleveland our 2nd rounder this year and maybe a conditional pick in 2015? I am.

This team appears ALMOST ready to win now... so why not use our picks in a way that is more advantageous to that train of thought? At this point in time a rookie is less likely to come in and make a big enough difference to really matter this season... maybe even next season as well.

You know what I am trying to say so don't blow it out of proportion... the right vet is going to trump ANY rookie the way things are shaping up already this season. If it were any other Center besides Mack I would laugh myself out of here but, WE ARE TALKING ABOUT ALEX MACK BEING A FREAKING COLT! Send

the picks and then Grigson can negotiate a tolerable contract that leaves all the room we need for what picks we have left plus mid-season pickups.

The draft only costs like $1.5M and we could probably go into the season with around ~$5M. We can still sign Mack if we wanted to.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Legend of Luck Practice Squad

Legend of Luck

Posted
Posted

I would like for someone to clarify what I am thing about right now...

 

With the addition of Nicks we are down to what, about 16 million?

 

If that is the case, I don't see us being able to simply just sign Mack to an offer sheet to get him on the team AND have the money we need to handle the draft/season pickups.

 

Correct me if I am wrong but, the way it looks right now... I have to believe that the easiest path to travel if we REALLY want Mack is to sign and trade. I don't see us trading any players in a deal or at least nothing obvious.

 

So, are we prepared to come to grips with the scenario of giving Cleveland our 2nd rounder this year and maybe a conditional pick in 2015? I am.

 

This team appears ALMOST ready to win now... so why not use our picks in a way that is more advantageous to that train of thought? At this point in time a rookie is less likely to come in and make a big enough difference to really matter this season... maybe even next season as well.

 

You know what I am trying to say so don't blow it out of proportion... the right vet is going to trump ANY rookie the way things are shaping up already this season. If it were any other Center besides Mack I would laugh myself out of here but, WE ARE TALKING ABOUT ALEX MACK BEING A FREAKING COLT! Send the picks and then Grigson can negotiate a tolerable contract that leaves all the room we need for what picks we have left plus mid-season pickups.  

 

Keep in mind, we dont have a first round pick. Takes a lot of the need for cap space away.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
MrNLM Walk On

MrNLM

Posted
Posted

The draft only costs like $1.5M and we could probably go into the season with around ~$5M. We can still sign Mack if we wanted to.

Well, if bringing Mack in means risking a bit of insecurity on mid season pickups... i still say we need to bring him in or at least try.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
loudnproudcolt Walk On

loudnproudcolt

Posted
Posted

On the subject of cap, don't know exactly where we are at because I don't know the structure of Davis, Nicks, and Costa. I am guessing though we will be in the neighborhood of still having 15M. We had 27M right before Davis signing and that counted all our own signings and Jones. So if they frontload Davis, it could be more, if they don't frontload him, we could have more cap space.

 

Our draft picks will only cost in the neighborhood of 700K towards the cap since we don't have a number 1, which is almost insignificant. If we wanted to make Mack an offer, we could structure Davis where it is not front loaded and have more cap, so cap is not an issue is we offer him a contract in the neighborhood of 10M. Worst case scenario, we have 6-7M left for resignings and emergencies, and that is if we frontload Davis. So I say, go for it. Give a 2nd and get him!

Link to comment
Share on other sites
backshoulderfade Walk On

backshoulderfade

Posted
Posted

On the subject of cap, don't know exactly where we are at because I don't know the structure of Davis, Nicks, and Costa. I am guessing though we will be in the neighborhood of still having 15M. We had 27M right before Davis signing and that counted all our own signings and Jones. So if they frontload Davis, it could be more, if they don't frontload him, we could have more cap space.

Our draft picks will only cost in the neighborhood of 700K towards the cap since we don't have a number 1, which is almost insignificant. If we wanted to make Mack an offer, we could structure Davis where it is not front loaded and have more cap, so cap is not an issue is we offer him a contract in the neighborhood of 10M. Worst case scenario, we have 6-7M left for resignings and emergencies, and that is if we frontload Davis. So I say, go for it. Give a 2nd and get him!

Davis' 2014 cap hit is around 6.5 mil.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
ColtsBlueFL Team Captain

ColtsBlueFL

Posted
Posted

Yeh, Cleveland have 5 days to match any offer sheet he signs. Nothing to do with days after the start of FA.

 

18 pages.............can we just sign this guy already!?!? 

 

Then we can make a 40 page celebration thread! :)

 

LOL, yes, that's what everybody here is hoping for.  However, It's just not that easy. Browns have a new regime, and they value Mack.  That is why the transition tag.  It gives the Browns the opportunity  to keep Mack, yet it still allows Mack to test the open market (to a degree) and set his worth.  I've been pondering this, and If Cleveland wanted someone to bid high and give a large contract, they would have went to the non-exclusive franchise tag.  That way, they receive two #1 draft picks as compensation for not matching on offer sheet.  The transition tag offers no compensation, and only saves a million or so on the tagged salary.   So rather than just let a team (IE: Colts) just make an offer and let him walk without receiving anything in return, they will make every effort to match that and get him on board longer term; knowing the market set the terms.

 

Because of the verbiage in the new CBA, the contract offer has to have some parity to it.  Thus, no poison pill clauses, etc.  However, that doesn't mean the players agent can't construct a contract that would pass the NFL's "may not contain a Principal Term that would create rights or obligations for the Old Club that differ in any way from the rights or obligations that such Principal Term would create for the Club extending the Offer" , yet still be advantageous to the Colts.

 

Contrary to what many here think about the Browns, they are just a very decent QB away from being a force.  No doubt they will acquire one early on and would need Mack to help him develop.  And it's possible that any offer that the Browns would decline to match might be too high for Grigson to agree to, and anything less not enough to keep the Browns from matching and keeping Mack for a few more years.

 

We all will just have to wait and see how it all plays out in time.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Legend of Luck Practice Squad

Legend of Luck

Posted
Posted

LOL, yes, that's what everybody here is hoping for.  However, It's just not that easy. Browns have a new regime, and they value Mack.  That is why the transition tag.  It gives the Browns the opportunity  to keep Mack, yet it still allows Mack to test the open market (to a degree) and set his worth.  I've been pondering this, and If Cleveland wanted someone to bid high and give a large contract, they would have went to the non-exclusive franchise tag.  That way, they receive two #1 draft picks as compensation for not matching on offer sheet.  The transition tag offers no compensation, and only saves a million or so on the tagged salary.   So rather than just let a team (IE: Colts) just make an offer and let him walk without receiving anything in return, they will make every effort to match that and get him on board longer term; knowing the market set the terms.

 

Because of the verbiage in the new CBA, the contract offer has to have some parity to it.  Thus, no poison pill clauses, etc.  However, that doesn't mean the players agent can't construct a contract that would pass the NFL's "may not contain a Principal Term that would create rights or obligations for the Old Club that differ in any way from the rights or obligations that such Principal Term would create for the Club extending the Offer" , yet still be advantageous to the Colts.

 

Contrary to what many here think about the Browns, they are just a very decent QB away from being a force.  No doubt they will acquire one early on and would need Mack to help him develop.  And it's possible that any offer that the Browns would decline to match might be too high for Grigson to agree to, and anything less not enough to keep the Browns from matching and keeping Mack for a few more years.

 

We all will just have to wait and see how it all plays out in time.

But if they REALLY valued him, to the point where they refuse to lose him, it would have been the franchise tag, not transition tag.

Link to comment
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
 Share
Go to topic listing

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...