Jump to content
Indianapolis Colts
Indianapolis Colts Fan Forum

TY Hilton signs new deal (Mega Merge)


Recommended Posts

Tremendous to hear. TY is worth every penny. 60% Guaranteed is huge though, kinda scary but I'll repeat myself: TY is worth every penny.

 

Now, we need to re-sign AC, then look at Fleener/Allen and then of coarse Andrew. We have to lock the young guys up no matter what, we are at the point now where the rest of our holes can/will be filled through the draft (OL/S/DL) instead of spending big in FA.

 

I'm so excited to see the core of TY/Dre/Moncrief/Dorsett/Carter work together boy does this get me excited for this season.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 420
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Uhhh seems to me we won a championship...and went to another...so yeah I don't know what your talking about. We competed at the highest level for many years during the Peyton Era.

1. I'm being facetious

2. You either didnt get 1, or intentionally trying to be annoying

3. Reread my post. I said championship"S"

Which means I am correct and you are wrong. We got 1, obviously, but that's it. Almost winning isn't winning.

It was meant to be a joke, but you went there.

Link to post
Share on other sites

 I don`t think you really follow the league so closely.

TY is the 14th ranked Fantasy WR for 2015 on one site.  http://nesn.com/2015/08/fantasy-football-rankings-2015-top-20-wide-receivers/

And he isn`t anywhere Near being a top 10 blocker. JMO. Kind of a Homer? Hmmm!

 

 

You're really going to use FANTASY rankings to determine how good a player is?!?     Really?      Seriously?

 

For a guy who takes more cheap shots at people on this website than anyone,  you say an extraordinary number of ridiculous things.....

Link to post
Share on other sites

First, you said no championships. Second, the failures of the Manning led offenses in the playoffs is well documented. Im not going to bash anyone in particular but when it comes to playoff success and failures it can and has been argued that the offense struggled as bad as the defense. Manning had a very good chance to win 2 SB's but it was not to be. Let us not forget that Manning did have the benefit of 2 of the best DE's of their era as well.

Also, this is year 4 of a total rebuild.

Exactly, I said championship"S"

Nvm I was being sarcastic.

And go look up how may fans we lost in the last couple minutes or seconds even due to defensive failure, completely out of control of manning. It's like half.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Paying a WR doesn't prevent us from having a balanced roster, or a good defense.

 

Guaranteeing contracts only guarantees that you have to pony up and in no way guarantees any performance. If you want the max performance all contracts would be incentive based only .... take it or leave it. If all the teams did the same, then you would see performance like never before! 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Paying a WR doesn't prevent us from having a balanced roster, or a good defense.

So we can afford those contacts for everyone? No? Ok then.

I know you know the percentage of cap we used on offense. Whole lot more than defense and was above league average for that time.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I don`t think you really follow the league so closely.

TY is the 14th ranked Fantasy WR for 2015 on one site. http://nesn.com/2015/08/fantasy-football-rankings-2015-top-20-wide-receivers/

And he isn`t anywhere Near being a top 10 blocker. JMO. Kind of a Homer? Hmmm!

What are you even talking about? I quote and agree with another post and you attack me? Lol... Move on
Link to post
Share on other sites

What are you even talking about? I quote and agree with another post and you attack me? Lol... Move on

 

 

BBZ is who he is.    It's what he does.  

 

He only attacks posters on days of the week that end in d-a-y.    

 

The others days, he's polite and respectful.       Oh,  wait.........            :facepalm:

Link to post
Share on other sites

This was always the plan. Make sure you maintain flexibility for re-signing your young core, and the time is now. 

 

Even the Cherilus contract, which turned out to be a mistake, isn't that big of a deal for us. Highest paid RT and all that, and he didn't live up to it. And while we're still dealing with this cap hit until 2016, it will average out to $4.125m/year for four years. :: shrug :: Not great, but it didn't really hurt us.

 

 

I agree that it really won't have any significant effect going forward. Just comparing it to the other FA deals we did that were mostly 2 year deals. Can't even fault the Colts on Cherlius as he appeared to warrant a long term deal with decent to good guarantees. Pretty hard to not have some cap hit when a guy like that busts out.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Stacked? Without TY we have an ageing AJ potentially in decline, and a bunch of

hopefulls / rookies. Stop being sensational.

It's not that I think T.Y. is a mistake to keep Hilton... Or that the others are locks to be stars... I just think we may be stacked at the position in all honesty. At least compared to other places on the roster. I just would've rather seen what Dorsett, Moncrief, and Carter could do before we threw that kind of money at one guy. We have needs on the offensive line and surely will have needs on defense to address next offseason.

Link to post
Share on other sites

It's not that I think T.Y. is a mistake to keep Hilton... Or that the others are locks to be stars... I just think we may be stacked at the position in all honesty. At least compared to other places on the roster. I just would've rather seen what Dorsett, Moncrief, and Carter could do before we threw that kind of money at one guy. We have needs on the offensive line and surely will have needs on defense to address next offseason.

Too big a gamble if you ask me. You got to keep your bonafide stars. And as Superman has already said, these youngsters are all staggered, so we can afford to keep them all. Win win for me.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Guaranteeing contracts only guarantees that you have to pony up and in no way guarantees any performance. If you want the max performance all contracts would be incentive based only .... take it or leave it. If all the teams did the same, then you would see performance like never before! 

 

No you wouldn't. You'd just see more teams move on from underperforming players, and faster.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Too big a gamble if you ask me. You got to keep your bonafide stars. And as Superman has already said, these youngsters are all staggered, so we can afford to keep them all. Win win for me.

Well we can certainly agree that T.Y. is worth keeping around, he's a quality player. I really wish we could've done it cheaper because I see A.C. and especially Luck as more important, harder to replace parts of the team who will demand big money. But hey, at least we do know we've got a good one in Hilton. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah, we could have taken Rhodes, but that wouldn't have improved our pass rush, which let's be honest, has really been the problem. They took a shot with Werner, and it made some sense. Our Dorsett pick we can't know if it was any good or not, quite yet. I know that wasnt' a very popular pick, and part of me thinks that part of the reason so many people are up in arms about it is because Belicheck took the guy a couple picks later. If we're talking sheer talent alone, I don't think anyone could really argue with taking Dorsett over Brown and Collins if we had needs at WR, DL, and S (which I would argue that we did have a need a all three. Does anyone not remember how we were talking about how we need to improve our WR corps for being blanketed all game long against NE in the playoffs and not being able to get open?).

I don't have a problem with the Colts thinking he was the better prospect "by a mile" as Grigs said (or maybe it was Pagano). Can't fault him for sticking to his ranking. Because it's just as possible that we could have gone Collins who I personally think will end up being no better or worse than Landry. Malcom might have been a good pick, but we'll see. So we picked the guy we thought was far and away in the best, we proceeded to go defense for pretty much the rest of the draft, precisely because there is talent at every round. We'll see how the picks pan out, but I don't think that anyone can look at our 2015 draft class and say with absolute certainty that we've made more bad decisions that good ones.

I like Dorsett, just didn't like the pick. But now the WR corps will be uncoverable. If we can't keep pace with :flyingelvis: this year idk what to do anymore

I still would've taken Rhodes. Him and Vonate would've been solid together. Pass rush guys are all throughout the draft. CB's not so much. But regardless Grigson has done a very solid job building this team from that 2-14 demoralizing experience. Really thankful to have him here. He's made some great moves but some haven't worked out due to the likes of

Laziness (Trent)

Bone heads (Da'Rick Purifoy Boyett)

Etc Etc

Link to post
Share on other sites

I disagree with the bolded. 

 

Moncrief is a free agent in 2018, and can be tagged. Dorsett's four year contract runs through 2018, then the Colts have an option for 2019, so he's not really a free agent until 2020. That's the last year of Hilton's new deal, and by then, obviously, his guaranteed money is done. Moncrief's potential deal comes two years sooner (and Hilton's guaranteed money is likely done, or close to done by then). 

 

Long and short, these three guys are staggered. Hilton's new money will really kick in in 2016; Moncrief's new contract will be in 2018; Dorsett isn't even a concern until 2019 or 2020. In the meantime, Andre will be gone, one or both of the TEs will be gone, etc., etc. And the cap is going to go through the roof by 2020, close to $200m. 

 

Maybe the Colts will decide they don't want to have $40m/year plus tied up in three wide receivers, which is fine. But I don't think Hilton's deal or Dorsett's potential deal in anyway squeezes out Moncrief.

I think we are probably talking about a difference in degree of probability.  Signing Hilton with Dorsett waiting in the wings (on the assumption that Dorsett becomes a core player) lessens the probability that the Colts will offer Moncrief anything that approaches market value (also assuming that Moncrief ascends to merit a big money long term deal) - by how much is a degree of separation, but it classifies as unlikely to me as of today.  

 

The beauty of having options is that solutions develop.  Things can and will change, and having 3 years of stagger with Moncrief is indeed a great option.  Moncrief could absolutely make himself indispensable over the next 3 year - and I very much hope he does. However, on the hopes that we are developing difference-makers worthy of core retention on the defense and O-line, it feels very unlikely to me that Moncrief will be "core" with 3 other receiving targets locked up long term (Hilton, Dorsett, and at least one of Fleener or Allen).  Moncrief at that point becomes Pierre Garcon.  Good player from a great system and QB who will be worth more to someone else than he is to us. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

So we can afford those contacts for everyone? No? Ok then.

I know you know the percentage of cap we used on offense. Whole lot more than defense and was above league average for that time.

 

What does that have to do with this team? The only thing that's the same is the uniform.

 

As of right now, even with Hilton's new deal, we spend more money on defense than on offense. Last year, it was probably 2:1. How'd that work out? Hilton is, so far, the only player Grigson has drafted and re-signed. There's no imbalance, aside from the fact that our best young players who are eligible for new deals are mostly offensive players. We kept Vontae, which was a great move. Roster mechanics are what they are, but you don't just let your best players walk because they aren't on your preferred side of the line of scrimmage.

 

As for your first line, why would it be necessary for us to give this kind of contract to every player? What does that have to do with anything? Nothing, right?

Link to post
Share on other sites

I think we are probably talking about a difference in degree of probability.  Signing Hilton with Dorsett waiting in the wings (on the assumption that Dorsett becomes a core player) lessens the probability that the Colts will offer Moncrief anything that approaches market value (also assuming that Moncrief ascends to merit a big money long term deal) - by how much is a degree of separation, but it classifies as unlikely to me as of today.  

 

The beauty of having options is that solutions develop.  Things can and will change, and having 3 years of stagger with Moncrief is indeed a great option.  Moncrief could absolutely make himself indispensable over the next 3 year - and I very much hope he does. However, on the hopes that we are developing difference-makers worthy of core retention on the defense and O-line, it feels very unlikely to me that Moncrief will be "core" with 3 other receiving targets locked up long term (Hilton, Dorsett, and at least one of Fleener or Allen).  Moncrief at that point becomes Pierre Garcon.  Good player from a great system and QB who will be worth more to someone else than he is to us. 

 

Like you said, solutions develop. If Moncrief is more Pierre Garcon than AJ Green (which is what his physical profile suggests he can become), then he can easily be allowed to walk in free agency. I'll take the third round compensatory pick and be fine with Hilton and Dorsett.

 

But I think we're assuming that Moncrief is worthy of being retained. In that event, you keep him, and let everything else work itself out. Personally, I think Moncrief can be better than Hilton and Dorsett, again, given his physical profile. But either of those two guys have Antonio Brown-like potential themselves, so let's wait and see. 

 

All I'm saying is that the numbers don't preclude us keeping Moncrief if he's worthy of being kept. And like you say, that's a matter for another day.

Link to post
Share on other sites

What does that have to do with this team? The only thing that's the same is the uniform.

As of right now, even with Hilton's new deal, we spend more money on defense than on offense. Last year, it was probably 2:1. How'd that work out? Hilton is, so far, the only player Grigson has drafted and re-signed. There's no imbalance, aside from the fact that our best young players who are eligible for new deals are mostly offensive players. We kept Vontae, which was a great move. Roster mechanics are what they are, but you don't just let your best players walk because they aren't on your preferred side of the line of scrimmage.

As for your first line, why would it be necessary for us to give this kind of contract to every player? What does that have to do with anything? Nothing, right?

My original comment you quoted was my comment to how someone was saying we are doing the same thing as the Peyton era. That's how it relates. We are not in Peyton Era status right now, but they are predicting we were heading that way...thus great offense and no defense.

It was a comment to the future, not the current status.

Link to post
Share on other sites

My original comment you quoted was my comment to how someone was saying we are doing the same thing as the Peyton era. That's how it relates. We are not in Peyton Era status right now, but they are predicting we were heading that way...thus great offense and no defense.

It was a comment to the future, not the current status.

 

And that thinking isn't based in reality. That we kept our best WR doesn't mean that we'll have a great offense and no defense. It's pretty much unrelated, as a matter of fact. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

It's not that I think T.Y. is a mistake to keep Hilton... Or that the others are locks to be stars... I just think we may be stacked at the position in all honesty. At least compared to other places on the roster. I just would've rather seen what Dorsett, Moncrief, and Carter could do before we threw that kind of money at one guy. We have needs on the offensive line and surely will have needs on defense to address next offseason.

Fans thought we were stacked at WR in 2013 and 2014. How well did that work out?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Why Valps? Because you know Brown and Collins are going to be pro-bowlers, and Dorsett a dud? Maybe, just maybe, it goes the other way.

 

Because as I've said before he's going to have a hard time getting playing time on offense.

Link to post
Share on other sites

And that thinking isn't based in reality. That we kept our best WR doesn't mean that we'll have a great offense and no defense. It's pretty much unrelated, as a matter of fact.

That may be, however they made the comparison statement about the Peyton era and that's what my comment was concerning. They were predicting that we would continue to pay tons to offensive weapons. Like our next WR, TE, line, etc. Like we did in the Peyton era.

Link to post
Share on other sites

No you wouldn't. You'd just see more teams move on from underperforming players, and faster.

 

So are you saying that is a bad thing? It's certainly a what have you done for me lately kind of world. paying for future performance is just a crap shoot and does not make sense unless you are stuck and only have one player with two legs left. I just don't see our receiver situation being that. How much more is TY worth than any of the $435,000 per year guys? $10M?. Common, there is no way to justify that. That is just a bad business decision and sets a bad precedent for future deals, not to mention bad feelings. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

 He really doesn`t drop a lot of balls. We have had a QB problem. Off target balls that get there late. Andrew is SLOWLY improving.

 This should be a good year for him to work on those type passes, particularly with Andre. lol

 Manning made a big jump in his accuracy/timing in year 6.

 

 TY made a nice deal for himself, he is set for life. He could have gotten more somewhere else.

 But here, playing with Andrew, he can become Internationally famous. Good luck and health TY.

 

Congratulations!    In his three years with the team, I believe you're the first poster here to actually write those words....

 

"We have had a QB problem."

 

I'm not sure what ails you,  but I certainly hope it's not contagious.........         :facepalm:

Link to post
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
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.


  • Thread of the Week

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • Ok, I'll say it.  If your Wisconsin CB has to run after a WR, would it be a Wildgoose chase?
    • Very true.  Even day two.  After Pitts the drop off is significant.  There will be FAs with experience that would be just as good or better.  
    • I disagree with this. I believe Ballard didn't want to pay up for an EDGE rusher. He admitted he wanted Autry back, and he went to the Titans instead. That was plan A. Afterward, he signed Rochell and re-signed Muhammed to somewhat stabilize the D-Line. He is now having to decide whether to re-sign Houston, or draft an EDGE in the first two rounds.    We are being forced to see what we have in Banogu, Turay, and Lewis. They are all 2nd round picks and it's sink or swim for them. They definitely aren't better options than Autry and Houston. I would say the same about the top EDGE rushers in FA this year. Cheaper? Yes. Better? No. Right now, we don't have an EDGE rusher that we can depend on. Maybe that changes, but EDGE is our biggest weakness on the team, bar none. At least with LT, it can be masked with Q and the rest of the O-Line along with some solid depth we signed. We are literally masking the entire EDGE spot with Buckner right now, and we're fully dependant on signing Houston back, or drafting an EDGE rusher that makes an immediate impact without knowing yet if Banogu, Turay, or Lewis improves.   Unfortunately, losing Autry hurt pretty badly. That will be hard to make up without some luck.
    • Tremble has been one of my early favorites   I saw one of the commentators mention the other day, that Tremble has had issues with drops   The little games I have watched, they didnt throw much to him...... is this an issue?    
    • You may end up being right, but lets be honest, these 4 are not playmakers, they are just familiar names to us on a roster.   We need some pass rush to get this defensive scheme to work. None of these 4 have proven that they can bring this on a consistent basis   When the offensive line was weak, we drafted both Q and Smith in the same year   I hope they take the same tact this year. 1 early, and 1 mid rounds that can develop.   Also, 3 of these 4 are free agents next year. We will have some churn next year.   We had better load up at an important position, IMHO              
  • Members

×
×
  • Create New...