Colts Players Who Might Get The Axe

[husker61]

Sometimes I wonder if people play too much Madden

You cannot restructure Freeney's contract if this is the final year of his contract. There is no place to move that money unless we extend his contract therefore making the cap hit flexible.

We either want Garcon or we don't. You cannot tag him (top 5 wr money) and then trade him, that would be Wayne-esque money and every coach in the league knows what Garcon brings : extremely inconsistent explosiveness

I don't think you can cut every one of the guys you are all listing yet re-sign older guys like Wayne, Mathis, Saturday and Diem. You cannot trade players the way they do in the NBA or in MLB. The management must decide if we are playing for now or should free up cap space to build a younger team.

right on the money!!

a lot of the players people want to cut wouldn't really save much cap space because of their signing bonuses. the only problem i have had with polian has been his over valuing of colt players with inflated contracts. now the colts are stuck with them.

[jwilli69]

We can tag him and trade him.

Sure but that just doesn't happen in the NFL. Garcon is not worth the top 5 wr in the league and would be insane to do it. Maybe I have a short memory but can you name the last three sign the tag players and trade? I recall Matt Cassell, picked up by a prior GM of the Pats who needed a young QB but don't really recall anyone else. I thinnk it is more rare too occur than to think it will occur. But heck, I would trade him for 2 first rounders, sure.

[GoGoColts]

Doesn't matter that he might be 5th or 6th, hes as important to the offense as those other TEs are to there teams, possibly more. He's Peyton's security blankey. I doubt Irsay views Clark's contract as a bad contract, I doubt that most would view it as bad.

Sorry, but this is just bad cap management.

[jgstriker]

Sure, in theory you could tag Garcon and the HOPE that a team would trade for him... But how often does ANYONE get traded in this league? Some team would have to be willing to trade for Garcon (knowing that he probably has little trade value to the Colts because he would be SUCH a liability to our team due to his enormous salary). The would have to hope that he would negotiate a longer contract and not just sit on his one year humongous salary, which would probably be similar to what he would earn in a three or four year deal right up front. This isn't like trading for a supposed franchise QB like Cassel. This is trading for a WR who AT best is a second wr on a team with a good qb.

Garcon is, at best, a luxury player, not someone you could build a passng offense around.

[Warhorse]

Sometimes I wonder if people play too much Madden

You cannot restructure Freeney's contract if this is the final year of his contract. There is no place to move that money unless we extend his contract therefore making the cap hit flexible.

We either want Garcon or we don't. You cannot tag him (top 5 wr money) and then trade him, that would be Wayne-esque money and every coach in the league knows what Garcon brings : extremely inconsistent explosiveness

I don't think you can cut every one of the guys you are all listing yet re-sign older guys like Wayne, Mathis, Saturday and Diem. You cannot trade players the way they do in the NBA or in MLB. The management must decide if we are playing for now or should free up cap space to build a younger team.

This. One guy who is needed both as a familiar face for Manning, or an outlet for a young QB, is Clark. He must restructure. Will he? I think so. But he is not worth the cap space he will eat up this season. Funny thing is, there are players that fans scream to cut, yet the owner or GM is asking them if they want to continue. The NFL is an elite club of individuals who can both perform, and stay healthy enough to remain. Just ask our new GM how hard that is. Fans complain about levels of talent and use descriptions like, "he sucks", when in reality, that player is in the top .05% of players at his position in the world. It is arguable that the guy who is cut from the CFL. or any other lower league might suck, but that is not entirely accurate because he too is still an elite athlete compared to the total.

Thousands upon thousands of players fail and disappear into obscurity in this sport with the dream of one day playing in the NFL. Saturday, Mathis, Wayne, Clark, Addai, Mathis, Freeney, Bullit, and Brackett may be needing to change their financial expectations, or perhaps retire or be traded. but they are still top notch NFL athletes. I appreciate it when fans regard them with the respect they have earned, not when they are regarded as obstacles to a fans enjoyment. How many of these players brought embarrassment to the franchise? Arrested? Charged with assault? Rape? Did they do their all to compete each and every Sunday? Just sayin......

[Superman]

right on the money!!

a lot of the players people want to cut wouldn't really save much cap space because of their signing bonuses. the only problem i have had with polian has been his over valuing of colt players with inflated contracts. now the colts are stuck with them.

But on the flip side, when a player walks in free agency, the Colts are being cheap. GMs can't win.

[Superman]

Sure but that just doesn't happen in the NFL. Garcon is not worth the top 5 wr in the league and would be insane to do it. Maybe I have a short memory but can you name the last three sign the tag players and trade? I recall Matt Cassell, picked up by a prior GM of the Pats who needed a young QB but don't really recall anyone else. I thinnk it is more rare too occur than to think it will occur. But heck, I would trade him for 2 first rounders, sure.

He doesn't have to be worth top 5 money. The tag for a receiver this year is $9.4 million, guaranteed (less than it's been the last two years, by the way). So if you tag a receiver, you can still reach a long-term deal with him. For practical reasons, the deal would probably have to included at least $9.4 million in guaranteed money for you to have any kind of leverage, otherwise the player can just take his one year tag value and (hopefully) hit free agency the next year.

So you can tag Garcon, and then throw him four years, $25 million, $10 million guaranteed. Or you can allow his agent to negotiate with a handful of teams who are interested, and then trade him to whatever team is going to pay him.

It's not a common occurence, but it's not like it's never happened. And it doesn't require two first rounders. That's the top tender for a restricted free agent (unless you negotiate something different with the tagging team). Has nothing to do with trading a franchise tagged player. If we did this kind of trade and got a 3rd in 2012 and a 4th in 2013 or something like that, I'd be fine with it. Garcon is a 6th rounder. Probably worth a 3rd rounder.

Other option is we just let him walk and hope we get a compensatory pick in the 2013 draft. How is that better than talking to other teams about working out a tag and trade for him? We have a month and a half before we'd have to tag him, and we have a couple three months after that to get him moved before training camps open. This isn't a radical idea.

[Thewholefnshow28]

Sometimes I wonder if people play too much Madden

You cannot restructure Freeney's contract if this is the final year of his contract. There is no place to move that money unless we extend his contract therefore making the cap hit flexible.

We either want Garcon or we don't. You cannot tag him (top 5 wr money) and then trade him, that would be Wayne-esque money and every coach in the league knows what Garcon brings : extremely inconsistent explosiveness

I don't think you can cut every one of the guys you are all listing yet re-sign older guys like Wayne, Mathis, Saturday and Diem. You cannot trade players the way they do in the NBA or in MLB. The management

I am glad I am not the only one who sees that. We have no place to push the money to since next season will be his final year of the contract. Like you said you either extend his contract and push money back, cut him, or play out this season with a 19 million cap hit.

What is going to really hurt cap wise is Brackett. The guy is due 5 million next season and is due 12 million the two seasons after that. Yet we have a younger and more promising player behind him.

Clark is due 16 million over the next two seasons, but you might be able push money back for next season, but you are still going to have to pay that money in 2013.

This offseason is going to be a rough one.

[Superman]

I am glad I am not the only one who sees that. We have no place to push the money to since next season will be his final year of the contract. Like you said you either extend his contract and push money back, cut him, or play out this season with a 19 million cap hit.

What is going to really hurt cap wise is Brackett. The guy is due 5 million next season and is due 12 million the two seasons after that. Yet we have a younger and more promising player behind him.

Clark is due 16 million over the next two seasons, but you might be able push money back for next season, but you are still going to have to pay that money in 2013.

This offseason is going to be a rough one.

When we signed Brackett's last deal, the structure seemed to indicate that it would be under intense scrutiny by the front office starting this offseason. Can't imagine, with the injuries he's had the past two years, and with Angerer being such a suitable replacement, that he'll still be a Colt next season.

And I also think Clark's contract will be addressed, especially with his injuries over the last two years and Tamme's production in his stead.

[Pancake Block]

restructure freeney allowing us to sign him and mathis with the savings from freeney.. can never have enough pass rushers

move on from clark tamme is just as good but cost 8m less per year

cut brackett due to much $$$ not productive for his price and his back up is better than him

cut collins if he dont retire

decide on saturday paid alot , might be time to move on

cut deim, painter ,gonzo all gone

decide on bullitt and addai ... brown can carry the load with carter, and lefeged is and option at ss and the draft class is deep you could even look at l. landry of the skins if the price is right

forgot decide if u want to keep a vet like wayne to help luck along until u get a young talent at wide out

Not bad. I would like to see Saturday retire a Colt and Pollack's not as good or he'd be starting already. Pollack's a keeper as a back-up for C/G positions. Not sure about Gonzo. He probably wouldn't be that expensive to keep. Let him try the open market and then determine if it's worth matching whatever offer he gets. If we decide to stay with the FB lead blocker, then Addai should go. He's not really suited to that kind of running attack. After the 1st pick, our draft needs to concentrate on OL, CB, S, and maybe WLB. There's a strong class for smaller, faster OLBs, so we should be able to snag a good one without having to go early in the draft. Save earlier picks for interior OL and CB. Someone mentioned that Carl Nicks would look good in Colt blue and white. I agree with that and he would solidify our OL with Ijalana coming back.

[jwilli69]

He doesn't have to be worth top 5 money. The tag for a receiver this year is $9.4 million, guaranteed (less than it's been the last two years, by the way). So if you tag a receiver, you can still reach a long-term deal with him. For practical reasons, the deal would probably have to included at least $9.4 million in guaranteed money for you to have any kind of leverage, otherwise the player can just take his one year tag value and (hopefully) hit free agency the next year.

So you can tag Garcon, and then throw him four years, $25 million, $10 million guaranteed. Or you can allow his agent to negotiate with a handful of teams who are interested, and then trade him to whatever team is going to pay him.

It's not a common occurence, but it's not like it's never happened. And it doesn't require two first rounders. That's the top tender for a restricted free agent (unless you negotiate something different with the tagging team). Has nothing to do with trading a franchise tagged player. If we did this kind of trade and got a 3rd in 2012 and a 4th in 2013 or something like that, I'd be fine with it. Garcon is a 6th rounder. Probably worth a 3rd rounder.

Other option is we just let him walk and hope we get a compensatory pick in the 2013 draft. How is that better than talking to other teams about working out a tag and trade for him? We have a month and a half before we'd have to tag him, and we have a couple three months after that to get him moved before training camps open. This isn't a radical idea.

Well the tag of 9.4mil is the top 5 wr's payscale in the league. The deal on having a player tagged and someone signing them is compensation of 2 first round picks. If the guy is only worth what you think (3rd and 4th) why in the stupidity would you place a 9.4 mil tag on the guy? You wouldn't, you would just let him wlk because you would dont pay someone you think so little of 9.4 mil/yr. If you honestly believe that Garcon would not attract suitors for his services, your a little silly because he is an up and coming talent who has improved each year and this season, he dramatically decreased his drops while being thrown to by subpar QB's. We will all see soon enough what he is worth because we will either have to pay him or let him walk out. My money is on us resigning him to a 4-5 year deal.

[jgstriker]

I personally do not beleive that Garcon is worth the kind of money that he will get this upcoming offseason. He is explosive, can stretch the field, and can do some really dangerous things in the screen game.

That being said, he, IMO, will NEVER be able to consistently take over games. He has flashes of greatness but I just don't think he has the mentality to turn the corner. I would bet that a very large percentage of his yardage came in the first part of the season before defenses really figured our that the only passing play Painter could run was the bubble screen to Garcon. That is not a knock on him, moreso on Painter, but I just feel that we are better off picking a WR in the 2nd or 3rd who can be that guy.

If we are playing to win this year, I think you need Wayne. If you are building for the future, I think you are almost forced to give Garcon a contract and let Wayne walk, picking up a wr in the early part of the draft.

[Superman]

Well the tag of 9.4mil is the top 5 wr's payscale in the league. The deal on having a player tagged and someone signing them is compensation of 2 first round picks. If the guy is only worth what you think (3rd and 4th) why in the stupidity would you place a 9.4 mil tag on the guy? You wouldn't, you would just let him wlk because you would dont pay someone you think so little of 9.4 mil/yr. If you honestly believe that Garcon would not attract suitors for his services, your a little silly because he is an up and coming talent who has improved each year and this season, he dramatically decreased his drops while being thrown to by subpar QB's. We will all see soon enough what he is worth because we will either have to pay him or let him walk out. My money is on us resigning him to a 4-5 year deal.

No.

That's not accurate. The restricted free agent top tender requires a team signing the player to compensate the tagging team with two first rounders (unless they negotiate a different compensation with the tagging team). That has nothing to do with the franchise tag.

As a matter of fact, other teams cannot sign a franchise tagged player because he's under contract. They can trade for him, and work out whatever level of compensation the two sides agree on. You're confusing two different "tags."

You absolutely can franchise tag a player and trade him to another team for whatever you want to trade him for.

IF Garcon leaves in free agency and goes to another team and has a really good year, we'll probably get a 3rd or 4th round compensatory pick anyways.

I'm not advocating one option over the other. But it is absolutely possible and maybe even practical to tag and then trade a player. I don't know that that's the best option for Garcon. If we could give him five years at $30-34 million with $10 million guaranteed, that would probably be a good deal for both sides. But there are other questions we have to answer, like what to do with Wayne, Mathis, Freeney, Brackett, Manning, etc. So that kind of long-term contract might not be advisable or even possible.

[FireJimCaldwell]

Sometimes I wonder if people play too much Madden

You cannot restructure Freeney's contract if this is the final year of his contract. There is no place to move that money unless we extend his contract therefore making the cap hit flexible.

It's called turning his base salary (14 million) into a signing bonus, thus creating a contract extension of 2-3 years and lowering the 2012 cap # in the process.. I get that you mentioned the extention, but creating the extension is still restructuring the current contract.

[jwilli69]

No.

That's not accurate. The restricted free agent top tender requires a team signing the player to compensate the tagging team with two first rounders (unless they negotiate a different compensation with the tagging team). That has nothing to do with the franchise tag.

As a matter of fact, other teams cannot sign a franchise tagged player because he's under contract. They can trade for him, and work out whatever level of compensation the two sides agree on. You're confusing two different "tags."

You absolutely can franchise tag a player and trade him to another team for whatever you want to trade him for.

IF Garcon leaves in free agency and goes to another team and has a really good year, we'll probably get a 3rd or 4th round compensatory pick anyways.

I'm not advocating one option over the other. But it is absolutely possible and maybe even practical to tag and then trade a player. I don't know that that's the best option for Garcon. If we could give him five years at $30-34 million with $10 million guaranteed, that would probably be a good deal for both sides. But there are other questions we have to answer, like what to do with Wayne, Mathis, Freeney, Brackett, Manning, etc. So that kind of long-term contract might not be advisable or even possible.

I am not confused, there is google for this stuff:

There are two types of franchise tag designations: the exclusive rights franchise tag, and non-exclusive rights franchise tag:

• An "exclusive" franchise player must be offered a one-year contract for an amount no less than the average of the top five salaries at the player's position as of a date in April of the current year in which the tag will apply, or 120 percent of the player's previous year's salary, whichever is greater. Exclusive franchise players cannot negotiate with other teams.
  
• A "non-exclusive" franchise player must be offered a one-year contract for an amount no less than the average of the top five salaries at the player's position in the previous year, or 120 percent of the player's previous year's salary, whichever is greater. A non-exclusive franchise player may negotiate with other NFL teams, but if he signs an offer sheet from another team, the original team has a right to match the terms of that offer, or if it does not match the offer and thus loses the player, is entitled to receive two first-round draft picks as compensation.
  

[jwilli69]

It's called turning his base salary (14 million) into a signing bonus, thus creating a contract extension of 2-3 years and lowering the 2012 cap # in the process..

At least someone gets it. Thank you FJC

[FireJimCaldwell]

I am not confused, there is google for this stuff:

There are two types of franchise tag designations: the exclusive rights franchise tag, and non-exclusive rights franchise tag:

• An "exclusive" franchise player must be offered a one-year contract for an amount no less than the average of the top five salaries at the player's position as of a date in April of the current year in which the tag will apply, or 120 percent of the player's previous year's salary, whichever is greater. Exclusive franchise players cannot negotiate with other teams.
  
• A "non-exclusive" franchise player must be offered a one-year contract for an amount no less than the average of the top five salaries at the player's position in the previous year, or 120 percent of the player's previous year's salary, whichever is greater. A non-exclusive franchise player may negotiate with other NFL teams, but if he signs an offer sheet from another team, the original team has a right to match the terms of that offer, or if it does not match the offer and thus loses the player, is entitled to receive two first-round draft picks as compensation.
  

The franchise tag calculations changed in the most recent cba.

It's much more complicated than just the top 5 players...

I was going to copy and paste some of the info, but it was far too long.

Here is a link to the document for those that might want to download it and review it:

http://www.google.co...BBLoX4A4Vr4JFyg

[jgstriker]

So by "restructuring" by extending his contract, are we really changing our current situation? We could get his cap number down this year but ultimately, he is still an elite DE and we would end up paying him the big bucks at some point.

I like Freeney and if we are competing next year for our division, we will need that pash rush. I just don't see how we can keep our team together as we know it

[Superman]

I am not confused, there is google for this stuff:

There are two types of franchise tag designations: the exclusive rights franchise tag, and non-exclusive rights franchise tag:

• An "exclusive" franchise player must be offered a one-year contract for an amount no less than the average of the top five salaries at the player's position as of a date in April of the current year in which the tag will apply, or 120 percent of the player's previous year's salary, whichever is greater. Exclusive franchise players cannot negotiate with other teams.
  
• A "non-exclusive" franchise player must be offered a one-year contract for an amount no less than the average of the top five salaries at the player's position in the previous year, or 120 percent of the player's previous year's salary, whichever is greater. A non-exclusive franchise player may negotiate with other NFL teams, but if he signs an offer sheet from another team, the original team has a right to match the terms of that offer, or if it does not match the offer and thus loses the player, is entitled to receive two first-round draft picks as compensation.
  

We're talking about the exclusive tag. The "non-exclusive" tag is called the transition tag, and there's no sense in using it on a player like Garcon, since no one is going to give up two first rounders for him.

[Tracy Denton]

I agree, but I would be really happy if it happened !! Maybe the redskins will do it..hehe

[FireJimCaldwell]

We're talking about the exclusive tag. The "non-exclusive" tag is called the transition tag, and there's no sense in using it on a player like Garcon, since no one is going to give up two first rounders for him.

The transition tag is it's own entity. The Franchise tag is divided into exclusive and non-exclusive.

[jwilli69]

We're talking about the exclusive tag. The "non-exclusive" tag is called the transition tag, and there's no sense in using it on a player like Garcon, since no one is going to give up two first rounders for him.

See the FJC post below here.

The transition tag is it's own entity. The Franchise tag is divided into exclusive and non-exclusive.

I know that but it seems superman wants to find a way to win a dead argument.

[GoColts8818]

Personally I would be surprised if Gary Brackett is back regardless of what we do with the defense. Angerer proved himself to be a good player at MLB. Also I think Brackett is a cover-2 linebacker and if we moved to another defense I am not sure he would be as good. So I wouldn't be shocked at all if Brackett is released.