Colts re-sign Dwayne Allen, four years $29.4m [Merge]

[SP_21]

10 minutes ago, throwing BBZ said:

 

 Why of course you are the authority in who is better.
 Ertz has one slight advantage i hope you agree.
 He has played in 47 of 48 games in his career. 
 Hopefully Allen doesn`t play like he did Most of last season. Yes, including his blocking, which was
 spotty way too often. Yes, he had an attitude because of how he was being used, and it sure looked like he carried that onto the field. Lets see how the $$$ affects his attitude now.

He missed one season. That greatly effects the number of games he's missed. Other than that one season he's missed a couple here and there and been knicked up in a few more. 

 

You want to question his character by talking about his attitude? Guy was misused for an entire season, I'd vent too. And right after that I believe he went on the USO tour with Pagano. 

 

You just love to hate everything this team does. We could sign JJ Watt for $2 million a year and you'd find something wrong with it. 

[Jason_]

21 minutes ago, Kyle said:

i have been reading a lot of comments calling him a "complete TE".  I would love for Allen to become the player the colts want him to be but how is he a "complete" TE just because he can block well.  That makes him a blocking TE.  

 

RECEIVING
Year	Team	G	Rec	Yds	Avg	Yds/G	Lng	TD	20+	40+	1st	FUM
2015	Indianapolis Colts	13	16	109	6.8	8.4	21	1	1	0	4	0
2014	Indianapolis Colts	13	29	395	13.6	30.4	41T	8	6	1	24	1
2013	Indianapolis Colts	1	1	20	20.0	20.0	20T	1	1	0	1	0
2012	Indianapolis Colts	16	45	521	11.6	32.6	40	3	9	1	30	1

 

Those stats are not a complete TE, they are a blocking TE.  He has not earned the right to be called complete until he shows he can do the receiving part of being a TE.

 

 

I hope this works out but I'd be lying if I said I wasn't SHOCKED at the numbers reported on the deal.

 

He has shown he can do the "receiving part" when given the opportunity.  He wasn't targeted nearly as much in 2014 and 2015 because he was being kept in to help the sub-par OL try to keep Luck off the dirt.

[Jason_]

19 minutes ago, Kyle said:

who cares if you started another topic.  I for one, don't want to jump into a conversation between 40 people that is 7 pages long.  I appreciate you starting the new thread for those of us that haven't discussed it yet.  If they have already discussed the topic of your thread and don't want to do it again, they can just not click on your thread.

 

Is this your first day on this forum?  Duplicate threads always get merged, or the new topic is closed.  Been that way for a loooong time now.  Same thing will happen with this thread.  It will either be closed or merged with the thread that was started yesterday, meaning one way or another, that's the place where you're going to have to go to continue the discussion.

[NewColtsFan]

6 hours ago, krunk said:

Do you understand Best Player Available or are you going to keep arguing about needs? BPA says take the highest rated player on your board. This is a SCENARIO I brought across to remind that BPA includes offensive players. I prefer a defensive player sure, but the goal of the pick is to get an excellent football player. Henry is an excellent football player who in scenario could be higher rated than some defensive players on the board depending on how the board drops. In the scenario I presented if Henry was BPA you are damn right I'd take him over lesser rated defensive players like Floyd. In fact it wont shock me at all if Henry has a higher score as an impact football player on Grigsons board than somebody like Foyd. Irsay says Let The Board Speak To You. I would not violate my scoring system just to take the lesser rated defensive player.

 

As Grigson himself said last year,  he's uses BPA for a position that is NOT needed ONLY WHEN the players is so much better than the other players on the board.

 

And Hunter Henry is not even a clear/obvious first round tight end.    Now, he's the BEST tight end,  but I haven't seen anyone rank him around 18.      So, I don't think he fits BPA.

 

Grigson says when there are multiple players with roughly the same grade,  he takes the player of NEED.

 

That's what Grigson said last year during the Phillip Dorsett controversy.

 

 

[jet1968]

If the Colts didnt sign him then who? And for how much? I think it was a good signing. Now maybe they can move on to getting Fleeners contract done.

[Jason_]

1 minute ago, jet1968 said:

If the Colts didnt sign him then who? And for how much? I think it was a good signing. Now maybe they can move on to getting Fleeners contract done.

 

After Allen's contract, I'd be shocked if Fleener was re-signed also.  That's a LOT of money to have tied up in the TE position.  

[bababooey]

4 minutes ago, NewColtsFan said:

 

As Grigson himself said last year,  he's uses BPA for a position that is NOT needed ONLY WHEN the players is so much better than the other players on the board.

 

And Hunter Henry is not even a clear/obvious first round tight end.    Now, he's the BEST tight end,  but I haven't seen anyone rank him around 18.      So, I don't think he fits BPA.

 

Grigson says when there are multiple players with roughly the same grade,  he takes the player of NEED.

 

That's what Grigson said last year during the Phillip Dorsett controversy.

 

 

The Dorsett pick looks pretty good now with AJ out. Hoping he has a better year this year with more playing time and less injury.

[indyagent17]

Allen is the more physical end. Fleener cant break the tackle of a 10 yr old.

 

Allen is a much better blocker 

 

Allen runs better routes and is harder to move off the point attack than Fleener is

 

IF and i mean IF Allen can stay healthy this is a slam dunk move to keep Allen over Fleener

[krunk]

36 minutes ago, NewColtsFan said:

 

As Grigson himself said last year,  he's uses BPA for a position that is NOT needed ONLY WHEN the players is so much better than the other players on the board.

 

And Hunter Henry is not even a clear/obvious first round tight end.    Now, he's the BEST tight end,  but I haven't seen anyone rank him around 18.      So, I don't think he fits BPA.

 

Grigson says when there are multiple players with roughly the same grade,  he takes the player of NEED.

 

That's what Grigson said last year during the Phillip Dorsett controversy.

 

 

 

I said zilch about us having to take Henry in the first however I did mention him in a scenario. It's not what I really want but I'm not going to sit back and cry if the guy is selected over needs.  He's the best Tight End in this draft and it's all about what is on the board at the time of said pick.  Very possible for him to be BPA.   

[21isSuperman]

2 hours ago, Archer said:

Dumbest move SO FAR!  (Grigson isn't done yet!)

I laugh on the outside, but I cry on the inside when I read this

[austriancolt]

way too much money for a guy with injury issues! another Grigson fail, more to come...

[Colts_Fan12]

9 hours ago, JPFolks said:

I just hope Elliot slips to us.. unlikely but man would he be a GREAT addition...

That's an even worse pick then Henry 

[Colts_Fan12]

2 hours ago, Dustin said:

It's definitely up there. And I say this as probably the biggest Allen fan on the board. 

Idk you have to compete with me and Colts Legacy as well 

[jvan1973]

22 minutes ago, austriancolt said:

way too much money for a guy with injury issues! another Grigson fail, more to come...

Where did you buy your crystal ball?   

[chad72]

Regardless of ability, availability has been low and that is not in favor based on Allen's history. I have no way to tell if that will change or not and if it does not, it will be another investment gone bad. If this means we are not negotiating with Fleener at all, I can certainly understand that. Yet, a bit risky to me.

[theanarchist]

20 hours ago, will426 said:

Well sounds like Allen truly wants to be a colt now let's see wth fleeners price will be 

Jack Doyle is the best blocker on the team. Period. Let him catch some balls too. He was tendered I believe so I think we end up with two good blocking TE's. Hopefully Allen can stay healthy.

[ColtsLegacy]

2 hours ago, Colts_Fan12 said:

Idk you have to compete with me and Colts Legacy as well 

 

Yes, sir. I have no doubt that Allen will excell as the TE. The people saying we overpaid for a blocking TE are clueless. Dwayne Allen is a better receiver than Fleener, but you have to, you know, throw him the ball first.

 

PS don't forget Southwest. He's been one of Allen's biggest supporters all along.

[ColtsLegacy]

2 minutes ago, theanarchist said:

Jack Doyle is the best blocker on the team. Period. Let him catch some balls too. He was tendered I believe so I think we end up with two good blocking TE's. Hopefully Allen can stay healthy.

 

Allen is a better overall blocker than Doyle, especially inline. Allen struggled at times last year but in previous years he was a top 5 blocking TE. Doyle is a good blocking TE, however.

[Colts_Fan12]

8 minutes ago, ColtsLegacy said:

 

Yes, sir. I have no doubt that Allen will excell as the TE. The people saying we overpaid for a blocking TE are clueless. Dwayne Allen is a better receiver than Fleener, but you have to, you know, throw him the ball first.

 

PS don't forget Southwest. He's been one of Allen's biggest supporters all along.

Totally agree like I said in another post chud just needs to use him as a damn TE not a freakin OL 

[ColtsLegacy]

1 hour ago, chad72 said:

Regardless of ability, availability has been low and that is not in favor based on Allen's history. I have no way to tell if that will change or not and if it does not, it will be another investment gone bad. If this means we are not negotiating with Fleener at all, I can certainly understand that. Yet, a bit risky to me.

 

He's missed one full season (3 seasons ago) and then a few games over the last two years. It's hardly as bad as all the exaggerators like to make it seem.

[NBColtsFanatic]

You guys have got to chill out. This is a good move. If you doubt what the Colts are doing and will continue to criticize the team and members despite even considering the opinions of others, move onto cheering for another team.

[ColtsLegacy]

4 minutes ago, Colts_Fan12 said:

Totally agree like I said in another post chud just needs to use him as a damn TE not a freakin OL 

 

They're not paying him this money to just block. This contract says that the FO and, assumably, the coaches agree with us that Dwayne has been sorely misused. Chud will incorporate Dwayne Allen or he'll be looking for a new job really quick.

[2006Coltsbestever]

Actually if I had to choose between Fleener and Allen I would take Allen. I would love to keep both though because Luck and Fleener have had a bond since Stanford and Fleener is Good.

[Colts_Fan12]

1 minute ago, ColtsLegacy said:

 

They're not paying him this money to just block. This contract says that the FO and, assumably, the coaches agree with us that Dwayne has been sorely misused. Chud will incorporate Dwayne Allen or he'll be looking for a new job really quick.

Yes thankfully dumping Pep has given Allen the shot he deserves. I have a feeling chud will show all these doubters exactly what all of us have been saying 

[ColtsLegacy]

12 minutes ago, Colts_Fan12 said:

Yes thankfully dumping Pep has given Allen the shot he deserves. I have a feeling chud will show all these doubters exactly what all of us have been saying 

 

I think so too. We know that DA can excel under a competent OC (see: rookie year under BA). I look for DA to be even more active in the passing game than his rookie year. I expect him to be a go to guy in 3rd downs and red zone situations.

[Colts_Fan12]

2 minutes ago, ColtsLegacy said:

 

I think so too. We know that DA can excel under a competent OC (see: rookie year under BA).

Exactly I'm talking top 3 or 4 TE with his ability 

[ColtsLegacy]

10 minutes ago, Colts_Fan12 said:

Exactly I'm talking top 3 or 4 TE with his ability 

 

Nah, man. He's just a blocking TE who's injured as often as Bob Sanders.

[Colts_Fan12]

5 minutes ago, ColtsLegacy said:

 

Nah, man. He's just a blocking TE who's injured as often as Bob Sanders.

 Ikr they act like we have IRd him every season 

[JH8788]

19 hours ago, krunk said:

Only from silly people who think BPA is limited to defensive need players. BPA means BPA and if that be Henry then that's what it is. 2 tight ends is a staple of Chuds offense so I could see it. Maybe not at 18 but it would not surprise me. Huge drop off after Allen and don't tell me nothing about Jack Doyle because he is more blocker than anything else.

So during Chud's 2 stints at SD, who were the TEs after Gates & how much did they produce? Don't worry, take your time. When he was in Carolina, who was after Olsen & how much did that guy produce? Again, take your time. In Cleveland, who was after Cameron? Once more, please take your time.

[krunk]

2 minutes ago, JH8788 said:

So during Chud's 2 stints at SD, who were the TEs after Gates & how much did they produce? Don't worry, take your time. When he was in Carolina, who was after Olsen & how much did that guy produce? Again, take your time. In Cleveland, who was after Cameron? Once more, please take your time.

 

Was it a one tight end offense or two?  Take your time

[JH8788]

1 minute ago, krunk said:

 

Was it a one tight end offense or two?  Take your time

How bout you answer my question.

[krunk]

2 minutes ago, JH8788 said:

How bout you answer my question.

 

No by all means you have all the knowledge sir!

[JH8788]

Just now, krunk said:

 

No by all means you have all the knowledge sir!

I respectfully disagree sir. You said Chud's offense is 2 TE dominant so I asked a question to see if you back up what you said. 

[masterlock]

22 hours ago, Jdubu said:

This is ridiculous money for a guy who can't stay on the field and just isn't a game changing type of guy. We keep saying we are going to not do the same things we did in the Manning era by spending so much on the offense but here we are spending 7+ mil/yr for a mostly blocking TE that can catch but is hurt too much. So we will have a $$TE, $$ WR (or 2) a $$$$ QB $$OT and maybe a $$ C if we bring in a high profile guy. This contract just wasn't necessary IMO and money could have been used for the defense to get much better.  Let Luck make avg players play above their level. I don't like it at all. 

He's only a "mostly blocking tight end" because that's how they used him. Why? because the o-line was sub-par, and Fleener doesn't shine as a blocker. The only knock on Allen, so far s I'm concerned is the injuries. Aside from that, he's the SUPERIOR tight end. He can get open, he has far better hands than Fleener, and he is a touchdown magnet in the end zone.

[MFT5]

Ladarius Green (SDC) or ex Ram Jared Cook are options at TE en light of looming Fleener

 

... so not all is lost it seems a productive TE can be discovered with ranging success

[BOTT]

7 hours ago, bababooey said:

The Dorsett pick looks pretty good now with AJ out. Hoping he has a better year this year with more playing time and less injury.

not really. Not difficult to replace AJ's production.

[bababooey]

1 hour ago, BOTT said:

not really. Not difficult to replace AJ's production.

We can agree to disagree, I see a third WR that can outperform the FA misses of the last three years at the position.

[BOTT]

2 minutes ago, bababooey said:

We can agree to disagree, I see a third WR that can outperform the FA misses of the last three years at the position.

 

2 minutes ago, bababooey said:

We can agree to disagree, I see a third WR that can outperform the FA misses of the last three years at the position.

I don't disagree with that, dorsett will play well, but why spend a 1st on a 3rd WR?

[Carlos Danger]

I don't really think we need to go out and sign a receiving TE, Fleener or otherwise.

 

Allen is capable at that role and Doyle has shown that he can be an outlet if Luck has to leave the pocket. There are 3 receivers that can stretch the field, leaving Allen to feast on mismatches on intermediate routes. 

 

I think Doyle and Allen give the offense a good shot at positive yardage on runs out of 2TE sets.   

 

There is a probably a depth issue, but I think that signing a guy to any substantial contract is overkill, considering the other holes that need to be addressed. I don't really buy the logic that we have to have a TE that specializes in getting behind linebackers when we have 3 sub 4.4 40 WRs. 

[bababooey]

1 hour ago, BOTT said:

 

I don't disagree with that, dorsett will play well, but why spend a 1st on a 3rd WR?

I didn't like the pick at the time but at least he doesn't look like a guy we will be cutting in two years.