Colt Free Agency Moves

[Superman]

Just now, ponyboy said:

 

My recollection is that Freeney *did* finish out the last year of the back loaded contract -- which I thought was around $18M.  He was not resigned as an URFA in 2013, but he wasn't cut.  I remember thinking he made $1M per tackle in 2012. 

 

His cap hit was $19m that year. Salary was $14m, would have been a $5m cap penalty to cut him. I never expected them to keep him, and they did. 

[DougDew]

20 minutes ago, ponyboy said:

 

My recollection is that Freeney *did* finish out the last year of the back loaded contract -- which I thought was around $18M.  He was not resigned as an URFA in 2013, but he wasn't cut.  I remember thinking he made $1M per tackle in 2012. 

You may be right.  At the time, there was some bad blood about that contract and his performance in the new system that led everybody to think that it would be best to part ways.  

 

Either way, neither Mathis nor Freeney could play SSB in the new system, and that's what Walden was brought in for.  So it was a matter of choosing Freeney or Mathis as the OLB and the Colts chose Mathis.  Since Mathis led the NFL in sacks, its hard to argue with that decision.

 

It depends on if Freeney would have been satisfied being #3 OLB behind Mathis and Walden after being the #1 DE for so long under Polian.  I think that would have impacted team dynamics and personalities so it was probably best to let him walk.

[dw49]

48 minutes ago, ponyboy said:

 

My recollection is that Freeney *did* finish out the last year of the back loaded contract -- which I thought was around $18M.  He was not resigned as an URFA in 2013, but he wasn't cut.  I remember thinking he made $1M per tackle in 2012. 

 

 

Where have you been all year ?

 

 Yeah ... DougDew got me off my game I think. I'm remembering that his cap hit was you say 18-19 mill.and 2012 was the final year of that big contract. His base was about 14 mill.

 

So maybe his (DougDew)Memory is really clouded when he says Freeney would not agree to a paycut ? No big deal as it's hard to  remember caps , contracts RFA and URFA years as they happened a while back. What I do remember is Dwight had an ankle injury that must have really affected his 2012 play.. cause he was way better at rushing the passer the following few years.

[dw49]

47 minutes ago, Superman said:

 

His cap hit was $19m that year. Salary was $14m, would have been a $5m cap penalty to cut him. I never expected them to keep him, and they did. 

 

 

Sorry Bud... I didn't see your post and ended up posting the same thing you had put up. This often happens when you click on a notification like the post that pony boy made to a post I had made. I just clicked on it and answered it without seeing you had already commented to the same in the thread.

[dw49]

38 minutes ago, DougDew said:

You may be right.  At the time, there was some bad blood about that contract and his performance in the new system that led everybody to think that it would be best to part ways.  

 

Either way, neither Mathis nor Freeney could play SSB in the new system, and that's what Walden was brought in for.  So it was a matter of choosing Freeney or Mathis as the OLB and the Colts chose Mathis.  Since Mathis led the NFL in sacks, its hard to argue with that decision.

 

It depends on if Freeney would have been satisfied being #3 OLB behind Mathis and Walden after being the #1 DE for so long under Polian.  I think that would have impacted team dynamics and personalities so it was probably best to let him walk.

 

I really don't think if they had to do it over again , it would have been "best to let him walk." Considering the age of Mathis and Freeney , the injury factor in the NFL , the 4 million per year Freeney was worth .. everybody could have been made happy by bringing him back. Well worth the money by just having him in there on all the passing downs. 

 

I really think what polluted the waters was that nobody attributed the big fall off in DF's play to the early season ankle injury. He didn't show that same explosiveness rushing the passer. If so , maybe  they wouldn't have cared to what you have pointed out .. Mathis on 1 side .. Frenzy on the other is not so hot.

[runthepost]

Wasn't Jerry Hughes an original 3-4 pass rusher when he came out the draft?

[DougDew]

11 minutes ago, dw49 said:

 

I really don't think if they had to do it over again , it would have been "best to let him walk." Considering the age of Mathis and Freeney , the injury factor in the NFL , the 4 million per year Freeney was worth .. everybody could have been made happy by bringing him back. Well worth the money by just having him in there on all the passing downs. 

 

I really think what polluted the waters was that nobody attributed the big fall off in DF's play to the early season ankle injury. He didn't show that same explosiveness rushing the passer. If so , maybe  they wouldn't have cared to what you have pointed out .. Mathis on 1 side .. Frenzy on the other is not so hot.

I think you noted, at the time Freeney had a bad ankle, may have had some hip problem too.  IIRC, he didn't do much with SD the first year but got a bit of his mojo back in the ensuing years after he got completely healthy.

 

Remember, we brought in Redding, some old NT, and Walden to play the fatty 34 because that's what Irsay wanted...in the mold of the Chargers and Steelers who kept beating the Colts in the playoffs.  Between the three new guys on the DL, there wasn't much room for Freeney or Mathis other than to just rotate with each other......and we may have even had Hughes then too.

 

In hindsight, keeping Hughes and Freeney to rotate in on pass rushing downs would have been ideal, but then the players have to want that too and I think both wanted more PT elsewhere.

[dw49]

1 hour ago, Superman said:

 

His cap hit was $19m that year. Salary was $14m, would have been a $5m cap penalty to cut him. I never expected them to keep him, and they did. 

 

 

Thinking back to 2012 , you have to give Irsay a lot of credit for paying DF that 14 mill base. We had pretty much cut all the high paid vets and were going to be playing a rookie QB. No one would have expected to make the playoffs. I just wonder if Irsay's motivation was to "reward" Freeney or was it the fact that he needed to field a somewhat "competitive" team as the fan base would not be happy with a "sad sack" product out there in 2012. I'd like to think it was the former ?

[dw49]

26 minutes ago, runthepost said:

Wasn't Jerry Hughes an original 3-4 pass rusher when he came out the draft?

 

 

I think he "projected "as possibly better as a 3-4 guy. Had that kind of size and speed suited for 3-4.  But I'm just going by scouting reports from draft publications. 

[dw49]

13 minutes ago, DougDew said:

I think you noted, at the time Freeney had a bad ankle, may have had some hip problem too.  IIRC, he didn't do much with SD the first year but got a bit of his mojo back in the ensuing years after he got completely healthy.

 

Remember, we brought in Redding, some old NT, and Walden to play the fatty 34 because that's what Irsay wanted...in the mold of the Chargers and Steelers who kept beating the Colts in the playoffs.  Between the three new guys on the DL, there wasn't much room for Freeney or Mathis other than to just rotate with each other......and we may have even had Hughes then too.

 

In hindsight, keeping Hughes and Freeney to rotate in on pass rushing downs would have been ideal, but then the players have to want that too and I think both wanted more PT elsewhere.

 

 

I'm not googling to really research it so I could be wrong . But there were 2 "waves" of free agency and I think maybe you are blending them together. The first was the year that we cut Manning , Addai , Clark etc and were in cap hell. We signed a bunch of cheap guys that I think included Redding and the old NT. The following year when all the "dead money" was off the books , we signed a bunch of "better" FA's . This list included Waldon I believe . 

[runthepost]

18 minutes ago, dw49 said:

 

 

I think he "project "as possibly better as a 3-4 guy. Had that kind of size and speed suited for 3-4.  But I'm just going by scouting reports from draft publications. 

He started 6 games in 2012 and got 4 sacks. I would have kept him and gave him another year to see if he could have more development 

[dw49]

Just now, runthepost said:

He started 6 games in 2012 and got 4 sacks. I would have kept him and gave him another year to see if he could have more development 

 

Thanks for the stat .. and yeah I thought he looked decent that last year.

[Superman]

2 hours ago, dw49 said:

 

 

Thinking back to 2012 , you have to give Irsay a lot of credit for paying DF that 14 mill base. We had pretty much cut all the high paid vets and were going to be playing a rookie QB. No one would have expected to make the playoffs. I just wonder if Irsay's motivation was to "reward" Freeney or was it the fact that he needed to field a somewhat "competitive" team as the fan base would not be happy with a "sad sack" product out there in 2012. I'd like to think it was the former ?

 

Was probably neither, from my seat. They kept Wayne and Mathis, with new contracts. Got rid of other dead weight contract players, most of whom never played again. Freeney still had tread on his tires, but much. Reportedly, they never even discussed a pay cut. Then they let him walk the next year with only a meek "thank you, and good luck." Makes no sense either way, IMO. I said at the time they should have done something with him, and in hindsight, they should have just cut him. His production was meager, and maybe you would have gotten more out of Hughes. 

 

Alternate reality where you cut Freeney, Hughes has a good 2012, and then you draft Rhodes instead of Werner? Now you're cooking with fire...

[BOTT]

5 hours ago, rockywoj said:

Pretty much EVERBODY and their dog were calling for the Colts to get rid of Jerry Hughes, calling him a bust and a stupid luxury pick, being that the Colts had Mathis and Freeney.  There were very few voices saying to be patient with him, that Hughes had not yet even been given a realistic shot to show what he can do.  

 

When the new staff came in, they raved about his athleticism, but most here just laughed at that notion. Then he was traded, he got used properly and turned into what he was supposed to be and NOW memories are short and people complain that Grigson got rid of the guy (that everybody was screaming for the Colts to get rid of).  

 

 

So Grigson shouldn't be more savy than the average forum member?  High standards.

[dw49]

7 minutes ago, Superman said:

 

Was probably neither, from my seat. They kept Wayne and Mathis, with new contracts. Got rid of other dead weight contract players, most of whom never played again. Freeney still had tread on his tires, but much. Reportedly, they never even discussed a pay cut. Then they let him walk the next year with only a meek "thank you, and good luck." Makes no sense either way, IMO. I said at the time they should have done something with him, and in hindsight, they should have just cut him. His production was meager, and maybe you would have gotten more out of Hughes. 

 

Alternate reality where you cut Freeney, Hughes has a good 2012, and then you draft Rhodes instead of Werner? Now you're cooking with fire...

 

Yes I remembered you and I discussing that contract when it was taking place. You really couldn't make sense or a case for their thinking . We both expected a pay cut or a release.

 

A few of those guys did play .. maybe just Clark and Manning ? I think Saturday was a free agent who just wasn't resigned.. so he wouldn't count. Addai and Brackett come to mind as not playing anymore. Wayne was only signed as an after thought... agree ? 

 

I remember Werner took a pretty good fall down the draft boards (that was the "word" anyway) as a result of a very pedestrian combine. At least to the second round.... Too bad the Colts didn't take heed to the measurables. Yeah think about what it might have meant if we drafted Rhodes. Not only would we have 2 # 1 CB's but we don't waste that FA money on Tolar and possibly Robinson. Maybe we draft a different guy than Smith with the 65th pick a couple years back ? Huge swing and miss if Rhodes was on their board . he should have been as he was highly rated and CB was no doubt a position of need that year

[WoolMagnet]

6 hours ago, dw49 said:

 

 

You are welcome to dispute any of what I said with something other than a one liner ? Or at least give me who Chuck and Ryan "thought" would be rushing the passer in 2016 other than a couple of guys way past their prime ? 

It wasn't just Chuck and Ryan.  We all debated who "might" step up to get sacks and pressure.  I think we all hoped Mathis would show signs of yesteryear and maybe Monachino's scheme would help.  Maybe even some pressure from the DL or the young guys.    But we all knew we were very weak at LB and there really wasn't anyone available.  Grigs can't pull players out his butt. At least I don't think he can, I have no proof tho.  Anyway, my point is we KNEW this was coming.  Heck, if anything, Walden, for all that he's been slandered on this board, was a bright spot in pressures and sacks.

  I feel what you do, but if memory serves, there was no magic pill player available to bring in and I'm not for overpaying.

3/4 of the teams in the league are CONSTANTLY looking for pass rushers.  It's no coincidence that they are the teams sitting at home this week. There just aren't many guys in the league or world with that rare ability to get to the QB.

[dw49]

45 minutes ago, WoolMagnet said:

It wasn't just Chuck and Ryan.  We all debated who "might" step up to get sacks and pressure.  I think we all hoped Mathis would show signs of yesteryear and maybe Monachino's scheme would help.  Maybe even some pressure from the DL or the young guys.    But we all knew we were very weak at LB and there really wasn't anyone available.  Grigs can't pull players out his butt. At least I don't think he can, I have no proof tho.  Anyway, my point is we KNEW this was coming.  Heck, if anything, Walden, for all that he's been slandered on this board, was a bright spot in pressures and sacks.

  I feel what you do, but if memory serves, there was no magic pill player available to bring in and I'm not for overpaying.

3/4 of the teams in the league are CONSTANTLY looking for pass rushers.  It's no coincidence that they are the teams sitting at home this week. There just aren't many guys in the league or world with that rare ability to get to the QB.

 

 

I'm not disputing the fact that there wasn't much they could have done this year. They had very little cap room as they had to do Luck's deal plus the way most of the contracts were written , the "sensible" cuts had to be made after the 2016 season. 

 

That said , I think if you read my posts in this thread , my point is that they did a poor job in the years leading up to this and it's more than the issue of "who was going to rush the passer in 2016." It's poorly worded on my part.

It is difficult to "find" pass rushers but we had a franchise QB that played 4 years on his rookie deal. That should give you the ammunition to get a little more than we are looking at now. My point is that it's hard to find any move that they made that was not wrong in the "pass rush category." They let 2 guys go that are better than anyone we now have on today's roster. Addison and Hughes . They squandered an incredible amount of Irsay's money in FA and have nothing to show for there. The draft had produced nothing.

 

As to teams sitting home.. you could also say besides Brees , the teams with the best QB's are still playing ? But yeah.. I agree that you can't pull guys out of your butt. My point was this is a cumulative result of poor use of money , drafts and player evaluation that led to this. Nobody held a gun to their heads to draft Werner , trade a #1 for TR spend huge FA money on guys like Landry and Cherlius . I will say that I can't think of great pass rushers they passed over in the draft that were obvious blunders.

[rockywoj]

2 hours ago, BOTT said:

So Grigson shouldn't be more savy than the average forum member?  High standards.

Actually, I guess I am just saying that most of the forum members that are complaining now about Hughes slipping through the Colts fingers are, well, hypocrites.  Especially so for most that were yelling for Grigs and company to ditch Hughes, but now instead say Grigson should be more savvy at evaluating talent. 

 

 

[Colts1324]

8 hours ago, dw49 said:

 

 

Other than resign a TE and extend Mewhort , Montcrief and maybe a couple others , what do we do with the approx 60 mill we will have in cap space ? You can't use it to buy draft picks.....

You know that is a crazy thought. Like that would be interesting if teams could buy draft picks. Like 50 million for a high first rounder. 40 for a late first. 30 for a second. Wonder what teams would give up for drafts picks. 

[BOTT]

23 minutes ago, rockywoj said:

Actually, I guess I am just saying that most of the forum members that are complaining now about Hughes slipping through the Colts fingers are, well, hypocrites.  Especially so for most that were yelling for Grigs and company to ditch Hughes, but now instead say Grigson should be more savvy at evaluating talent. 

 

 

Oh yes, I dare ask that an NFL GM being paid millions should be more savvy than forum members who spend 5 minutes a year evaluating talent.

[dw49]

8 minutes ago, BOTT said:

Oh yes, I dare ask that an NFL GM being paid millions should be more savvy than forum members who spend 5 minutes a year evaluating talent.

 

Hey .. we were pretty fair as we didn't criticize Pagano and his staff for not developing Hughes...

[dw49]

22 minutes ago, Colts1324 said:

You know that is a crazy thought. Like that would be interesting if teams could buy draft picks. Like 50 million for a high first rounder. 40 for a late first. 30 for a second. Wonder what teams would give up for drafts picks. 

 

No doubt that teams value draft picks more every year. You can see that in how they trade draft picks for players. Not too many TR type trades happening now days... 

[WoolMagnet]

4 hours ago, dw49 said:

 

 

I'm not disputing the fact that there wasn't much they could have done this year. They had very little cap room as they had to do Luck's deal plus the way most of the contracts were written , the "sensible" cuts had to be made after the 2016 season. 

 

That said , I think if you read my posts in this thread , my point is that they did a poor job in the years leading up to this and it's more than the issue of "who was going to rush the passer in 2016." It's poorly worded on my part.

It is difficult to "find" pass rushers but we had a franchise QB that played 4 years on his rookie deal. That should give you the ammunition to get a little more than we are looking at now. My point is that it's hard to find any move that they made that was not wrong in the "pass rush category." They let 2 guys go that are better than anyone we now have on today's roster. Addison and Hughes . They squandered an incredible amount of Irsay's money in FA and have nothing to show for there. The draft had produced nothing.

 

As to teams sitting home.. you could also say besides Brees , the teams with the best QB's are still playing ? But yeah.. I agree that you can't pull guys out of your butt. My point was this is a cumulative result of poor use of money , drafts and player evaluation that led to this. Nobody held a gun to their heads to draft Werner , trade a #1 for TR spend huge FA money on guys like Landry and Cherlius . I will say that I can't think of great pass rushers they passed over in the draft that were obvious blunders.

I hear ya.

but many other teams passed over them too.  You never really know ow good they will be.

the werner and trent deals didnt pan out.  But, imo, more of our draft picks met or eceed d realistic expectations than those that didnt.

we need to move on from the trent and werner thing.  Its in the rear view.  Better to try to move forward.  I think this year we go nuts on LBs.  It is a bummer tho how this year progressed.(or didn't)

[coach kline]

On Monday, January 02, 2017 at 3:46 PM, dw49 said:

 

 

Other than resign a TE and extend Mewhort , Montcrief and maybe a couple others , what do we do with the approx 60 mill we will have in cap space ? You can't use it to buy draft picks.....

They'll just bring in damaged players who can't perform

[dw49]

33 minutes ago, relkins said:

They'll just bring in damaged players who can't perform

 

 

Let's hope not...