FA tracker update -- 2/28

[Superman]

http://www.nfl.com/freeagency#tab=rankings

 

So now that our fun little outage is over (thanks Amazon Web Services!!), let's catch up:

 

Eric Berry is re-signed, six years, $78m; Chiefs might still tag Poe; Jamaal Charles released

 

Adrian Peterson will be a free agent. 

 

Kirk Cousins tagged (again).

 

TJ Lang will likely be a free agent.

[jvan1973]

What is the cost of tagging cousins again?

[jvan1973]

33 minutes ago, Superman said:

http://www.nfl.com/freeagency#tab=rankings

 

So now that our fun little outage is over (thanks Amazon Web Services!!), let's catch up:

 

Eric Berry is re-signed, six years, $78m; Chiefs might still tag Poe; Jamaal Charles released

 

Adrian Peterson will be a free agent. 

 

Kirk Cousins tagged (again).

 

TJ Lang will likely be a free agent.

Jamal Charles was also let go

[MPStack]

1 minute ago, jvan1973 said:

What is the cost of tagging cousins again?

Only 24M and some change..

[jvan1973]

1 minute ago, MPStack said:

Only 24M and some change..

Wow

[2006Coltsbestever]

50 minutes ago, Superman said:

http://www.nfl.com/freeagency#tab=rankings

 

So now that our fun little outage is over (thanks Amazon Web Services!!), let's catch up:

 

Eric Berry is re-signed, six years, $78m; Chiefs might still tag Poe; Jamaal Charles released

 

Adrian Peterson will be a free agent. 

 

Kirk Cousins tagged (again).

 

TJ Lang will likely be a free agent.

I thought maybe Irsay was having fun with us regarding the website . I am surprised the Chiefs let Charles go and the Redskins should just sign Kirk Cousins and get it over with. Tagging him again for 24 Mill is insane. I wonder where Peterson will end up? He may be a difference maker for a year or 2 on a contending team. Also if I am the Colts I am jumping at the chance to sign Hightower. Pats just let anyone go like it's no big deal.

[Andrew Luck fan club]

Berry re-signed. Ugh another dream crushed. 

[NewColtsFan]

47 minutes ago, 2006Coltsbestever said:

I thought maybe Irsay was having fun with us regarding the website . I am surprised the Chiefs let Charles go and the Redskins should just sign Kirk Cousins and get it over with. Tagging him again for 24 Mill is insane. I wonder where Peterson will end up? He may be a difference maker for a year or 2 on a contending team. Also if I am the Colts I am jumping at the chance to sign Hightower. Pats just let anyone go like it's no big deal.

 

I wouldn't rule out Hightower remaining with the Pats.     I think they're letting him hit the FA market.    Then, depending on what he's offered,  the Pats may choose to keep him.      Or not.

 

I just have a hard time believing at this point that they've decided they're not interested in bringing him back.

 

He's said to be a Belichick favorite....   so I'll believe it when I see it.

 

 

 

[SaturdayAllDay]

1 hour ago, 2006Coltsbestever said:

I thought maybe Irsay was having fun with us regarding the website . I am surprised the Chiefs let Charles go and the Redskins should just sign Kirk Cousins and get it over with. Tagging him again for 24 Mill is insane. I wonder where Peterson will end up? He may be a difference maker for a year or 2 on a contending team. Also if I am the Colts I am jumping at the chance to sign Hightower. Pats just let anyone go like it's no big deal.

Cousins forced their hand into tagging him. His agent wasnt negotiating with them and they had to choose between tagging him or letting him walk. They still have a few months to resign him to a long term contract, this just gives cousins agent more bargaining power.

[Andrew Luck fan club]

Looks like Jairus Byrd will be released from the Saints next week. 

[SaturdayAllDay]

3 minutes ago, Majin Vegeta said:

Looks like Jairus Byrd will be released from the Saints next week. 

Not surprising at all. He hasn't lived up to his lofty contract in NO. Last I heard they were talking about asking him to take a pay cut, guess that isnt happening. They still have Vaccaro and Bell anyways. 

 

Still, that 8M in dead cap is going to hurt. Maybe they designate him post June 1st cut?

[Superman]

3 minutes ago, SaturdayAllDay said:

Maybe they designate him post June 1st cut?

 

It drops that dead money down to $3.4m in 2017, with $4.6m in 2018.

 

Mickey Loomis has really been awful with the cap. They're in okay shape this year, but the past couple years have been atrocious. Everyone praised him for finding a way to afford Byrd when they signed him, but this is what happens when you backload contracts. It's even worse when your players don't live up to those backloaded contracts. To still have $8m in dead money on that deal is egregious.

[SaturdayAllDay]

9 minutes ago, Superman said:

 

It drops that dead money down to $3.4m in 2017, with $4.6m in 2018.

 

Mickey Loomis has really been awful with the cap. They're in okay shape this year, but the past couple years have been atrocious. Everyone praised him for finding a way to afford Byrd when they signed him, but this is what happens when you backload contracts. It's even worse when your players don't live up to those backloaded contracts. To still have $8m in dead money on that deal is egregious.

Yah I was at a loss for words when they signed him. Loomis already had them in serious cap trouble and they went and signed the top FA? At some point you have to just take your lumps and fix things. I think they have enough cap this year to just take the brunt of the hit and get it over with. It hurts their chances for free agency this year a bit, but it gives them more money for next year. More importantly it stops them from continually pushing money problems to the future and hurting the franchise year after year. Almost half of the that dead cap is due to them restructuring Byrd's contract a year into his deal so that they could sign CJ Spiller. Now they have dead cap hits from both of them. 

 

Im not ever going to say that Grigson was a good GM, but at least he didnt pull this kind of crap with us. 

[AZColt11]

3 hours ago, 2006Coltsbestever said:

I thought maybe Irsay was having fun with us regarding the website . I am surprised the Chiefs let Charles go and the Redskins should just sign Kirk Cousins and get it over with. Tagging him again for 24 Mill is insane. I wonder where Peterson will end up? He may be a difference maker for a year or 2 on a contending team. Also if I am the Colts I am jumping at the chance to sign Hightower. Pats just let anyone go like it's no big deal.

Not surprised on Charles.  He is at that magical age of 30 and has been hurt more than healthy the last few years.  Still very productive when healthy though.  I would rather have Peterson personally.  Even though he's a year older than Charles he is a bigger body and IMHO will have a longer career.  If he can get past those personal issues I would take him over Charles but I think our best case scenario is finding a young, cheap RB in the draft.  And I would take Hightower in a NY minute.

[Shive]

4 hours ago, SaturdayAllDay said:

Im not ever going to say that Grigson was a good GM, but at least he didnt pull this kind of crap with us. 

I'll say that Grigs actually did a great job with contracts (for the most part). While he may have overpaid for subpar talent, he never set us up for failure with insane dead money issues.

[Bluefire4]

14 minutes ago, Shive said:

I'll say that Grigs actually did a great job with contracts (for the most part). While he may have overpaid for subpar talent, he never set us up for failure with insane dead money issues.

http://www.stampedeblue.com/2017/2/24/14730778/mike-bluem-opens-up-about-the-colts-approach-to-the-salary-cap

[LJpalmbeacher2]

8 hours ago, MPStack said:

Only 24M and some change..

 

That's good money.

He'll be able to afford to fix his car now. lol

[Smonroe]

15 hours ago, Superman said:

http://www.nfl.com/freeagency#tab=rankings

 

So now that our fun little outage is over (thanks Amazon Web Services!!), let's catch up:

 

Eric Berry is re-signed, six years, $78m; Chiefs might still tag Poe; Jamaal Charles released

 

Adrian Peterson will be a free agent. 

 

Kirk Cousins tagged (again).

 

TJ Lang will likely be a free agent.

 

Anyone have a fair idea what Charles would get?  If it was reasonable it seems like he'd be a great pickup.

 

I know most people want a younger RB in the draft, but if he's 100% it would be hard to find someone better outside of the first round.

[Shive]

7 hours ago, Bluefire4 said:

http://www.stampedeblue.com/2017/2/24/14730778/mike-bluem-opens-up-about-the-colts-approach-to-the-salary-cap

I stand corrected. Good to know!

[Shive]

Hopefully we can snag him. He'd be perfect at NT and would have familiarity with the scheme, so it'd be more about chemistry than learning the defense. 

[Finball]

Ravens won't use 15M on an NT? Shocking!

[BCoop]

1 hour ago, Smonroe said:

 

Anyone have a fair idea what Charles would get?  If it was reasonable it seems like he'd be a great pickup.

 

I know most people want a younger RB in the draft, but if he's 100% it would be hard to find someone better outside of the first round.

 

I'm with you. I think the whole "build with youth" approach has been taken a bit to an extreme around here. This team obviously needs to get younger, but we'd be silly to ignore players that would make the team better in the short term as well.

We can still accumulate young assets and bring guys like Charles in for 1-2 years to help in the interim. I'd have no problem rolling with Charles/Gore/Turbin in the backfield for a year. It allows CB to focus solely on defense in FA/Draft with maybe one acquisition on the OL as well. Then, next year we can go all in on finding the best RB possible.

[Iancolts]

Can we bring in a duel threat in Adrian Peterson and Charles?  With luck at the helm and those two backs wow can you imagine?

[pgt_rob]

2 minutes ago, Iancolts said:

Can we bring in a duel threat in Adrian Peterson and Charles?  With luck at the helm and those two backs wow can you imagine?

 

That would be something to see, that's for sure. But both would probably want like $8M+ each per year.

[Colts_Fan12]

7 minutes ago, BCoop said:

 

I'm with you. I think the whole "build with youth" approach has been taken a bit to an extreme around here. This team obviously needs to get younger, but we'd be silly to ignore players that would make the team better in the short term as well.

We can still accumulate young assets and bring guys like Charles in for 1-2 years to help in the interim. I'd have no problem rolling with Charles/Gore/Turbin in the backfield for a year. It allows CB to focus solely on defense in FA/Draft with maybe one acquisition on the OL as well. Then, next year we can go all in on finding the best RB possible.

Older players are fine if they can actually play Charles is NEVER on the field 

[BCoop]

Just now, Colts_Fan12 said:

Older players are fine if they can actually play Charles is NEVER on the field 

 

That's a valid point. It would be up to the medical staff to evaluate him going into next season. There's probably a good chance he's going the Ahmad Bradshaw route so I wouldn't complain if management thought he was too much of a risk. 

 

In general though, I wouldn't rule out any player on the wrong side of 30 if it's a short contract that helps us now and allows younger players to grow without being thrown into the fire.

[Colts_Fan12]

1 minute ago, BCoop said:

 

That's a valid point. It would be up to the medical staff to evaluate him going into next season. There's probably a good chance he's going the Ahmad Bradshaw route so I wouldn't complain if management thought he was too much of a risk. 

 

In general though, I wouldn't rule out any player on the wrong side of 30 if it's a short contract that helps us now and allows younger players to grow without being thrown into the fire.

No one has a problem with older players for short term just Grigson got old players and over paid and kept them way to long 

[csmopar]

17 minutes ago, Iancolts said:

Can we bring in a duel threat in Adrian Peterson and Charles?  With luck at the helm and those two backs wow can you imagine?

an AP and Gore combo would be very dangerous and much better than the walking IR case that is Charles

14 hours ago, Majin Vegeta said:

Looks like Jairus Byrd will be released from the Saints next week. 

 

14 hours ago, SaturdayAllDay said:

Not surprising at all. He hasn't lived up to his lofty contract in NO. Last I heard they were talking about asking him to take a pay cut, guess that isnt happening. They still have Vaccaro and Bell anyways. 

 

Still, that 8M in dead cap is going to hurt. Maybe they designate him post June 1st cut?

Wasnt Byrd one of the ones this forum was ticked that Grigs didnt go after?

14 hours ago, Superman said:

 

It drops that dead money down to $3.4m in 2017, with $4.6m in 2018.

 

Mickey Loomis has really been awful with the cap. They're in okay shape this year, but the past couple years have been atrocious. Everyone praised him for finding a way to afford Byrd when they signed him, but this is what happens when you backload contracts. It's even worse when your players don't live up to those backloaded contracts. To still have $8m in dead money on that deal is egregious.

This is where Grigs honestly did a good job, not a great job but a good job and one I hope Ballard can continue to do

[jskinnz]

20 minutes ago, BCoop said:

 

I'm with you. I think the whole "build with youth" approach has been taken a bit to an extreme around here. This team obviously needs to get younger, but we'd be silly to ignore players that would make the team better in the short term as well.

We can still accumulate young assets and bring guys like Charles in for 1-2 years to help in the interim. I'd have no problem rolling with Charles/Gore/Turbin in the backfield for a year. It allows CB to focus solely on defense in FA/Draft with maybe one acquisition on the OL as well. Then, next year we can go all in on finding the best RB possible.

 

There is no way the Colts would consider having two RB's on the roster north of 30.  Will.  Not.  Happen.

 

The other thing to consider is that your backup RB's need to be special teams contributors.  And there is not a chance that they would ask Gore or Charles to do that.

 

Charles will not be a Colt.

[Finball]

33 minutes ago, pgt_rob said:

 

That would be something to see, that's for sure. But both would probably want like $8M+ each per year.

 

Probably will but I don't thin there's a chance they will get that.

[BCoop]

Just now, jskinnz said:

 

There is no way the Colts would consider having two RB's on the roster north of 30.  Will.  Not.  Happen.

 

The other thing to consider is that your backup RB's need to be special teams contributors.  And there is not a chance that they would ask Gore or Charles to do that.

 

Charles will not be a Colt.

 

If management feels Charles can be an asset short-term while affording the Colts to use an extra draft pick on a talent-needy defense, his age doesn't make a lick of difference. This is even more true if he is completely healed with almost no mileage on him the past 2 years.

 

There are plenty of teams with RBBC where neither RB plays special teams so I'm not concerned about that.

 

I'm not saying it's the Colts' best option. I'm just saying it's an option if you're committed to using all available assets to fix the defense this off-season. To instantly rule it out because a guy is 30 isn't really operating in the best interest of the team.

[jskinnz]

14 minutes ago, BCoop said:

 

If management feels Charles can be an asset short-term while affording the Colts to use an extra draft pick on a talent-needy defense, his age doesn't make a lick of difference. This is even more true if he is completely healed with almost no mileage on him the past 2 years.

 

There are plenty of teams with RBBC where neither RB plays special teams so I'm not concerned about that.

 

I'm not saying it's the Colts' best option. I'm just saying it's an option if you're committed to using all available assets to fix the defense this off-season. To instantly rule it out because a guy is 30 isn't really operating in the best interest of the team.

 

They may consider 30+ year-old guys at other positions.  Not at RB with Gore already on board.  I say this with virtual certainty which is as much as I guarantee something without actually being in the room with Ballard.  

[ColtsBlueFL]

17 hours ago, jvan1973 said:

What is the cost of tagging cousins again?

 

Exclusive Franchise tag 2017 - 23.94 million

Transition Franchise tag in 2018 - 28.78 million   (Exclusive tag 2018 = 34.48 million, they won't do this one))

 

15 hours ago, SaturdayAllDay said:

Cousins forced their hand into tagging him. His agent wasnt negotiating with them and they had to choose between tagging him or letting him walk. They still have a few months to resign him to a long term contract, this just gives cousins agent more bargaining power.

 

Some with Washington, but how much else with other teams?  None this year (can't even talk to other teams) , and not much in 2018 if he gets the Transition Franchise tag.

 

16 hours ago, 2006Coltsbestever said:

Redskins should just sign Kirk Cousins and get it over with. Tagging him again for 24 Mill is insane.

{snip}

 

If you see above, In order for the Redskins to keep Cousins, It will take just over 52 million guaranteed in 2017 and 2018 using the Franchise Tags available.  I do not see his agent negotiating any deal that is less than 52 million guaranteed over the 1st two years of a long term contract.  Why should he?

 

If someone else offers him a contract in 2018 (they can't this year) while on a Transition Franchise tag, Redskins can match it, or get two 1st round compensation picks.  In the meantime, they get a QB that will sign the tender, get into camp and play.  They can also prepare a new QB for 2019 and the potential departure of Cousins.

[OffensivelyPC]

18 minutes ago, ColtsBlueFL said:

 

Exclusive Franchise tag 2017 - 23.94 million

Transition Franchise tag in 2018 - 28.78 million   (Exclusive tag 2018 = 34.48 million, they won't do this one))

 

By NFL rule, you can only tag a player two consecutive years and 3 times total (i.e. they tagged him in 2016, could tag him agian in 2017, but they couldn't tag him again until 2019).  In other words, they could not legally tag him in 2018.

 

They have to sign him after this year or let him go.

[Shive]

17 minutes ago, OffensivelyPC said:

By NFL rule, you can only tag a player two consecutive years and 3 times total (i.e. they tagged him in 2016, could tag him agian in 2017, but they couldn't tag him again until 2019).  In other words, they could not legally tag him in 2018.

 

They have to sign him after this year or let him go.

I believe they can't use the exclusive franchise tag a 3rd time, but they can use the Transition Tag next year, which comes with a 40% increase over the standard Franchise Tag rate.

[Shive]

Either way, Cousins is in a peculiar position. He's betting on himself again this year by not working out a long-term deal with the Redskins. If he has a down year, he will have potentially lost a lot of money. I could see the 49ers trading for him, but not at what the Redskins reportedly want, which is pretty much what they gave up to get RG3. No team would give that up for Cousins, because he's not THAT good and what you see right now is most likely the best you'll get.

[ColtsBlueFL]

45 minutes ago, OffensivelyPC said:

By NFL rule, you can only tag a player two consecutive years and 3 times total (i.e. they tagged him in 2016, could tag him agian in 2017, but they couldn't tag him again until 2019).  In other words, they could not legally tag him in 2018.

 

They have to sign him after this year or let him go.

 

 

Ahhh, I think this is a CBA issue (2006 CBA changed the formulas), not NFL rule.  And the last I knew, non QB players tagged for a third year got paid the average of the top five salaries at the highest paid position (typically QB). 

 

Quarterbacks, in the third year of the exclusive franchise tag, they get at least a 44-percent raise over their salary in the prior year.

 

It makes no sense to skip a year, as the player has signed or moved on in FA.  There's no chance to tag him a third time if a year must elapse before doing so.  I believe my information to be correct.

[Luck 4 president]

1 hour ago, Iancolts said:

Can we bring in a duel threat in Adrian Peterson and Charles?  With luck at the helm and those two backs wow can you imagine?

That would honestly be pretty funny/awesome if they were paired with frank gore. Give them each 10 carries a game hoping they don't get hurt. 

[ColtsBlueFL]

22 minutes ago, Shive said:

I believe they can't use the exclusive franchise tag a 3rd time, but they can use the Transition Tag next year, which comes with a 40% increase over the standard Franchise Tag rate.

 

I think they can use either tag again, but the Exclusive tag would incur a 44% increase over the 23.94 million, whereas the Transition tag would only be another 20% over the 23.05 million. So we're talking just shy of 29 million versus almost 35 million for Cousins next year to be tagged again a 3rd time.  He's already going to get his 24 million this year.

[dgambill]

36 minutes ago, OffensivelyPC said:

By NFL rule, you can only tag a player two consecutive years and 3 times total (i.e. they tagged him in 2016, could tag him agian in 2017, but they couldn't tag him again until 2019).  In other words, they could not legally tag him in 2018.

 

They have to sign him after this year or let him go.

I get the sneaky suspicion that Gruden doesn't want his future tied to Cousins. I think they actually would very much like to trade Cousins. If they could get SF #2 pick and get say a few of those 11 picks they have later in the draft they would do it. (1ST, 4TH, 5TH) I don't think they need multiple first round picks for him. If there is someone in this draft they like they could likely use their pick 17th overall and have an option to pick one of the first rd talents. Yes it would mean taking a step back but if they are going to get past Dallas and NY they may need to add some talent to that defense and if they aren't sold on Cousins then why pay him a fortune and limit building around him.