Zeitler looking at 12M/yr?!?!

[Yoshinator]

2 minutes ago, jvan1973 said:

How did levitre turn out for the titans?

Didn't realize Levitre and Zeitler were the same person. Extremely ridiculous to say one person failed and use that as a template for another person failing.

[jvan1973]

Just now, Jared Cisneros said:

Didn't realize Levitre and Zeitler were the same person. Extremely ridiculous to say one person failed and use that as a template for another person failing.

Name any guard that signed a huge free agent contract and lived up to it

[Legend of Luck]

1 minute ago, jvan1973 said:

Most big time free agents never perform to the level of their new contract.   Why do you think it is great teams rarely ever sign huge free agent deals?  

Do you remember the Broncos 3 years ago?

Demarcus Ware

TJ Ward

Aquib Talib

Emmanuel Sanders

 

 

Pretty sure they won a super bowl..

[BleedBlu8792]

2 minutes ago, jvan1973 said:

How did levitre turn out for the titans?

 

He's worked out well for the Falcons so far.

[BleedBlu8792]

1 minute ago, jvan1973 said:

Name any guard that signed a huge free agent contract and lived up to it

 

Kelechi Osemele was probably the top OG in football this year.

[jvan1973]

2 minutes ago, Legend of Luck said:

Do you remember the Broncos 3 years ago?

Demarcus Ware

TJ Ward

Aquib Talib

Emmanuel Sanders

 

 

Pretty sure they won a super bowl..

Ware and talib  we're big contracts.  They also had an old qb and had a small window.     How many big free agent contracts have the patriots signed?

[DaColts85]

Osemele did well last year for the Raiders. DeCastro is a stud for the Steelers.  Marshal Yanda, Justin Pugh.  These are some guys who make top dollar and are doing just well as a Guard.  Now a days you have to find and pay for quality offensive linemen.  

[Yoshinator]

Just now, jvan1973 said:

Name any guard that signed a huge free agent contract and lived up to it

It doesn't matter, that's a coincedence. You are cherry picking something. The next 5 guards could work out or the next 10 could be a bust. You can't judge the future results of player A based on the past results of players B-G. You have to do your due diligence, and occasionally take a chance. You should know there's no Guard worth taking at 15, this is a poor draft class for G's, and there are 4-5 top tier G's in FA. FA is absolutely not the best way to build a team, but you have to use your cap on a couple of guys in our situation. This isn't blackjack where the past dictates the future, it's more like roulette, where each event in FA is an independent trial success-wise for free agents.

[Legend of Luck]

1 minute ago, BleedBlu8792 said:

 

Kelechi Osemele was probably the top OG in football this year.

 

[DaColts85]

1 minute ago, jvan1973 said:

Ware and talib  we're big contracts.  They also had an old qb and had a small window.     How many big free agent contracts have the patriots signed?

They have spent a lot on their own guys...McCourty and Gronk (injured quit a bit).  But they also have a system in place that works for them.  It is not easy t o just copy someone and expect the same success.  If that is the case then you should be a GM just like many others.  Spending in FA has been increasing with teams but some do it in a wrong way, while others see it as a way to land some key pieces (i.e. Giants and Raiders last year).

[OffensivelyPC]

7 minutes ago, Jared Cisneros said:

It doesn't matter, that's a coincedence. You are cherry picking something. The next 5 guards could work out or the next 10 could be a bust. You can't judge the future results of player A based on the past results of players B-G. You have to do your due diligence, and occasionally take a chance. You should know there's no Guard worth taking at 15, this is a poor draft class for G's, and there are 4-5 top tier G's in FA. FA is absolutely not the best way to build a team, but you have to use your cap on a couple of guys in our situation. This isn't blackjack where the past dictates the future, it's more like roulette, where each event in FA is an independent trial success-wise for free agents.

the point isn't that you judge future players based on another players past performance.  It's like a proverb that doesn't necessarily apply in every situation, but generally holds true.  The fact of the matter is, big spenders in free agency don't often get the results they thought they were paying for.  Sometimes they do, but more often than not, they don't.  So some teams, and its usually the ones that are perennially good teams, don't spend much cash in FA.  

 

It's not about proving facts that haven't occurred yet, it's about playing the odds.

[Yoshinator]

1 minute ago, OffensivelyPC said:

the point isn't that you judge future players based on another players past performance.  It's like a proverb that doesn't necessarily apply in every situation, but generally holds true.  The fact of the matter is, big spenders in free agency don't often get the results they thought they were paying for.  Sometimes they do, but more often than not, they don't.  So some teams, and its usually the ones that are perennially good teams, don't spend much cash in FA.  

 

It's not about proving facts that haven't occurred yet, it's about playing the odds.

Of course the odds in FA are bad, but the rules are that each team has to spend 95% of their salary cap, and we don't have a complete enough team to re-sign our own to higher contracts and keep franchise type players. This is why we are going to sign some FA's (most likely a couple high profile ones) whether you like it or not. The odds are bad, but you have to do your due diligence, and try to hit on someone. You can either sign a couple high profile guys, or a bunch of lower tier FA's. The latter hasn't worked with Grigson, so I hope we do the former this time with Ballard.

[SaturdayAllDay]

1 minute ago, Jared Cisneros said:

Of course the odds in FA are bad, but the rules are that each team has to spend 95% of their salary cap, and we don't have a complete enough team to re-sign our own to higher contracts and keep franchise type players. This is why we are going to sign some FA's (most likely a couple high profile ones) whether you like it or not. The odds are bad, but you have to do your due diligence, and try to hit on someone. You can either sign a couple high profile guys, or a bunch of lower tier FA's. The latter hasn't worked with Grigson, so I hope we do the former this time with Ballard.

To use your own words:

Didn't realize Grigson and Ballard were the same person. Extremely ridiculous to say one person failed and use that as a template for another person failing. 

[Yoshinator]

Just now, SaturdayAllDay said:

To use your own words:

Didn't realize Grigson and Ballard were the same person. Extremely ridiculous to say one person failed and use that as a template for another person failing. 

I'm using this based on a different approach to FA, high tier FA's to low tier ones, not passing on a position because of past results. Any GM or person with decent intelligence on here will tell you high tier FA's have a higher success rate over the short and long term than the cheaper ones.

[SaturdayAllDay]

Just now, Jared Cisneros said:

I'm using this based on a different approach to FA, high tier FA's to low tier ones, not passing on a position because of past results. Any GM or person with decent intelligence on here will tell you high tier FA's have a higher success rate over the short and long term than the cheaper ones.

and you have the stats to prove that or information from multiple successful GMs saying that?

[Shive]

8 minutes ago, Jared Cisneros said:

I'm using this based on a different approach to FA, high tier FA's to low tier ones, not passing on a position because of past results. Any GM or person with decent intelligence on here will tell you high tier FA's have a higher success rate over the short and long term than the cheaper ones.

High tier vs low tier isn't really all that important. The Jags had quite a few high tier signings last year and still weren't good. It all comes down to bringing in the RIGHT guys. The right lower tier guys are usually the ones that do better, because they haven't received their big payday yet and usually are players that haven't reached their prime. Top tier players are usually ones in their prime or just on the back side of it, where you're paying for past success, not future potential.

 

Ballard could potentially do no top tier signings and drastically improve the team, if the right players are chosen. His lower tier guys may be different than Grigson's...

[SaturdayAllDay]

1 minute ago, Shive said:

High tier vs low tier isn't really all that important. The Jags had quite a few high tier signings last year and still weren't good. It all comes down to bringing in the RIGHT guys. The right lower tier guys are usually the ones that do better, because they haven't received their big payday yet and usually are players that haven't reached their prime. Top tier players are usually ones in their prime or just on the back side of it, where you're paying for past success, not future potential.

 

Ballard could potentially do no top tier signings and drastically improve the team, if the right players are chosen.

Exactly. Just because Grigson was terrible at bringing in free agents doesnt mean his philosophy was necessarily wrong. Just that he was bad at judging talent, which is pretty much a given based on a lot of his draft picks. 

[Yoshinator]

9 minutes ago, SaturdayAllDay said:

and you have the stats to prove that or information from multiple successful GMs saying that?

As far as GM's go, it's proven every year because they go after the more high profile FA's on day 1 every year. EVERY YEAR. The top FA's are taken in the first few days and then the less desirable FA's go little by little. Proof that GM's would rather take a chance on the expensive FA's and try to land a big hit. As far as FA's go, I guess I can name a lot of hits that were high profile. Just last year, Malik Jackson, Osemele, Trevathan, Janoris Jenkins, and Bruce Irvin were hits from the top 10 group last year. That's probably as much as the lower tier put together.

[ColtsBlueFL]

2 hours ago, Jared Cisneros said:

Of course the odds in FA are bad, but the rules are that each team has to spend 95% of their salary cap, and we don't have a complete enough team to re-sign our own to higher contracts and keep franchise type players. This is why we are going to sign some FA's (most likely a couple high profile ones) whether you like it or not. The odds are bad, but you have to do your due diligence, and try to hit on someone. You can either sign a couple high profile guys, or a bunch of lower tier FA's. The latter hasn't worked with Grigson, so I hope we do the former this time with Ballard.

 

Actually, it is 89% average over a 4 years period, and cash, not necessarily Cap Hit.

 

2017 is the first year in the new 4 years averaging window (2013-2016 was the first), so there is absolutely no pressing issue to spend if it is not felt prudent.

[Leon]

id rather spend 12mill on a good player than 12 on 3 or 4 backup quality over the hill guys that dont pan out.....again

[Yoshinator]

6 minutes ago, Shive said:

High tier vs low tier isn't really all that important. The Jags had quite a few high tier signings last year and still weren't good. It all comes down to bringing in the RIGHT guys. The right lower tier guys are usually the ones that do better, because they haven't received their big payday yet and usually are players that haven't reached their prime. Top tier players are usually ones in their prime or just on the back side of it, where you're paying for past success, not future potential.

 

Ballard could potentially do no top tier signings and drastically improve the team, if the right players are chosen. His lower tier guys may be different than Grigson's...

The Jags weren't good because they have bad QB play, bad RB play and a bad head coach. No FA class was going to make up for that and you know it. You are more intelligent than this, and I don't know why you are using the Jags for a weak argument like that. As far as your 2nd comment, he very well could. However, lower tier FA's are just that for a reason. They are the bad combination of players that were released, along with players that are more expensive than normal players at their skill level. The odds on hitting on one of them are very low, and the reward is low most of the time as well.

[Yoshinator]

2 minutes ago, ColtsBlueFL said:

 

Actually, it is 89% average over a 4 years period, and cash, not necessarily Cap Hit.

 

2017 is the first year in the new 4 years averaging window (2013-2016 was the first), so their is absolutely no pressing issue to spend if it is not felt prudent.

Didn't realize this. Thank you for the info!

[OffensivelyPC]

22 minutes ago, Jared Cisneros said:

Of course the odds in FA are bad, but the rules are that each team has to spend 95% of their salary cap, and we don't have a complete enough team to re-sign our own to higher contracts and keep franchise type players. This is why we are going to sign some FA's (most likely a couple high profile ones) whether you like it or not. The odds are bad, but you have to do your due diligence, and try to hit on someone. You can either sign a couple high profile guys, or a bunch of lower tier FA's. The latter hasn't worked with Grigson, so I hope we do the former this time with Ballard.

That's fair.  If you used Supes offseason mock, we'd spend around $25m on free agents after re-signing our own guys.  That's not a ton and you saw the players he added at their contract values.  We'll see what Ballard does this offseason, but obviously, signing a big name free agent means less toward other free agents. 

[PeterBowman]

I will say this, it's nice having a cap wiz like Bleum on the staff to make sure the contracts don't hurt the team in the long run.

[Shive]

5 minutes ago, Jared Cisneros said:

The Jags weren't good because they have bad QB play, bad RB play and a bad head coach. No FA class was going to make up for that and you know it. You are more intelligent than this, and I don't know why you are using the Jags for a weak argument like that. As far as your 2nd comment, he very well could. However, lower tier FA's are just that for a reason. They are the bad combination of players that were released, along with players that are more expensive than normal players at their skill level. The odds on hitting on one of them are very low, and the reward is low most of the time as well.

That was just the most recent example I could think of. I could cite more like the old Redskins teams that always brought in all the big names...

 

My point is that bringing in top tier FA's isn't always the recipe for success. The best teams in the league generally don't take any top tier FA's. I'm not saying go only for the low tier guys, but those mid-tiered guys are where the bulk of your FA spending should be. You bring in guys that may not be superstars, but can fill the holes that you have, gel in your locker room, and do their jobs on the field. You look at the teams that played in the divisional rounds of the playoffs and you'll see that almost none of them brought in top tier FA's, because it's not what consistently good teams do.

[Yoshinator]

2 minutes ago, Shive said:

That was just the most recent example I could think of. I could cite more like the old Redskins teams that always brought in all the big names...

 

My point is that bringing in top tier FA's isn't always the recipe for success. The best teams in the league generally don't take any top tier FA's. I'm not saying go only for the low tier guys, but those mid-tiered guys are where the bulk of your FA spending should be. You bring in guys that may not be superstars, but can fill the holes that you have, gel in your locker room, and do their jobs on the field. You look at the teams that played in the divisional rounds of the playoffs and you'll see that almost none of them brought in top tier FA's, because it's not what consistently good teams do.

Believe me, I'm the biggest supporter of building through the draft. If I was a GM, I'd copy the Packers and Ravens model for success. Build through the draft, get compensatory picks for FA's I didn't want to re-sign, and use those to help get a championship. FA's should be used as a tool to put a team over the edge and win a championship like the Broncos or the Pats did. In our case, we have to spend a bit, and I'd like a couple top FA's at the trenches (especially G and NT), in a draft where there isn't much strength at either position and where we have a GM that values the trenches now. I trust his input that he can make the right choices, and the pure number of solid choices at both choices in FA means we should take someone there where it's given to us. Just my opinion though.

[ClaytonColt]

2 hours ago, Legend of Luck said:

We can't beg the team to protect Andrew and then complain when the team considers getting a top player in the league at that position just because he's in for big money. 

 

IF WE'RE GOING TO SPEND CAP, SPEND IT TO PROTECT ANDREW!

Spend it to make the team better.

 

The purpose of the game isn't to allow zero sacks but allow 40 points per game. 

[Legend of Luck]

7 minutes ago, ClaytonColt said:

Spend it to make the team better.

 

The purpose of the game isn't to allow zero sacks but allow 40 points per game. 

 

I agree of course, but you can't say adding a top 5 RG in the league wouldn't immensely help our offense.

[colts52761]

thought we would hear more signings by now?

[Legend of Luck]

5 minutes ago, colts52761 said:

thought we would hear more signings by now?

 

I think with so many teams having cap space, agents and players are really feeling all the offers and options around the market.

[Shive]

5 minutes ago, colts52761 said:

thought we would hear more signings by now?

I was thinking so too. Not just with us, but league-wide. Some teams have retained some of their own lowerror level guys, but the only ones of note have been Doyle, Gresham, and Chandler Jones..

[Steamboat_Shaun]

3 hours ago, BleedBlu8792 said:

 

 

For 5 years I've seen nothing but "protect our QB", "if only Luck had more time", "if Luck had the Cowboys OL", then a great OL player becomes available AND everybody is up in arms at the cost. You HAVE to pay to play. This team is sitting on ~60MIL, we can afford the guy, and if you want to solidify that wall in front of Andrew, we're going to have to pay. Yes. his price is a little inflated, but nothing this team can't handle. A top tier right OG would do this team wonders AND we'd have him throughout the prime of his career. 

 

I agree. If we truly want the OL to get better and be an elite unit, it's gonna cost some money. You can't have it both ways. If we can justify paying Luck big bucks, there's no reason not to use some valuable resources (high draft picks, big money FAs) to protect that investment.

[Steamboat_Shaun]

41 minutes ago, colts52761 said:

thought we would hear more signings by now?

 

Free agent signings don't officially start until tomorrow, right now is just the "legal tampering" period. It's ok to discuss contract possibilities with players and agents, but if a player's changing teams, nothing can be signed until tomorrow.

[PeterBowman]

1 minute ago, Steamboat_Shaun said:

 

Free agent signings don't officially start until tomorrow, right now is just the "legal tampering" period. It's ok to discuss contract possibilities with players and agents, but if a player's changing teams, nothing can be signed until tomorrow.

yep, there will be a flurry as of 4:05 pm tomorrow lol

[ColtsBlueFL]

44 minutes ago, colts52761 said:

thought we would hear more signings by now?

 

You will only hear of leaks about 'potential' signings... all the way until Thursday at Four.  While teams can 'talk' to players agents (not the player), they can't sign any deals until the new NFL season officially begins.  And that is Thursday after 4:00 pm EST.

 

Only teams that sign their own FA's can actually sign a contract and then 'release the info'.  All pothers wait until March 9th, 2017 at 4:00 pm EST.

[Steamboat_Shaun]

Just now, PeterBowman said:

yep, there will be a flurry as of 4:05 pm tomorrow lol

 

I just hope that we're in on it, and land a couple gamechangers, and I honestly think we will, as the names we've been associated with suggest so.

[ColtsBlueFL]

3 minutes ago, PeterBowman said:

yep, there will be a flurry as of 4:05 pm tomorrow lol

 

Yes indeed.  probably many deals have been made already, but the NFL wants them to keep it quiet.  Normally, that doesn't happen and word leaks out.  We'll see this year if we hear nothing, then hear about 1-20 signings at 4:01 pom EST !!  LOL

[Shive]

31 minutes ago, ColtsBlueFL said:

 

You will only hear of leaks about 'potential' signings... all the way until Thursday at Four.  While teams can 'talk' to players agents (not the player), they can't sign any deals until the new NFL season officially begins.  And that is Thursday after 4:00 pm EST.

 

Only teams that sign their own FA's can actually sign a contract and then 'release the info'.  All pothers wait until March 9th, 2017 at 4:00 pm EST.

I'm pretty sure it can be announced that teams have agreed on terms with a free agent, just the signings just can't occur until tomorrow. 

[ClaytonColt]

1 hour ago, Legend of Luck said:

 

I agree of course, but you can't say adding a top 5 RG in the league wouldn't immensely help our offense.

I'm not sure. Did having Zeitler get the Bengals a Championship? 

 

I keep saying it but we shouldn't need 5 studs to have a championship quality offensive line. We just need a good "group", good scheme and good coaching. The talent should be there.

 

The talent on the other side of the ball....not so much.

 

Spending $12m a year on a RG when our defense is the way it is buggers belief.

[Jason_]

10 minutes ago, ClaytonColt said:

I'm not sure. Did having Zeitler get the Bengals a Championship? 

 

I keep saying it but we shouldn't need 5 studs to have a championship quality offensive line. We just need a good "group", good scheme and good coaching. The talent should be there.

 

The talent on the other side of the ball....not so much.

 

Spending $12m a year on a RG when our defense is the way it is buggers belief.

 

It's not an either/or.  There's enough cap space to sign Zeitler, if they want, and still sign a few defensive free agents as well.