Jump to content
Indianapolis Colts
Indianapolis Colts Fan Forum

Recommended Posts

IMO Peterson does not have a new contract left in him. He played in three games last season and his stat line was not good at all. He played in three games with 37 carries for 72 yards. He averaged 1..95 yards with no TDs. Add the fact he is 32 years old with a lot of tread on his tires and his injuries were not minor.

This draft has quite a few good running backs that can be signed for a rookie contract unlike Peterson who's veteran contract would be much more.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, LJpalmbeacher said:

He looked done last year BEFORE his season ending injury.

No thanks.


He looked so good against us last year...


...then they put him in the game...


Thanks AP, we needed that ego boost!

Link to post
Share on other sites

I'd rather draft a RB. I understand your want. We need someone to take the pressure off of Andrew Luck. I'm just not sure Peterson is that guy. We need someone for the future in my opinion. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Not worth the price.  Let someone else over-pay him for past production.


But if he was the last one left in the RB pile, and cheap? And healthy enough to get into camp in time to learn the system?


I'd like to see him in a rotational role.  He wouldn't make it through an entire season as a feature back.


But he'll go for a big contract, or for a contender, or if he's foolish to a team that promises to make him the feature back, so it won't happen anyway.

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 3/18/2017 at 8:51 AM, BOTT said:

Not that I want either, but I would go for Jamal Charles before Peterson.

I agree.  If Charles can recover fully he and Gore would make great, albeit geriatric, duo.  High risk/high reward.  

Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

  • Thread of the Week

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • Because I’ve been a Colts fan for a long time and Jim Irsay has never had an issue spending money.  Ballard has also said over and over again he was saving his money to pay his own.  This isn’t breaking news.  So rather buy into some idea that he was fine with spending money under Tobin, Polian, and Grigson but is no longer fine with spending money under Ballard just doesn’t add up when you look at his history and what Ballard said.  It’s much more logical to assume that’s he’s spending what Ballard wants like he has with his previous GMs especially when the GM tells you he doesn’t believe in splash free agents and is saving his money to sign his own.   Irsay doesn’t negotiate the contracts.  Ballard does so contract structuring is done by Ballard and Ballard has done it in away to give him cap flexibility that is going to allow him to keep guys like Nelson, Leonard, Smith and others over the next couple of years.    Also Jim Irsay is worth 3 billion dollars he’s not hurting for money.
    • I’m not sure why you find it hard to accept that the Colts may have cash flow problems?  Not that they can’t manage them, but still….   Irsay is one of the few owners who doesn’t have any other source of big income.   No high tech company.  No real estate development.   No oil and gas.   His wealth is owning the Colts.   That’s it.    Sure he may he may spend money, but these last five years he now uses a pay-go system that lends itself to managing money.  We used to give bigger SB’s under Grigson.   Now,  we give either small or no signing bonuses.   Very few teams do that.  And we’re a very small market franchise.   You weren’t the least bit surprised to see DeForest Buckner accept a ZERO signing bonus?   I sure was.     Point of clarification:  none of what I’ve written is proof of anything.   But I think it’s at least worth considering, and you seem completely unwilling to even do that.  I confess find that surprising. 
    • Just because they had money left over doesn’t mean Irsay had a problem spending it had Ballard wanted too.  It doesn’t take that hard of a look back at Irsay’s history of owner to see he has zero problem spending what his GM wants to spend.  
    • That's not exactly true if you consider cap space left over. IIRC, we had the most unspent or near most unspent over a 3-4 year period just recently (IIRC, 16, 17, 18, 19). Pretty sure we had 40+M unspent two years in a row.   IIRC, we carried over the most in the league again this year at around 30M.   It was also speculated that we 1) didn't ask Luck for money back, AND 2) gave JB such a big raise, was because we would have been too far under the 89% rule had we not done both 1 and 2.     
    • Regardless Irsay has never been shy about spending to make the Colts better.  So either way the first point that started all this is irrelevant.  
  • Members

  • Create New...