Does anybody kind of wished Garcon whould have stayed with the Colts?

[horseshoecrabs]

I know that the NFL is a business and sometimes you lose guys to free agency, But one guy I really liked ,we had was Garcon at WR. 

It's too late now for wishful thinking, but he would have been a good receiver to be a Colt, during his carrier. He was an excellent possession receiver during the late Manning  years. I will always see him as Manning induced product, But obviously he had talent beyond Catching for Peyton.

   

[horseshoecrabs]

Hey, It's a bye week, just a diversional question, to past the time for now. 

[Calmack]

Yes. He would have been amazing in Lucks early years. 

[DonnieDarko1023]

Felt that way as soon as the Redskins overpaid for him.....he should have never left 

[coltsfanej]

yes would have been nice. but I believe had he re-signed here that Reggie would not have been retained, and I preferred Reggie over Garcon. I think Reggie was the perfect guy to help Luck start his career. 

[Jdubu]

Well I thought the kid had such potential to become a staple in our offense and that he would get resigned here that I bought his jersey middle of his last season in Indy. I was a little put off by his departure but looking back now, I can’t blame anyone for wanting out of the toxic environment that Griggs brought. 

[Alex22]

39 minutes ago, horseshoecrabs said:

I know that the NFL is a business and sometimes you lose guys to free agency, But one guy I really liked ,we had was Garcon at WR. 

It's too late now for wishful thinking, but he would have been a good receiver to be a Colt, during his carrier. He was an excellent possession receiver during the late Manning  years. I will always see him as Manning induced product, But obviously he had talent beyond Catching for Peyton.

   

 

He dropped the ball a lot and apparently isn’t great in the locker room. 

[Boiler_Colt]

If he stayed, Reggie would not have, so no.

[Calmack]

6 minutes ago, Jdubu said:

Well I thought the kid had such potential to become a staple in our offense and that he would get resigned here that I bought his jersey middle of his last season in Indy. I was a little put off by his departure but looking back now, I can’t blame anyone for wanting out of the toxic environment that Griggs brought. 

I think he left right around the time Grigs was hired. No one knew Grigs was gonna be trash yet. Colts just finished a season 2-14. He probably also wanted the $$. Cant blame him for that. 

[chad72]

No, I do not. He made a few flash plays and would follow it up with not executing routine plays. He was not a consistent WR by any means, more streaky for my liking. I'd take the routine floor that Reggie brought to the table any day of the week, more so on Sunday.  

[horseshoecrabs]

Owe I beg to differ, He made plenty of clutch plays for Peyton in crucial situations.  I think the kid at the time came out of no where. Sort of like what

our tight end no frills Doyle has done. I never heard of this kid back then, and all of a sudden he was making clutch plays. As far as the comparison to Reggie, that's not what the debate should be about no more than TY  to  Reggie or Garcon

[SteelCityColt]

Yes.. Garçon does.

[RollerColt]

Hmm...

 

Imagine a younger Luck throwing to Reggie, TY and Pierre...

 

Dang... That would have been a potent trio or receivers. 

 

 

[horseshoecrabs]

1 minute ago, horseshoecrabs said:

Owe I beg to differ, He made plenty of clutch plays for Peyton in crucial situations. 

 

[horseshoecrabs]

20 minutes ago, chad72 said:

No, I do not. He made a few flash plays and would follow it up with not executing routine plays. He was not a consistent WR by any means, more streaky for my liking. I'd take the routine floor that Reggie brought to the table any day of the week, more so on Sunday.  

Was he a Number 1 receiver? obviously not but,  a good complement as a clutch possession receiver ? yes

 

[horseshoecrabs]

44 minutes ago, Alex22 said:

 

He dropped the ball a lot and apparently isn’t great in the locker room. 

And you base your Locker room  hearsay on what evidence? 

[horseshoecrabs]

Yea, a lot of dropped balls, 625 catches, For 7,798 yds 37 tds, in 147 games for not the number 1 receiver for the Colts. 

[Fluke_33]

1 hour ago, Alex22 said:

 

He dropped the ball a lot and apparently isn’t great in the locker room. 

Agreed.  Reminded me of Sean Dawkins.  

[horseshoecrabs]

So as fans,  even Garcon  is not someone you liked? my goodness, You have high standards. I sure am glad  I am not a new stand up comedian in an audience that you guys judge lol. 

[csmopar]

2 hours ago, horseshoecrabs said:

I know that the NFL is a business and sometimes you lose guys to free agency, But one guy I really liked ,we had was Garcon at WR. 

It's too late now for wishful thinking, but he would have been a good receiver to be a Colt, during his carrier. He was an excellent possession receiver during the late Manning  years. I will always see him as Manning induced product, But obviously he had talent beyond Catching for Peyton.

   

Nope

[HectorRoberts]

Yes!!!! I wish we would bring him back now! I think he would be an amazing compliment to Hilton 

[rockywoj]

I recall it was assumed that Reggie was going to be unaffordable and gone and that the Colts would re-sign Garçon. 

 

But then Garcon was signed way beyond what I considered to be fair market value and Wayne took a home team discount.  I could not have been more happy the way this went down and Reggie proceeded to have his best year as a Colt by far!  Reggie was THE man!

 

That being said, Garçon would have been an upgrade over the other receivers not named Wayne, or in the very least a darn good compliment to TY, after Reggie was derailed by injuries. 

 

(Still hate that key 1st half drop in the Super Bowl by Garçon.  That and the Baskett onside kick fail were, to me, the two game changing plays that wrecked what was primed to be a Colts SB route.  )

[crazycolt1]

3 minutes ago, rockywoj said:

I recall it was assumed that Reggie was going to be unaffordable and gone and that the Colts would re-sign Garçon. 

 

But then Garcon was signed way beyond what I considered to be fair market value and Wayne took a home team discount.  I could not have been more happy the way this went down and Reggie proceeded to have his best year as a Colt by far!  Reggie was THE man!

 

That being said, Garçon would have been an upgrade over the other receivers not named Wayne, or in the very least a darn good compliment to TY, after Reggie was derailed by injuries. 

 

(Still hate that key 1st half drop in the Super Bowl by Garçon.  That and the Baskett onside kick fail were, to me, the two game changing plays that wrecked what was primed to be a Colts SB route.  )

At the time Garcon had the rep of catching the tough throws but dropping the easy ones. There was some truth to that IMO.  Now he may have gotten better after leaving I don't know. I just haven't look at the numbers.  It was just one of those deals at the time.

[2006Coltsbestever]

Too old. He is 32. If we get someone to pair up with Hilton they need to be 27 or younger. JMO.

[crazycolt1]

2 minutes ago, 2006Coltsbestever said:

Too old. He is 32. If we get someone to pair up with Hilton they need to be 27 or younger. JMO.

I think the thought was wishing we would have kept him. Not signing him today?  Changes the picture a little?

[Devildog]

Nope. 

[2006Coltsbestever]

2 minutes ago, crazycolt1 said:

I think the thought was wishing we would have kept him. Not signing him today?  Changes the picture a little?

I am still confused from reading some of the stuff on the Nelson Thread. My brain is foggy I guess  but yeah you are right, the point of this Thread was wishing he would've stayed. I liked Garcon eventhough he had a key drop in the SB.

[crazycolt1]

I interrupt this program to remind the fans that the Pacer game is on at 8 pm on NBCH or FSIN.

[EastStreet]

too old now, too greedy then...

we need to have a little more patience. I'd bet a WR is taken in the 1st or 2nd next year.

i hate that Cain went down, but I think he has the potential to be really good too.

TY, Cain, and a stud drafted next year, is what I'll be hoping for.

 

would have loved to pick up Golden Tate

[crazycolt1]

22 minutes ago, Irish YJ said:

too old now, too greedy then...

we need to have a little more patience. I'd bet a WR is taken in the 1st or 2nd next year.

i hate that Cain went down, but I think he has the potential to be really good too.

TY, Cain, and a stud drafted next year, is what I'll be hoping for.

 

would have loved to pick up Golden Tate

I think Ballard has faith in Cain but also in Inman and Ashmael. Maybe Ballard didn't want to give a draft pick up and deal with his contract at the end of this season? 

An addition:::: I have to add Johnson too because we have seen a glimpse of him.

[EastStreet]

21 minutes ago, crazycolt1 said:

I think Ballard has faith in Cain but also in Inman and Ashmael. Maybe Ballard didn't want to give a draft pick up and deal with his contract at the end of this season? 

 

Cain has a high ceiling and has the skill set to ascend quickly. Inman and Asmael, they might work out, but it will take time. They are both cheap, so I'm happy to be patient. 

 

Tate, he'll be asking for 7ism per year. We're paying Grant, who is third in productivity 5M. I'd be happy to pay an extra 2 or 3M plus a 3rd for Tate in place of Grant. We'd get double the production spending perhaps less than 50% more. Tate also brings more tools in his tool bag. Not to mention TY would be more open...

[Jdubu]

2 hours ago, Calmack said:

I think he left right around the time Grigs was hired. No one knew Grigs was gonna be trash yet. Colts just finished a season 2-14. He probably also wanted the $$. Cant blame him for that. 

Yeah I know, it was kinda tongue in cheek really. Just can’t beat up on old Griggs enough on the forum though   I guess I should have added the sarcasm emoji earlier since it’s next to impossible to read a poster by text alone. 

[crazycolt1]

2 hours ago, Irish YJ said:

 

Cain has a high ceiling and has the skill set to ascend quickly. Inman and Asmael, they might work out, but it will take time. They are both cheap, so I'm happy to be patient. 

 

Tate, he'll be asking for 7ism per year. We're paying Grant, who is third in productivity 5M. I'd be happy to pay an extra 2 or 3M plus a 3rd for Tate in place of Grant. We'd get double the production spending perhaps less than 50% more. Tate also brings more tools in his tool bag. Not to mention TY would be more open...

I just don't think Ballard want's to sign Tate to a multi year contract when he is going to be on the wrong side of 30.  He was the 3rd best receiver on the Lions and they didn't think he was worth dealing with him. Not when we have Inman, Ashmael, Pascal and Rogers active and Cain, Johnson and Wright on IR. Ballard has said he wanted to get younger and groom our own players preferably through the draft.

Ballard said what he wanted and right now he is doing exactly as he said he was going to do.

Agree or not that is reality.

Ballard has a plan and I for one don't have a problem with him not signing Tate. IMO Grant will be gone at years end and those guys mentioned will get their chance along with next years draft. If a WR that is in the 23-26 year range pops up Ballard might bite on it? He did fish for Cooper but sure wasn't going to give a 1st round pick for him.

[Superman]

I liked Garcon, but it was him or Reggie, and keeping Reggie was definitely the right move. Especially since Garcon got a fat contract. 

 

I'm still mad about that SB drop, too.

[rockywoj]

6 hours ago, 2006Coltsbestever said:

Too old. He is 32. If we get someone to pair up with Hilton they need to be 27 or younger. JMO.

Adrian Peterson is having a fine season at a ripe old age.  Personally I prefer to assess value based on performance rather than age discrimination.

[IinD]

I'll always remember his monster game against the Jets in the playoffs... And that one particular dropped pass we all remember him for.

 

He's had himself a solid career, unfortunately we couldn't pay him at the time.

[EastStreet]

10 hours ago, crazycolt1 said:

I just don't think Ballard want's to sign Tate to a multi year contract when he is going to be on the wrong side of 30.  He was the 3rd best receiver on the Lions and they didn't think he was worth dealing with him. Not when we have Inman, Ashmael, Pascal and Rogers active and Cain, Johnson and Wright on IR. Ballard has said he wanted to get younger and groom our own players preferably through the draft.

Ballard said what he wanted and right now he is doing exactly as he said he was going to do.

Agree or not that is reality.

Ballard has a plan and I for one don't have a problem with him not signing Tate. IMO Grant will be gone at years end and those guys mentioned will get their chance along with next years draft. If a WR that is in the 23-26 year range pops up Ballard might bite on it? He did fish for Cooper but sure wasn't going to give a 1st round pick for him.

Tate is the 3rd best? He was leading them in both receptions and yards.... Through only 7 games he's statistically ahead of his totals for the past three years. They got rid of him because they would have had to wait a year for a comp pick when he left in FA after the season. Which is really stupid, and sends a message that your giving up on 2018.

 

I don't have a problem with Ballard sticking to plan, but to say he's satisfied with grooming those on the roster is not accurate. He'll more than likely use one of the first 2 picks on a WR next year. Let's not forget Grant was a FA signing for only one year, so we know Ballard is willing to go outside of the "grooming stable". Tate is on the wrong the side of 30, so I wouldn't want a long term deal. I don't see anyone signing him for more than 2-3 years. But, Tate does not look like he's slowed based on current and past stats.

[Mr.Debonair]

Sad to say and very petty but I was through with Garçon when he dropped that pass in the SuperBowl.

 

Only Hank “can’t put it in the” Baskett irked me more 

[crazycolt1]

35 minutes ago, Irish YJ said:

Tate is the 3rd best? He was leading them in both receptions and yards.... Through only 7 games he's statistically ahead of his totals for the past three years. They got rid of him because they would have had to wait a year for a comp pick when he left in FA after the season. Which is really stupid, and sends a message that your giving up on 2018.

 

I don't have a problem with Ballard sticking to plan, but to say he's satisfied with grooming those on the roster is not accurate. He'll more than likely use one of the first 2 picks on a WR next year. Let's not forget Grant was a FA signing for only one year, so we know Ballard is willing to go outside of the "grooming stable". Tate is on the wrong the side of 30, so I wouldn't want a long term deal. I don't see anyone signing him for more than 2-3 years. But, Tate does not look like he's slowed based on current and past stats.

Golladay took his place.  Tate only had 40 more yards that Golladay and Jones had 2 more TDs. If you have been paying more attention you would have noticed that Golladay had already pretty much took his spot away.

The signing of Grant was to have at least one vet WR on the roster besides TY.  Just how much has Grant been used this season?  We have a rookie TE who has been used more than him. Grant signed as an insurance player does not say Ballard is not grooming his own.

 

 

 

[Finball]

58 minutes ago, crazycolt1 said:

Golladay took his place.  Tate only had 40 more yards that Golladay and Jones had 2 more TDs. If you have been paying more attention you would have noticed that Golladay had already pretty much took his spot away.

 

 

 

Tate usually plays in the slot, Golladay usually outside and the Lions most used personnel is 11 personnel. Tate's snap count actually has increased from last year.