ThorstenDenmark

Colts sign... Bell and DeMarcus or Flowers

Recommended Posts

7 hours ago, aaron11 said:

 

maybe they do want bell none of us know for sure either way

 

i dont see him being a locker room problem here.  he wont come if hes not happy with the contract.  plus he already hinted he wants to

 

Do I know with 100% certainty that they don't want Bell?  No.

 

But I have listened.  And I have read.  And my tea-leaves reading ability is pretty damn good.  

 

So here is what I will tell you with 99% certainly - Ballard will not set the market for a free agent RB.  I would be surprised if they even inquired with anything more than a passing interest.  I would not be surprised in the off season to hear from Bell's agent that the Colts never even called.

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, SouthernIndianaNDFan said:

 

What happens if we go on the spending spree you're eluding to, and then in 2020 and beyond all of our cap $ is tied into 5-6 bigger names, and we can't resign all of the draft selections Ballard nailed? I'll tell you what happens...we're good for a few seasons, then back in the proverbial sh*tter.

I would hardly call three top tier FA's a spending spree.  Especially when you have over 100M.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, SouthernIndianaNDFan said:

You realize how much it's gonna take to resign Hooker, Leonard, Q? 

Kelly, Hooker and Q all have 5th. yr. options available if we need them.  Not all in the same year.  We are years away of having to worry about them.   Leonard is three years away.  The timing couldn't be better.  We should have all the cap we need if we want to resign them.  That doesn't even count the increase in cap space every year and other strategies that can be used. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, richard pallo said:

I would hardly call three top tier FA's a spending spree.  Especially when you have over 100M.  

Who was the last team to sign 3 top tier free agents in the same off season?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Jdubu said:

Who was the last FA Passrusher that was considered a top elite guy that succeeded on another team after signing for enormous money?  My memory is too short to recall any. 

I think it's because they never hit FA.  They get signed or tagged.  Of course you have Mack who was traded and signed a big contract.   I don't think the Bears are complaining. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, jvan1973 said:

Who was the last team to sign 3 top tier free agents in the same off season?

Here's a thought.  Maybe no other team needed to or had enough money to or maybe the FA's available did not fit a need.  One thing is certain.  There is always a first time for everything.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Jdubu said:

Who was the last FA Passrusher that was considered a top elite guy that succeeded on another team after signing for enormous money?  My memory is too short to recall any. 

2017- Calais Campbell on the Jags. 25 sacks in the last 2 seasons. 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, richard pallo said:

Here's a thought.  Maybe no other team needed to or had enough money to or maybe the FA's available did not fit a need.  One thing is certain.  There is always a first time for everything.  

They won't be signing 3 big name free agents.   Maybe 1 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, SaturdayAllDay said:

2017- Calais Campbell on the Jags. 25 sacks in the last 2 seasons. 

That guy was definitely a hit and I would love to see that type of production from a high priced FA guy we may select. However, where did it get the team by selecting him? Then you look at the Pats, never go out and pay top 3 FA money for a player and just win. Their model is solid, have 53 guys that are solid and above with 2-3 stars on the team and win championships. Everyone else keeps trying to buy stars and their lower third players really suffer in the talent pool and when disaster strikes with that 20 million/yr cap hit guy, the team overall struggles. 

 

Im almost a firm believer that building the team using second tier players throughout and using your draft wisely is the way to build. Along with a good system of coaching and a high quality QB, that’s the way to build. Paying 15 million a yr for a RB is nuts. Paying 20 million a yr for a DT who doesn’t rush the passer is crazy. It awesome to have that name recognition and see runs stuffed or 25 yard runs broken off but when that guy goes down, what’s left in line? Team suffers. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23 hours ago, Mr_486lo said:

When has Ballard said Bell doesn't fit our team/culture? Do you have a source or link? I'm asking because I want to read it. 

Ballard isn’t afraid to bring a player like that into the locker room so long as they fit the culture.

“Am I against adding a player that’s a difference maker on Sunday that I know is going to help us win games? No. I would absolutely add that player,” Ballard said. “He’s gotta fit into our culture. He has to fit in to doing things right. He has to fit in about being team-first. He has to be accountable to his teammates. They have to fit that criteria.”

Ballard's words

Why would we ever add Leveon Bell for millions of dollars per year  when we know we want to Run a RBBC(running back by committee)? #2 We have a young runner that just ran for 900 plus yards and he didn't even play a full season.  Not too mention he's on a pretty team friendly contract.  The two things above tell me everything I need to know about why we just wouldn't sign Leveon Bell.  Ballards going to invest that money into the defense, maybe WR/OL depth and resigning our own primarily.  I'd bet on that!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, krunk said:

Why would we ever add Leveon Bell for millions of dollars per year  when we know we want to Run a RBBC(running back by committee)? #2 We have a young runner that just ran for 900 plus yards and he didn't even play a full season.  Not too mention he's on a pretty team friendly contract.  The two things above tell me everything I need to know about why we just wouldn't sign Leveon Bell.  Ballards going to invest that money into the defense, maybe WR/OL depth and resigning our own primarily.  I'd bet on that!

Maybe the reason we run RBBC is because we don't have an elite three down back and we can't find one.  So without that asset you default to RBBC.  I think given the choice Irsay and Ballard would prefer the Edge/ Jamal Charles approach.  They just have to find one who BTW now happens to be available.  RBBC doesn't scare anybody and actually your running game becomes more predictable.  No real need to game plan for the position.  They are JAG's.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, richard pallo said:

Maybe the reason we run RBBC is because we don't have an elite three down back and we can't find one.  So without that asset you default to RBBC.  I think given the choice Irsay and Ballard would prefer the Edge/ Jamal Charles approach.  They just have to find one who BTW now happens to be available.  RBBC doesn't scare anybody and actually your running game becomes more predictable.  No real need to game plan for the position.  They are JAG's.  

They don't want one because they want to attack the defense with multiple backs who have different skill sets.   And if they did they'd draft one before they spent milions on a back.  What we do is the same thing the Pats do with their backfield.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, krunk said:

They don't want one because they want to attack the defense with multiple backs who have different skill sets.   And if they did they'd draft one before they spent milions on a back.  What we do is the same thing the Pats do with their backfield.

We weren't drafting high enough to get a Barkley or Elliot.  And we won't be going forward.  If we don't get Bell it will most likely be RBBC going forward since players like Bell rarely hit FA in their prime just like ER's.  Money is the least of our problems.  We don't have to worry about our key players for years to come.  The time to spend is now when we have that "window" so to speak.  I would find it difficult to say no to the only bonafide offensive playmaker available.  Especially , if history is an indicator, no top tier ER will see FA. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, richard pallo said:

We weren't drafting high enough to get a Barkley or Elliot.  And we won't be going forward.  If we don't get Bell it will most likely be RBBC going forward since players like Bell rarely hit FA in their prime just like ER's.  Money is the least of our problems.  We don't have to worry about our key players for years to come.  The time to spend is now when we have that "window" so to speak.  I would find it difficult to say no to the only bonafide offensive playmaker available.  Especially , if history is an indicator, no top tier ER will see FA. 

Just because you have money doesn't mean you just throw it at the wall.   Like I said if you know you are a RBBC backfield and you haven't shown any indication that you're going away from that then I don't see the sense in the Bell aquisition.   Remember Philly was top 5 in Rushing when they had Reich and they didn't have big contracts in their backfield.

Share this post


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

They don't want one because they want to attack the defense with multiple backs who have different skill sets.   And if they did they'd draft one before they spent milions on a back.  What we do is the same thing the Pats do with their backfield.

Who's on our draft board? Who are we selecting with the 26th pick? If you can tell me that Krunk, I'd believe everything you're saying. But I can't. Be optimistic, not objective. Telling us what the Colts aren't going to do (when you dont know yourself) is foolish. 

Bell is better than any back on our roster combined. Regardless of the money, you would want a RBBC or L. Bell?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Don't want Bell unless he's cheap which is unlikely.

 

I would however be willing to part with some serious cap space for a star edge rusher.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 2/10/2019 at 10:35 AM, Mr_486lo said:

When has Ballard said Bell doesn't fit our team/culture? Do you have a source or link? I'm asking because I want to read it. 

Ballard isn’t afraid to bring a player like that into the locker room so long as they fit the culture.

“Am I against adding a player that’s a difference maker on Sunday that I know is going to help us win games? No. I would absolutely add that player,” Ballard said. “He’s gotta fit into our culture. He has to fit in to doing things right. He has to fit in about being team-first. He has to be accountable to his teammates. They have to fit that criteria.”

Ballard's words

He actually was asked directly about Bell in a recent post season Dakich interview, pretty much slammed the door down HARD on Bell. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Mr_486lo said:

Who's on our draft board? Who are we selecting with the 26th pick? If you can tell me that Krunk, I'd believe everything you're saying. But I can't. Be optimistic, not objective. Telling us what the Colts aren't going to do (when you dont know yourself) is foolish. 

Bell is better than any back on our roster combined. Regardless of the money, you would want a RBBC or L. Bell?

I'd keep the committee we have or improve the committee. I'd like Bell only from an entertainment standpoint.  Dollars and Sense wise there's no sense in getting Bell because he's got tread on those tires and the money he's asking is ridiculous. Especially in an offensive system that has produced a top 5 rushing attack in Philly using multiple runners.  And made a 900 yard year for Mack and he didn't even play the whole year. It doesn't make sense to tie premium dollars up at a position where you can get really good or the same production from guys you don't have to break the bank for.    Bell is just a Pipe dream for you and that's fine I guess on a forum.  Nobody knows who we are picking but just apply some sense here and you can kind of rule some things out.   If we are to pay a back premium dollars I think that should be after we've already gotten 4 good years from that back on a rookie contract and we know who he is already.  Like Edgerrin James or something.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I thought there was nothing I wanted in the NFL as far as changes....more than Brady retiring. I have to admit, I now want whatever team that finally signs Bell to get it done as SOON as it is possible. Please, for the love of ***, make it go away. 

 

giphy.gif

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

None of those guys are going to earn less than double digit millions, and all will land ridiculous contracts with mediocre clubs with money or contenders with very short windows.  

 

 

 

 

Share this post


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.