OBJ

[SouthernIndianaNDFan]

The OBJ trade rumors are circulating once again lol, now all we've gotta do is go get him. I'm of the belief that he's the most talented WR in the NFL, and with Luck throwing him the ball, and TY and Ebron drawing coverage, I think he would lead the league in many statistical categories. Wonder what it would take to get it done?

[jvan1973]

6 minutes ago, SouthernIndianaNDFan said:

The OBJ trade rumors are circulating once again lol, now all we've gotta do is go get him. I'm of the belief that he's the most talented WR in the NFL, and with Luck throwing him the ball, and TY and Ebron drawing coverage, I think he would lead the league in many statistical categories. Wonder what it would take to get it done?

More than Ballard will spend

[krunk]

I don't think Ballard would ever get OBJ.  I think he's got potential to destroy a locker room to be honest.

[lollygagger8]

25 minutes ago, SouthernIndianaNDFan said:

The OBJ trade rumors are circulating once again lol, now all we've gotta do is go get him. I'm of the belief that he's the most talented WR in the NFL, and with Luck throwing him the ball, and TY and Ebron drawing coverage, I think he would lead the league in many statistical categories. Wonder what it would take to get it done?

 

[aaron11]

his attitude doesnt bother me, but his contract and trade price would be a bit much.  they are not that desperate to trade him either

[SouthernIndianaNDFan]

It's funny how everyone wants another WR...and when the opportunity presents itself to have arguably the best one playing (in his prime), everyone's like nah...too expensive. You get what you pay for, if you wanna pay Inman prices, and continue to get Kansas City playoff results, that's cool. I'd rather be a legit SB contender while we actually have the opportunity and a bunch of playmakers on rookie deals. They could sign Lev, AB, and OBJ and still have over 60 mil in cap room...don't know why everyone is so scared to spend the cap $, that's kinda why it's there.

[aaron11]

2 hours ago, SouthernIndianaNDFan said:

It's funny how everyone wants another WR...and when the opportunity presents itself to have arguably the best one playing (in his prime), everyone's like nah...too expensive. You get what you pay for, if you wanna pay Inman prices, and continue to get Kansas City playoff results, that's cool. I'd rather be a legit SB contender while we actually have the opportunity and a bunch of playmakers on rookie deals. They could sign Lev, AB, and OBJ and still have over 60 mil in cap room...don't know why everyone is so scared to spend the cap $, that's kinda why it's there.

he might be worth the money, but they are not in a desperate bind to move him

 

they would probably want two firsts or something  

[richard pallo]

1 hour ago, SouthernIndianaNDFan said:

It's funny how everyone wants another WR...and when the opportunity presents itself to have arguably the best one playing (in his prime), everyone's like nah...too expensive. You get what you pay for, if you wanna pay Inman prices, and continue to get Kansas City playoff results, that's cool. I'd rather be a legit SB contender while we actually have the opportunity and a bunch of playmakers on rookie deals. They could sign Lev, AB, and OBJ and still have over 60 mil in cap room...don't know why everyone is so scared to spend the cap $, that's kinda why it's there.

You will quickly learn that the majority of the people here don't want to spend a dime if you can spend a nickel.  Always bargain shopping.  Always save for when we have to sign our own players.  Even if it's years down the road.  Always looking for a reason not to pay any player what he's worth.  Even though a free marketplace determines his worth.  You are right you get what you pay for and you do pay for quality.  Personally I think we have entered our SB window.  Many experts feel the same way.  This is when Ballard should make some serious moves and use all of his resources.  Hopefully he will and I actually think he does this year.  I think he knows the time is now. 

[krunk]

Even if the guy is not a great fit lets just spend the money anyway says Richard P.   You just like to see money spent with no discipline I think is your thing.

[Four2itus]

Ballard is quite explicit about the type of players he is interested in bringing into the locker room. Sometimes fans don't want to believe that. 

 

[buccolts]

Can you imagine the contender we'd be if we brought in OBJ, AB, Bell, Collins, and Suh?

It would be epic, monstrous, unstoppable.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Is that trolling?

[Cynjin]

25 minutes ago, buccolts said:

Can you imagine the contender we'd be if we brought in OBJ, AB, Bell, Collins, and Suh?

It would be epic, monstrous, unstoppable.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Is that trolling?

 

Well, the Colts would more than likely "win the offseason" if that were to happen.

[buccolts]

Just now, Cynjin said:

 

Well, the Colts would more than likely "win the offseason" if that were to happen.

 

I suppose when you're staving for accomplishments, and your ego depends on them, everything counts.

[crazycolt1]

20 hours ago, richard pallo said:

You will quickly learn that the majority of the people here don't want to spend a dime if you can spend a nickel.  Always bargain shopping.  Always save for when we have to sign our own players.  Even if it's years down the road.  Always looking for a reason not to pay any player what he's worth.  Even though a free marketplace determines his worth.  You are right you get what you pay for and you do pay for quality.  Personally I think we have entered our SB window.  Many experts feel the same way.  This is when Ballard should make some serious moves and use all of his resources.  Hopefully he will and I actually think he does this year.  I think he knows the time is now. 

So you completely disregard what Ballard has been saying since day one?

This mindset of signing every free agent or trading for every free agent with any talent will not get a ring.

That has been tried by a few teams but please list me the teams it has worked for.

Big names do not automatically get you rings.

The Kansas City game shows we have to have a better core of guys before we dabble in big names. We are not there yet.

[richard pallo]

12 minutes ago, crazycolt1 said:

So you completely disregard what Ballard has been saying since day one?

This mindset of signing every free agent or trading for every free agent with any talent will not get a ring.

That has been tried by a few teams but please list me the teams it has worked for.

Big names do not automatically get you rings.

The Kansas City game shows we have to have a better core of guys before we dabble in big names. We are not there yet.

There's the difference.  I think we are there and you don't.  To me last year proved we are ahead of schedule and we even won a playoff game on the road.  The time to acquire some big time players is now IMO.  I think can get to the SB with a few difference makers and a good draft.  That's all. 

[Tsarquise]

42 minutes ago, crazycolt1 said:

So you completely disregard what Ballard has been saying since day one?

This mindset of signing every free agent or trading for every free agent with any talent will not get a ring.

That has been tried by a few teams but please list me the teams it has worked for.

Big names do not automatically get you rings.

The Kansas City game shows we have to have a better core of guys before we dabble in big names. We are not there yet.

Denver did a good job with free agency, so has New England to an extent. 

 

Those are just the ones off the top of my head. 

 

Kansas City game showed we needed playmakers, specifically WR, and pass rush. 

[krunk]

I'm okay with a big name or two if it's a good fit across the board for us.  I'm not into the big names if the fit is not there and the finance is overblown in relation to what the guy actually produces.  Spending money just to be spending it I ain't okay with.

[runthepost]

Winning cures everything 

[JimJaime]

He was almost traded to NE last year. Imagine him with Edelman at WR wit Him White and Michel in the backfield...  make a bet that make shrink stay ONE more year try get ring #4 for himself..

[Jackie Daytona]

On 2/21/2019 at 1:22 PM, richard pallo said:

You will quickly learn that the majority of the people here don't want to spend a dime if you can spend a nickel.  Always bargain shopping.  Always save for when we have to sign our own players.  Even if it's years down the road.  Always looking for a reason not to pay any player what he's worth.  Even though a free marketplace determines his worth.  You are right you get what you pay for and you do pay for quality.  Personally I think we have entered our SB window.  Many experts feel the same way.  This is when Ballard should make some serious moves and use all of his resources.  Hopefully he will and I actually think he does this year.  I think he knows the time is now. 

It's not what most people here WANT..... it's what most people here EXPECT....  They are conditioned by years of this type of Team running.... Decades of The Colts doing this between Polian, and now Ballard.... and The Pacers have been doing the same thing since they joined the NBA....  so it's pretty ingrained in the natural fanbase of Indiana.....  I think most would love to have teams stocked with premier talent...  they just have never seen teams consistently utilize that approach, so why get your hope up for adding a star every year?  

[Superman]

On 2/21/2019 at 8:04 AM, SouthernIndianaNDFan said:

I'd rather be a legit SB contender while we actually have the opportunity

 

This is always the rationalization for making "big" moves for star players. The benefit supposedly outweighs the cost because 'if we had Player X, we're automatically SB contenders.' If you think that way, you can defend any move at any cost, because that move is the move that guarantees contention.

 

Meanwhile, the Colts GM -- the guy who put together the team that most people think is the most promising team in the NFL right now -- continually says stuff like 'you're never one player away,' and 'there are no shortcuts to building a great roster.' And history proves that he's right, because we've seen tons of teams add good players and still fail to perform, and even backslide due to internal friction, overwhelming expectations, etc.

 

There's no question that OBJ is a great player, and adding him would make any team better, on paper. Receiver is one of our biggest needs, so it's logical to assume he would help us win more games. The questions are whether he's a good fit for the Colts, on and off the field, and whether he's worth the premium cost it would take to acquire him.

 

And that's the same evaluation for any player -- OBJ, AB, Bell, and any other player, high profile or not. Just saying 'this player would make us a SB contender' isn't legitimate evaluation. And that's to say nothing of the way opposing viewpoints get misrepresented.

[SouthernIndianaNDFan]

37 minutes ago, Superman said:

 

This is always the rationalization for making "big" moves for star players. The benefit supposedly outweighs the cost because 'if we had Player X, we're automatically SB contenders.' If you think that way, you can defend any move at any cost, because that move is the move that guarantees contention.

 

Meanwhile, the Colts GM -- the guy who put together the team that most people think is the most promising team in the NFL right now -- continually says stuff like 'you're never one player away,' and 'there are no shortcuts to building a great roster.' And history proves that he's right, because we've seen tons of teams add good players and still fail to perform, and even backslide due to internal friction, overwhelming expectations, etc.

 

There's no question that OBJ is a great player, and adding him would make any team better, on paper. Receiver is one of our biggest needs, so it's logical to assume he would help us win more games. The questions are whether he's a good fit for the Colts, on and off the field, and whether he's worth the premium cost it would take to acquire him.

 

And that's the same evaluation for any player -- OBJ, AB, Bell, and any other player, high profile or not. Just saying 'this player would make us a SB contender' isn't legitimate evaluation. And that's to say nothing of the way opposing viewpoints get misrepresented.

 

I'm too tired to respond to this lol...people always put up these long-winded responses/comments, and generally I'd take the time to put up my own, but I'm at the tail end of a wicked stretch of 12 hour 3rds (shift)...and well, I'm beat, mentally and physically. 

 

To me, a team (or franchise, or GM, or however you wanna break it down) can play it too conservatively, and just be GOOD for a set window, rather than taking some chances with the opportunity to be GREAT.  To me, this is a no-brainer. I mean, how far off can you really be on a player like OBJ? He makes geriatric -shell of his SB self- Eli Manning look competent...and we all know it's been a couple seasons since he's had it. I'm of the belief that if you add possibly the best WR in the game (who's in his prime), with Andrew Luck throwing him the ball, and Reich designing the plays, you have a recipe for success. 

 

You make it seem like that's the only ingredient we would be cooking with, when in reality it would be a small, yet extremely influential, piece of the offseason-addition "puzzle". They could add him, and barely know it happened from a financial standpoint. They can still draft who they're gonna draft, and sign the other guys they're gonna sign, again...this is just a piece of the puzzle. 

 

Another note, all of the reasons that OBJ has been disgruntled in NY would seemingly be alleviated. We would definitely win games, and there's no reason he and TY shouldn't be the top WR-tandem in the NFL, so who knows? OBJ could be a great locker room presence? 

 

All in all, I think it's time to make some executive decisions, and make a real run at this thing. If we draft a WR, it could be a slow developmental process...and a lesser FA addition may not be much -if any- better than what we've already got in-house. 

 

(Got a long-winded response outta ne afterall lol)

[Superman]

3 minutes ago, SouthernIndianaNDFan said:

To me, a team (or franchise, or GM, or however you wanna break it down) can play it too conservatively, and just be GOOD for a set window, rather than taking some chances with the opportunity to be GREAT.

 

I agree. But some act like being cautious with big personalities and highly paid vets is the same as being overly conservative. No one is against being great. We're just debating the best path to take.

 

5 minutes ago, SouthernIndianaNDFan said:

I mean, how far off can you really be on a player like OBJ?

 

So why do you think the Giants are thinking about trading him? I'm just saying, there's something about OBJ that is off-putting to certain teams, and the fact that the Giants just paid him last year, and halfway through the season were considering trading him, is something to consider. No question he's a great player, though.

 

6 minutes ago, SouthernIndianaNDFan said:

You make it seem like that's the only ingredient we would be cooking with

...

They can still draft who they're gonna draft

 

No, I don't, and no, they can't. Acquiring OBJ would at least cost a first rounder, probably two, not to mention the $31m guaranteed he's due over the next two seasons.

 

But my push back isn't just about the price of acquiring and retaining him. My counter to your argument of 'if we add OBJ, we're SB contenders' is that it's not honest and complete evaluation. Adding a great player doesn't automatically make a team a contender. Same thing for draft picks -- people often defend drafting a player by saying 'he's a future HOFer!' as if they have a guarantee that it's the case. In reality, it's just an empty platitude in place of real evaluation and team building strategy.

 

You can defend any personnel decision by projecting the player to be a HOFer, or to immediately make your team a contender. But just like draft picks bust every year, teams add great players all the time that fail to propel the team to contention. I'm not saying OBJ wouldn't make the Colts better, I'm saying you can't just ignore the other variables.

 

17 minutes ago, SouthernIndianaNDFan said:

Another note, all of the reasons that OBJ has been disgruntled in NY would seemingly be alleviated.

 

You would think so, but diva players find a way to be divas no matter what the circumstances are. Maybe OBJ would be fine in Indy, but that's still a gamble.

 

Quote

(Got a long-winded response outta ne afterall lol)

 

I know exactly what you mean.

 

But I've enjoyed the back and forth. Glad you responded.

[SouthernIndianaNDFan]

3 minutes ago, Superman said:

 

I agree. But some act like being cautious with big personalities and highly paid vets is the same as being overly conservative. No one is against being great. We're just debating the best path to take.

 

 

So why do you think the Giants are thinking about trading him? I'm just saying, there's something about OBJ that is off-putting to certain teams, and the fact that the Giants just paid him last year, and halfway through the season were considering trading him, is something to consider. No question he's a great player, though.

 

 

No, I don't, and no, they can't. Acquiring OBJ would at least cost a first rounder, probably two, not to mention the $31m guaranteed he's due over the next two seasons.

 

But my push back isn't just about the price of acquiring and retaining him. My counter to your argument of 'if we add OBJ, we're SB contenders' is that it's not honest and complete evaluation. Adding a great player doesn't automatically make a team a contender. Same thing for draft picks -- people often defend drafting a player by saying 'he's a future HOFer!' as if they have a guarantee that it's the case. In reality, it's just an empty platitude in place of real evaluation and team building strategy.

 

You can defend any personnel decision by projecting the player to be a HOFer, or to immediately make your team a contender. But just like draft picks bust every year, teams add great players all the time that fail to propel the team to contention. I'm not saying OBJ wouldn't make the Colts better, I'm saying you can't just ignore the other variables.

 

 

You would think so, but diva players find a way to be divas no matter what the circumstances are. Maybe OBJ would be fine in Indy, but that's still a gamble.

 

 

I know exactly what you mean.

 

But I've enjoyed the back and forth. Glad you responded.

 

I think the Giants realize they're a few years away from even sniffing the playoffs, and are gonna unload players like OBJ and Collins due to that. I could be wrong. 

 

Secondly, I never said "if we add OBJ, we're SB contenders" you're taking pieces of what I said and making it what you want me to have said, in order to strengthen your argument. 

 

I'm simply saying that adding a player like OBJ would bring us that much closer to being immediate SB contenders. There would obviously have to be other additions...which is my 2nd point: We have the firepower this offseason to make several, several high-powered moves-draft picks-transactions, and that OBJ would be a signature piece (the crowning achievement, if you will) within these moves. 

 

I'm in the minority, but I'd add Lev too, and attempt to sign any of the high profile defensive players that hit FA too. I think those signings, in addition to the draft selection over the next few seasons, would propel the Colts to multiple SB titles. Just a tired man's opinion lol, I may wake up tomorrow and be like "Man...how tired were you?"

[Superman]

26 minutes ago, SouthernIndianaNDFan said:

 

I think the Giants realize they're a few years away from even sniffing the playoffs, and are gonna unload players like OBJ and Collins due to that. I could be wrong. 

 

Secondly, I never said "if we add OBJ, we're SB contenders" you're taking pieces of what I said and making it what you want me to have said, in order to strengthen your argument. 

  

I'm simply saying that adding a player like OBJ would bring us that much closer to being immediate SB contenders. There would obviously have to be other additions...which is my 2nd point: We have the firepower this offseason to make several, several high-powered moves-draft picks-transactions, and that OBJ would be a signature piece (the crowning achievement, if you will) within these moves. 

 

I'm in the minority, but I'd add Lev too, and attempt to sign any of the high profile defensive players that hit FA too. I think those signings, in addition to the draft selection over the next few seasons, would propel the Colts to multiple SB titles. Just a tired man's opinion lol, I may wake up tomorrow and be like "Man...how tired were you?"

 

I don't know what the story really is with OBJ. I think the media makes things seem worse than they really are, and as far as I know, OBJ hasn't really been an issue. Like you, I wonder if they're just hitting reset on the whole operation, but it's interesting that they didn't do that last year when they hired a new GM and coach. Now, one year into the new regime, they're getting rid of their two best players? Kind of fishy to me.

 

To the bolded, I thought you implied that, and that's obviously what I inferred. Not trying to misrepresent your argument, but that's what I got from the post I quoted originally.

 

In the end, I think the Colts have a unique opportunity to really cement themselves as AFC contenders moving forward. We agree there, but we somewhat disagree on the best way to take advantage of that opportunity. I'm not against adding high profile players, but I still have a "no" list. And I'm not willing to rationalize adding a player from the "no" list by convincing myself that adding said player would make the team a SB contender.

 

Give me Grady Jarrett and Trey Flowers and other guys who are highly productive and good teammates and don't have injury concerns and character concerns, and I'm even fine with overpaying for those guys, to an extent. But when we start talking about draft picks, now we're undermining long term roster building. I think it's a delicate balance, but building a sustained winner requires good drafting, year after year.

[SouthernIndianaNDFan]

1 minute ago, Superman said:

 

I don't know what the story really is with OBJ. I think the media makes things seem worse than they really are, and as far as I know, OBJ hasn't really been an issue. Like you, I wonder if they're just hitting reset on the whole operation, but it's interesting that they didn't do that last year when they hired a new GM and coach. Now, one year into the new regime, they're getting rid of their two best players? Kind of fishy to me.

 

To the bolded, I thought you implied that, and that's obviously what I inferred. Not trying to misrepresent your argument, but that's what I got from the post I quoted originally.

 

In the end, I think the Colts have a unique opportunity to really cement themselves as AFC contenders moving forward. We agree there, but we somewhat disagree on the best way to take advantage of that opportunity. I'm not against adding high profile players, but I still have a "no" list. And I'm not willing to rationalize adding a player from the "no" list by convincing myself that adding said player would make the team a SB contender.

 

Give me Grady Jarrett and Trey Flowers and other guys who are highly productive and good teammates and don't have injury concerns and character concerns, and I'm even fine with overpaying for those guys, to an extent. But when we start talking about draft picks, now we're undermining long term roster building. I think it's a delicate balance, but building a sustained winner requires good drafting, year after year.

 

I agree, somewhat. I look at like if a major team need is WR, and you can get a proven, elite commodity (like OBJ) for a 1st rounder, that could've otherwise been spent to draft a developmental WR, who may or may not pan out, then why not send the pick and move forward knowing that you have an elite playmaker? Now, if the price goes beyond that, then I'm with you 100%, you can't send that much draft capital. 

[Restinpeacesweetchloe]

I don’t think he would be a cancer like AB could be. I really don’t know what has been said about him though. If we could trade for him and throw in Brissett we might not have to give up much as far the draft. Plus he is still young.

[SouthernIndianaNDFan]

4 minutes ago, Superman said:

 

I don't know what the story really is with OBJ. I think the media makes things seem worse than they really are, and as far as I know, OBJ hasn't really been an issue. Like you, I wonder if they're just hitting reset on the whole operation, but it's interesting that they didn't do that last year when they hired a new GM and coach. Now, one year into the new regime, they're getting rid of their two best players? Kind of fishy to me.

 

To the bolded, I thought you implied that, and that's obviously what I inferred. Not trying to misrepresent your argument, but that's what I got from the post I quoted originally.

 

In the end, I think the Colts have a unique opportunity to really cement themselves as AFC contenders moving forward. We agree there, but we somewhat disagree on the best way to take advantage of that opportunity. I'm not against adding high profile players, but I still have a "no" list. And I'm not willing to rationalize adding a player from the "no" list by convincing myself that adding said player would make the team a SB contender.

 

Give me Grady Jarrett and Trey Flowers and other guys who are highly productive and good teammates and don't have injury concerns and character concerns, and I'm even fine with overpaying for those guys, to an extent. But when we start talking about draft picks, now we're undermining long term roster building. I think it's a delicate balance, but building a sustained winner requires good drafting, year after year.

 

I'm actually a big fan of picking up Davante Parker, and hoping that the potential that gave him a 1st round grade can finally be realized. It may be extreme bias, but I feel like Reich/Luck could bring the best out of him, or potentially others, like they essentially did with Ebron. And, I also realize that the Ebron-scenario ends up as a dud way more times than not, but the cost is generally relatively low, with a potentially high payoff.

[SouthernIndianaNDFan]

3 minutes ago, Chloe6124 said:

I don’t think he would be a cancer like AB could be. I really don’t know what has been said about him though. If we could trade for him and throw in Brissett we might not have to give up much as far the draft. Plus he is still young.

 

That's an idea. OBJ, in my eyes, is supremely talented, and with the right QB, could be hands down the best WR in the league. I'm all for them (the Colts) exploring all of the options to get him on the roster. 

[Superman]

3 minutes ago, SouthernIndianaNDFan said:

 

I agree, somewhat. I look at like if a major team need is WR, and you can get a proven, elite commodity (like OBJ) for a 1st rounder, that could've otherwise been spent to draft a developmental WR, who may or may not pan out, then why not send the pick and move forward knowing that you have an elite playmaker? Now, if the price goes beyond that, then I'm with you 100%, you can't send that much draft capital. 

 

Because part of the advantage of drafting players is getting them on a rookie contract, which helps you build your team. You're double-spending when you trade a first for a highly paid vet. It can be worth it, but that's part of the evaluation.

 

Specific to OBJ, my biggest concern about him is injury. You trade away at least a first, and get back a player who has had several injuries, including some that are pretty serious, and it's possible that he doesn't even last through his current contract. So rather than drafting a player who should be part of your core for the next ten years, you're getting a guy who might have a short prime and be at limited effectiveness within the next couple seasons. Again, part of the evaluation.

[Superman]

4 minutes ago, SouthernIndianaNDFan said:

 

I'm actually a big fan of picking up Davante Parker, and hoping that the potential that gave him a 1st round grade can finally be realized. It may be extreme bias, but I feel like Reich/Luck could bring the best out of him, or potentially others, like they essentially did with Ebron. And, I also realize that the Ebron-scenario ends up as a dud way more times than not, but the cost is generally relatively low, with a potentially high payoff.

 

Parker's talent is intriguing, but I want a different kind of receiver, so I'm not super excited about him. I'd be fine with him, at a low cost, which could be a "buy low" situation. But he's under contract for ~$10m in 2019, so he's kind of already off my radar.

[BleedBlu8792]

12 minutes ago, Superman said:

 

Parker's talent is intriguing, but I want a different kind of receiver, so I'm not super excited about him. I'd be fine with him, at a low cost, which could be a "buy low" situation. But he's under contract for ~$10m in 2019, so he's kind of already off my radar.

Parker is rumored to be released by the Dolphins and I'd definitely give him a look.

[Restinpeacesweetchloe]

We need defense in the draft so I would not give away my first pick. I might give up a second round pick. The later one. They need a qb. It could be obj for Brissett and a third round or something like that. I believe OBJ is only 26 so we would get him right about the time a reciever is in their prime.

[Restinpeacesweetchloe]

He does have a huge contract though. But I think he would be worth it. I haven’t read anything where he has gotten in trouble or anything.

[Nate!]

Would probably be prohibitively expensive in draft capital (Brisset and a third isn’t netting OBJ), but Beckham and Luck would be so sweet.  Would elevate the Colts offense to high level elite.   I’d trade our first and Brisset but I don’t think they’d take it. Would probably have to be a first and another high pick and even then, may not do it.

[Restinpeacesweetchloe]

I am not sure Ballard would be willing to give up a first. We need defense. But that could also depend on who they could get in FA. If they could get s big defensive player in  FA he might be willing to give up the first. 

[richard pallo]

Brissett could be a key piece in a trade for OBJ considering their QB situation.  He could make us a leading contender when compared to other potential suitors.  It's just a matter of settling on the draft compensation which Ballard should be able to do. 

[jvan1973]

1 hour ago, richard pallo said:

Brissett could be a key piece in a trade for OBJ considering their QB situation.  He could make us a leading contender when compared to other potential suitors.  It's just a matter of settling on the draft compensation which Ballard should be able to do. 

If you don't mind.    Can I ask you how old you are??  Your posts make me believe you are very young and haven't seen how most successful Gms do business

[Superman]

5 hours ago, BleedBlu8792 said:

Parker is rumored to be released by the Dolphins and I'd definitely give him a look.

 

Makes sense. If he gets released, I have no problem with it, at the right price. 

[BleedBlu8792]

20 minutes ago, Superman said:

 

Makes sense. If he gets released, I have no problem with it, at the right price. 

Considering how underwhelming he's been in Miami, I don't think he'll be to costly. However, we've all seen teams give out excessive money to underwhelming players before, so it wouldn't surprise me if some team throws money at him. I think a Grant-type deal would get him here, especially with having Luck and hopefully continuing to be an ascending team.