Jump to content
Indianapolis Colts
Indianapolis Colts Fan Forum

Official complaints about Free Agency thread (merge)


Recommended Posts

8 hours ago, threeflight said:

 

In 2 years those rookie deals will no longer be rookie deals, and then what?  We have to pay Luck and the present day rookies.  THE TIME TO HIT WAS NOW.  

 

Or we can pay our critical guys, let the good (but not great) players walk, and continue to add new rookies and solid FAs.

 

Two different opinions of how to build a team going forward.  One puts an emphasis on winning now.  An if we don't win now, then what?

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 593
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

Thanks for creating a thread for this. I was having a hard time finding whether or not anyone was disappponted with free agency so far. This was much needed.            

Then don’t say anything.

Posted Images

10 minutes ago, shastamasta said:

Everybody likes to bring up NE...well this is what they do. 

 

Not really.

 

Yes, they let good players walk if they aren't interested in meeting their contract demands (Flowers, Brown, Butler, etc.)

 

But more often than not, they've been trading for good players, keeping them for a year, then flipping them for a pick (Cooks). They traded Chandler Jones, didn't let him walk for a comp pick. And when they did make an obvious comp pick signing with Revis, they executed it far differently than what we're doing with Funchess. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, Superman said:

 

I don't think the comp system is collectively bargained, although I suppose it's something the players could ask for a say on. Don't see why they would...

 

As for signing players to one year deals to increase your odds of getting future picks, I think that's simply a potential by-product, not necessarily a core strategy. If you sign a player who plays well, and he fits your team, and he's 26, he should remain part of your core if possible. It's better to keep a player who plays well and fits than it is to potentially get a 3rd or 4th round comp pick a year from now. This is the same reason we don't just trade our good players a year before they come up for FA, but even that would be a more practical plan, because you're securing compensation now, not hoping for future compensation if the stars align.

 

I think people are a little overboard with their comp pick justifications lately. 'It's okay if we lose good players in FA, we'll get a comp pick a year from now!' Nah, that's not a primary team building strategy. It's an element to consider, but it's like 8th on a list of ten elements, IMO.

 

Oh I agree people go overboard. Comp picks are not a core building strategy...but I do think it is very much a consideration when you are signing one year deals...especially higher-priced ones. Cheap flyer FAs (like Glow) are different.

 

With Funchess...this is just how I see it playing out. 

 

I don't think signing a bunch of one-year pillow contracts should be a core building strategy either...because the Colts are trading off cost control and certainty to reduce the risk. Definitely should be part of the strategy though.

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, superrep1967 said:

Yes, Ballard has said on numourous occasions that they put a value on a player and when the player exceeds that amount he can sleep well knowing he’ll go after the next player. I will say this about Ballard he don’t mince words and I respect that. 

And Ballard apparently values Devin Futch at $10-$13 M....which is absolutely insane.

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

For people saying the Colts are at a point in the process that the Browns were a year or two ago aren't taking one thing into account: Ballard is conservative AF, and Dorsey is the epitome of aggressive. Ballard will never do what Dorsey did this offseason, never. What's sad is that the goal is to win Super Bowls, right? So, why not spend a portion of what we had, acquire some heavy hitters, and make a run at a few SB titles before Lucks arm falls off? You can't tell me this team wouldn't have competed for the SB with OBJ and Lev, and a couple of key additions on defense...you couple that with our draft selections, and we're in there. I think you can become too conservative, and miss your window. Hopefully he continues to draft well, because that's literally the only way this philosophy leads to success, and not mediocrity. 

  • Haha 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
29 minutes ago, Superman said:

 

Not really.

 

Yes, they let good players walk if they aren't interested in meeting their contract demands (Flowers, Brown, Butler, etc.)

 

But more often than not, they've been trading for good players, keeping them for a year, then flipping them for a pick (Cooks). They traded Chandler Jones, didn't let him walk for a comp pick. And when they did make an obvious comp pick signing with Revis, they executed it far differently than what we're doing with Funchess. 

 

NE lets guys go all the time....one way or another...and they find more cost-effective ways of replacing them OR they just upgrade the position with a great player instead of re-signing an expensive good player (like they did when they signed Gilmore and let Ryan walk in FA). 

 

That was my point. That they definitely do not adhere to the "re-sign your own" mantra...they are very selective and creative in team building. And trust me...I have been pounding the table for Ballard to make some trades.

 

I wasn't referencing the Funchess signing in that post...just generally about approach of paying your own.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, SouthernIndianaNDFan said:

For people saying the Colts are at a point in the process that the Browns were a year or two ago aren't taking one thing into account: Ballard is conservative AF, and Dorsey is the epitome of aggressive. Ballard will never do what Dorsey did this offseason, never. What's sad is that the goal is to win Super Bowls, right? So, why not spend a portion of what we had, acquire some heavy hitters, and make a run at a few SB titles before Lucks arm falls off? You can't tell me this team wouldn't have competed for the SB with OBJ and Lev, and a couple of key additions on defense...you couple that with our draft selections, and we're in there. I think you can become too conservative, and miss your window. Hopefully he continues to draft well, because that's literally the only way this philosophy leads to success, and not mediocrity. 

Adding OBJ and Bell, along with the remaining picks we had and some lower priced FA's?

 

We are probably SB favs heading into this year AND we would probably still have some cap space left.  We have a solid 5-6 good years of OBJ left, 2 or 3 with Bell, and cap flexibility.

 

Why does anyone want to pass that chance up when it would not have broken the bank by any means?

 

Makes no sense.

 

I just have to shake my head at those saying 'wait....lets give this another year or 2 THEN GO FOR IT'.

 

Ok.  By that time Luck is 2 years older.  Rookie contracts are up.  And there is no guarantee that players the caliber of Hunt, Bell, OBJ and AB will even be available.

 

Nope....we blew it.  We had a team coming off a good season.  Cap space.  Fan interest was coming back.  And we had 2 teams in the Steelers and Giants holding a fire sale for ELITE players.

 

What did we do?  Nothing.


Why?  Because we have a GM who is so freaking cocky in this thoughts that his way is the ONLY way and that he can find players anywhere that he failed to take advantage of what was thrown in his face.

 

Mark my words this team is going to regret this off season for a long long time.

  • Like 1
  • Haha 1
  • Confused 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

 

3 minutes ago, threeflight said:

Adding OBJ and Bell, along with the remaining picks we had and some lower priced FA's?

 

We are probably SB favs heading into this year AND we would probably still have some cap space left.  We have a solid 5-6 good years of OBJ left, 2 or 3 with Bell, and cap flexibility.

 

I just have to shake my head at those saying 'wait....lets give this another year or 2 THEN GO FOR IT'.

 

Ok.  By that time Luck is 2 years older.  Rookie contracts are up.  And there is no guarantee that players the caliber of Hunt, Bell, OBJ and AB will even be available.

 

Nope....we blew it.  We had a team coming off a good season.  Cap space.  Fan interest was coming back.  And we had 2 teams in the Steelers and Giants holding a fire sale for ELITE players.

 

What did we do?  Nothing.


Why?  Because we have a GM who is so freaking cocky in this thoughts that his way is the ONLY way and that he can find players anywhere that he failed to take advantage of what was thrown in his face.

 

Mark my words this team is going to regret this off season for a long long time.

 

Nah man, we signed Devin Funchess for the same amount we could've payed Lev Bell basically...and Lev will probably have more RECEIVING yards next year than Funchess lol. 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, SouthernIndianaNDFan said:

 

 

Nah man, we signed Devin Funchess for the same amount we could've payed Lev Bell basically...and Lev will probably have more RECEIVING yards next year than Funchess lol. 

LOL it really puts things into perspective when you realize that Ballard just about paid the same amount for Futchess as Lev Bell...an elite elite player.

 

It makes no sense and is totally contrary to everything Ballard has preached.

 

 

  • Haha 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, SouthernIndianaNDFan said:

For people saying the Colts are at a point in the process that the Browns were a year or two ago aren't taking one thing into account: Ballard is conservative AF, and Dorsey is the epitome of aggressive. Ballard will never do what Dorsey did this offseason, never. What's sad is that the goal is to win Super Bowls, right? So, why not spend a portion of what we had, acquire some heavy hitters, and make a run at a few SB titles before Lucks arm falls off? You can't tell me this team wouldn't have competed for the SB with OBJ and Lev, and a couple of key additions on defense...you couple that with our draft selections, and we're in there. I think you can become too conservative, and miss your window. Hopefully he continues to draft well, because that's literally the only way this philosophy leads to success, and not mediocrity. 

 

If Ballard won't make moves this offseason...it does make one wonder if he ever will. Next year's FA group isn't very strong...and most of the good players won't make it.

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

 

If Ballard won't make moves this offseason...it does make one wonder if he ever will. Next year's FA group isn't very strong...and most of the good players won't make it.

 

At some point he's either gonna have to start signing guys or extending contracts, because they're well under the 89% 4-year CB threshold. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, threeflight said:

LOL it really puts things into perspective when you realize that Ballard just about paid the same amount for Futchess as Lev Bell...an elite elite player.

 

It makes no sense and is totally contrary to everything Ballard has preached.

Except he didn't.  The guaranteed money and years was more for Bell.

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, SouthernIndianaNDFan said:

 

At some point he's either gonna have to start signing guys or extending contracts, because they're well under the 89% 4-year CB threshold. 

Which is the plan, signing your own players like Nelson and Lawrence (who were drafted last year and are impact guys).  OBJ, Bell, and Brown do not offer the locker room presence that the Colts are looking for currently.

This team is young, won ten games last year and is on the rise and I am fine with added quality pros and trusting the evaluations of draft prospects of the staff.

Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, Dilger85 said:

Except he didn't.  The guaranteed money and years was more for Bell.

Quote

 

As they should be.  Bell is a proven elite player.  One of the best RBs of the modern era.  You want to lock up players like that.

 

Futchess didn't deserve jack.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, threeflight said:

Nope....we blew it.

 

Why are you acting as if it's all already over?

 

The season (you know, when they actually play the games) hasn't even started yet.

 

You're going to look like a damn fool if the Colts win a SB with Devin "freaking" Funchess.  And at the very least, if the Colts have a more successful season than the Raiders and Browns, you know damn well we're all going to come back to this thread and throw all your nonsense posts back in your face.  :thmup:

  • Like 1
  • Haha 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Superman said:

 

I don't think the comp system is collectively bargained, although I suppose it's something the players could ask for a say on. Don't see why they would...

 

As for signing players to one year deals to increase your odds of getting future picks, I think that's simply a potential by-product, not necessarily a core strategy. If you sign a player who plays well, and he fits your team, and he's 26, he should remain part of your core if possible. It's better to keep a player who plays well and fits than it is to potentially get a 3rd or 4th round comp pick a year from now. This is the same reason we don't just trade our good players a year before they come up for FA, but even that would be a more practical plan, because you're securing compensation now, not hoping for future compensation if the stars align.

 

I think people are a little overboard with their comp pick justifications lately. 'It's okay if we lose good players in FA, we'll get a comp pick a year from now!' Nah, that's not a primary team building strategy. It's an element to consider, but it's like 8th on a list of ten elements, IMO.

 

I laugh at the folks who think this way since a majority of them are also the same folks that are in here screaming when we aren't spending big on the top-notch elite talents the first day or two of tampering or free agency.

 

News flash to the masses:

 

If you spend big on free agents it off-sets the comp picks you would get if you lose a guy.

 

So if Funchess blows up and then we lose him and he signs somewhere else, the only way we get a comp pick for that is if we then are not spending big on anyone else next off-season.

 

Are you guys all gonna be good w us not spending next year to get a comp pick in the 2021 draft in that example?

 

My guess is no. So the comp pick side of the Funchess deal is pretty much a dead topic before it even begins unless you are someone who is totally OK with us spending very little on outside FAs (which most of our board seems to not be OK with lol)

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, threeflight said:

As they should be.  Bell is a proven elite player.  One of the best RBs of the modern era.  You want to lock up players like that.

 

Futchess didn't deserve jack.

That wasn't the argument you were making nor what I responded to in my post.  You said that CB paid as much for Funchess as Bell received which was not true.  You moved your goal posts of your argument.

Link to post
Share on other sites
58 minutes ago, TomDiggs said:

 

I laugh at the folks who think this way since a majority of them are also the same folks that are in here screaming when we aren't spending big on the top-notch elite talents the first day or two of tampering or free agency.

 

News flash to the masses:

 

If you spend big on free agents it off-sets the comp picks you would get if you lose a guy.

 

So if Funchess blows up and then we lose him and he signs somewhere else, the only way we get a comp pick for that is if we then are not spending big on anyone else next off-season.

 

Are you guys all gonna be good w us not spending next year to get a comp pick in the 2021 draft in that example?

 

My guess is no. So the comp pick side of the Funchess deal is pretty much a dead topic before it even begins unless you are someone who is totally OK with us spending very little on outside FAs (which most of our board seems to not be OK with lol)

 

I am not ok with it...I just expect it. Colts aren't spending big money on UFAs...it's just not happening for one reason or another.

 

Besides, they could spend a lot of money on guys that are released...or trade middle round picks for guys under contract...and those won't affect the comp formula.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, shastamasta said:

 

I am not ok with it...I just expect it. Colts aren't spending big money on UFAs...it's just not happening for one reason or another.

 

Besides, they could spend a lot of money on guys that are released...or trade middle round picks for guys under contract...and those won't affect the comp formula.

 

Exactly why I was and still am expecting CB to chase Justin Houston

 

 

  • Confused 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
On 3/12/2019 at 10:14 AM, threeflight said:

So instead of trading a 3rd and a 5th and giving a top 5 greatest WR of all time $18 M for 3 years, which would have made the Colts instant top 3 favs to win the SB this year, we decided to give $13 M to a guy who runs like a statue and who can't catch.

 

Does this make any rational sense?

 

To me it doesn't and I'm surprised Irsay hasn't stepped in and said sign someone while we have all this money and Luck is still viable 

 

Antonio Brown... top 5 WR of all-time, really?

Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, Barry Sears said:

 

And, apparently Funchess is a bottom 5 WR of all-time. :P

Too bad, the kid is probably really excited for this new opportunity, only to see Colts forums dis him before he has even stepped of the plane. 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, threeflight said:

LOL it really puts things into perspective when you realize that Ballard just about paid the same amount for Futchess as Lev Bell...an elite elite player.

 

It makes no sense and is totally contrary to everything Ballard has preached.

 

 

Complete nonsense

Link to post
Share on other sites

In these contemptuous days/hours as FA is getting under way lets remember to address posts rather than attacking the poster...

Some posts have been removed...

With that said, if you take an impassioned stance & continue to double down on said stance, do not be surprised when others also take an impassioned stance, and or negatively address/critique that stance...

 

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Buck Showalter said:

 

With that said, if you take an impassioned stance & continue to double down on said stance, do not be surprised when others also take an impassioned stance, and or negatively address/critic that stance...

 

Exactly. It's fine to have an opinion, just as it's ok when someone has an opinion...about your opinion. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
50 minutes ago, Steamboat_Shaun said:

 

He runs like a "statue" & "can't catch."

 

 

Just saying this video means absolutely nothing.  I can go and find a Trent Richardson video being a beast and we all know he was bad. I think I saw somewhere that funchess led the league last year in drops.  So I guess he can't catch.  

Devils advocate here!! 

Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, tweezy32 said:

Just saying this video means absolutely nothing.  I can go and find a Trent Richardson video being a beast and we all know he was bad. I think I saw somewhere that funchess led the league last year in drops.  So I guess he can't catch.  

Devils advocate here!! 

 

Yeah, my grandmother has one of those hype videos. (She also runs a 4.4 40 and hits like a Mack truck)

Link to post
Share on other sites
40 minutes ago, tweezy32 said:

Just saying this video means absolutely nothing.  I can go and find a Trent Richardson video being a beast and we all know he was bad. I think I saw somewhere that funchess led the league last year in drops.  So I guess he can't catch.  

Devils advocate here!! 

 

He was also phased out of the offense by his former team...only one year after his supposed breakout season, in exchange for guys that could separate.

 

I like the height...but the lack of a separation (and lack of YAC...1.8 woof) is what concerns me. You can see Cam chucking it up to Funchess in that video. That's not Luck's style. Luck is a cerebral...he goes through his reads to find the open man and uses touch. I don't like the idea of him throwing contested passes to a covered WR...no matter his size. Maybe in the red zone...but not between the 20s.

 

I still hope they double dip at WR in the draft...and get some speed and guys that can make plays after catch.

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Tyrell Williams signs for 4 years, $44 M.

 

So potentially $2 M less a year than Funchess, and you get to keep him for longer than a year if he does well his first season.

 

You're telling me we couldn't afford that?????  

 

 

Williams is 10 x the wr that Funchess is.

 

Brilliant Ballard!!!

Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, threeflight said:

Tyrell Williams signs for 4 years, $44 M.

 

So potentially $2 M less a year than Funchess, and you get to keep him for longer than a year if he does well his first season.

 

You're telling me we couldn't afford that?????  

 

 

Williams is 10 x the wr that Funchess is.

 

Brilliant Ballard!!!

 

The sky is falling!

 

There's no way we ever win a SB with Ballard in charge!

 

We're all gonna die!  AHHHHHHHHH!!!!!

 

ahhhhhhhh-5b2ff4.jpg

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.   You want to see an organization that doesn’t want to spend money look across town where Simon won’t even let the Pacers look at the luxury tax.  That’s an owner who doesn’t want to spend.
    • 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

    • King Colt

      King Colt 981

      Senior Member
      Joined:
      Last active:
    • superrep1967

      superrep1967 598

      Senior Member
      Joined:
      Last active:
    • ReMeDy

      ReMeDy 446

      Senior Member
      Joined:
      Last active:
    • RDNScot

      RDNScot 3

      Rookie
      Joined:
      Last active:
    • Kangaroo

      Kangaroo 98

      Member
      Joined:
      Last active:
    • Chucklez

      Chucklez 338

      Senior Member
      Joined:
      Last active:
    • CoachLite

      CoachLite 429

      Senior Member
      Joined:
      Last active:
×
×
  • Create New...