Jump to content
Indianapolis Colts

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

GusFring

Official complaints about Free Agency thread (merge)

Recommended Posts

7 minutes ago, Lucky Colts Fan said:

 

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

Laugh all you want but the fact is Ballard has some really good players go elsewhere for very decent money.  $11 M a year for Williams is very very reasonable and solves our #2 wr issue for 2 years at least while we develop Cain or a pick this year.

 

Makes no sense why we couldn't sign this guy for that kind of money.

 

Cmon.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
24 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!!!

 

I know that the real life NFL is exactly like a game of madden in your mind, but try to consider the possibility that Ballard offered equal money or even more, but Williams chose Oakland for one of 1000 other reasons. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
26 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!!!

This has to be the dumbest post I have seen. The last time I checked 13m is less then 44m.  Funchess actually had a better PFF grade then Williams.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Chloe6124 said:

This has to be the dumbest post I have seen. The last time I checked 13m is less then 44m.  Funchess actually had a better PFF grade then Williams.

I would rather have Williams locked up at $11 M year for more than one year than Funchess at $10-13 for ONE year only.

 

Cmon.  All of you guys were saying how badly you wanted Williams for the past 2 months...but now you don't want him once he signs elsewhere.

 

Because.....reasons.

 

Righttttttttttttttttt.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I am going to sit back and laugh when funchess has 8 or 9 touchdowns next season. Ty has a career year because he no longer has double teams and funchess creates a huge mismatch for defenses. I promise I won’t rub it in.

Share this post


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

Makes no sense why we couldn't sign this guy for that kind of money.

 

To you.

 

A fan.

 

That has never even tried to run an NFL team and doesn't seem to comprehend all the different aspects that go into signing free agents besides the dollar amount.

Share this post


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

Laugh all you want but the fact is Ballard has some really good players go elsewhere for very decent money.  $11 M a year for Williams is very very reasonable and solves our #2 wr issue for 2 years at least while we develop Cain or a pick this year.

 

Makes no sense why we couldn't sign this guy for that kind of money.

 

Cmon.

 

Just a quick reminder 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, threeflight said:

I would rather have Williams locked up at $11 M year for more than one year than Funchess at $10-13 per year.

 

Cmon.  All of you guys were saying how badly you wanted Williams for the past 2 months...but now you don't want him once he signs elsewhere.

 

Because.....reasons.

 

Righttttttttttttttttt.

No one is saying they would not of wanted him. But this stupid hating on funchess and the false narrative is getting old.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Chloe6124 said:

I am going to sit back and laugh when funchess has 8 or 9 touchdowns next season. Ty has a career year because he no longer has double teams and funchess creates a huge mismatch for defenses. I promise I won’t rub it in.

I have already stated I expect Funchess to do ok.  As in maybe 600-700 yards and 5 or 6 Tds.

 

He isn't that bad.  He is, as I said.....ok.

 

But not worth $13 M and not worth signing over the other guys available.....like AB, OBJ, Humphries, and Williams.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, J@son said:

 

Just a quick reminder 

 

 

So true.  Lets not forget this is the same guy who wanted the manlet from NE as our coach.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, threeflight said:

But not worth $13 M

 

If he earns $13, he will be worth the $13.

 

Why are you so stubborn about adding certain players you want?

Share this post


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

So true.  Lets not forget this is the same guy who wanted the manlet from NE as our coach.

 

Let's not forget this is the same guy that had what so far appears to be an elite draft class last year, one of the highest graded free agancy classes as graded after the season played out, wound up hiring the right HCwho was a finalist in CotY voting and who himself won exec of the year. 

Share this post


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

I have already stated I expect Funchess to do ok.  As in maybe 600-700 yards and 5 or 6 Tds.

 

He isn't that bad.  He is, as I said.....ok.

 

But not worth $13 M and not worth signing over the other guys available.....like AB, OBJ, Humphries, and Williams.  

 

why are you fixated on 13,000,000?

 

1st of all the deal is 10,000,000 w/ 3 million possible in incentives.

2nd of all, it is a 1 year deal. 1 year deals are generally higher than multi-year deals because the club doesn't have to commit to the player for more than.... you guessed it. One year.

 

Worst case scenario, we find ourselves w/ the most cap space again next year, and that isn't a bad thing.

Share this post


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

I would rather have Williams locked up at $11 M year for more than one year than Funchess at $10-13 for ONE year only.

 

Cmon.  All of you guys were saying how badly you wanted Williams for the past 2 months...but now you don't want him once he signs elsewhere.

 

Because.....reasons.

 

Righttttttttttttttttt.

If we have to explain it to you ........

Share this post


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

 

why are you fixated on 13,000,000?

 

1st of all the deal is 10,000,000 w/ 3 million possible in incentives.

2nd of all, it is a 1 year deal. 1 year deals are generally higher than multi-year deals because the club doesn't have to commit to the player for more than.... you guessed it. One year.

 

Worst case scenario, we find ourselves w/ the most cap space again next year, and that isn't a bad thing.

Careful!  His head might explode with all that info and FACTS.

Im starting to think he's "lil Ryan"... Grigson's 8 year old kid the way he hates on Ballard.  Or perhaps its Grigsy's over-protective mom.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I just don’t understand why we wouldn’t have tried to sign Williams at WR. And don’t say because it’s a 4 year $44 million contract. The length isn’t the issue just like with L Collins at Wash. it’s the guaranteed money that’s important. Would have rather had Williams at $11 million for 2 years than what we signed for $10 million for 1 year. If Williams had performed at a high level you could have him for potentially 4 years.  As it is we have to go looking again next year for a replacement or draft one and HOPE he develops 

Share this post


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

Careful!  His head might explode with all that info and FACTS.

Im starting to think he's "lil Ryan"... Grigson's 8 year old kid the way he hates on Ballard.  Or perhaps its Grigsy's over-protective mom.

I have explained it.  You are choosing not to understand it.

 

I would rather have a better WR in Williams locked up for 2-4 years at $11 M per year than a lesser WR in Funchess for one year at $10-$13 M per year.  

 

Lets say Funchess does well.  The chances that we resign him are slim as his price will go up.  Lets say he doesn't do well.  The chances are we don't resign him as he well....sucks.

 

So instead we are wasting valuable cap space, resources, and time on a guy that probably won't be here next year regardless.  We have to do the same thing all over next year.

 

I would much rather have a better WR in Williams locked up for at least 2 years so that:

A.  We don't have to worry about a #2 wr for two years at least.  It's one less issue to worry about.

B.  If he does well we don't have to worry about him leaving after one year and having to find another WR all over again.

C. He gives the Colts time to either develop Cain or find another wr in the draft. 

D.  He is just a better WR than Funchess.

 

It really isn't that hard to figure out.

 

What you are saying is you would rather have someone like Funchess for one year at a potentially higher price than someone who is better locked up for 4 years at a potentially cheaper price.   It makes no sense.

 

You lock up better players...especially when the price is cheaper.

 

This isn't hard to understand.

Share this post


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

 

why are you fixated on 13,000,000?

 

1st of all the deal is 10,000,000 w/ 3 million possible in incentives.

2nd of all, it is a 1 year deal. 1 year deals are generally higher than multi-year deals because the club doesn't have to commit to the player for more than.... you guessed it. One year.

 

Worst case scenario, we find ourselves w/ the most cap space again next year, and that isn't a bad thing.

 

Williams also is guaranteed 22 mill which makes his contract quite a bit better than the Funchess deal. 

 

That said , I would have liked Williams but might be Ballard not so much ?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Here what I like about what Ballard did with funchess. He has to earn his way into a contract with the colts after next year. He is going to work hard. Instead of just handing  a player like Williams a four year deal we are making Funchess earn it. This is very ballard like. He wants players to earn their way onto this team. That is exactly what funchess is doing. He doesn’t like to hand out contacts to players who haven’t earned their way onto the colts.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, Chloe6124 said:

Here what I like about what Ballard did with funchess. He has to earn his way into a contract with the colts after next year. He is going to work hard. Instead of just handing  a player like Williams a four year deal we are making Funchess earn it. This is very ballard like. He wants players to earn their way onto this team. That is exactly what funchess is doing. He doesn’t like to hand out contacts to players who haven’t earned their way onto the colts.

So you are saying you would rather go through a year where we are not entirely confident about how Funchess will perform, but that is ok because he has to earn his money.....which btw is as much or more than some higher rated wrs received.  This isn't $5 M we are talking.  This is $10-13 M.  So you are ok with being unsure how he will perform-which is what we have gone through the past 5 years with our #2 wr, but you would rather have that than locking up a better guy like a Williams for 2-4 years at a cheaper yearly $ and NOT have to worry about how that WR will perform and NOT have to worry about another situation arising like last year where Luck basically had a lame TY to throw to and then a bunch of scrubs a wr.

 

I don't understand that logic at all.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What your not getting is Ballard will reward him if he plays well. We have no idea how Williams would play either. I would rather take my chance on a one year deal then be tied to someone for four years. This signing is exactly who ballard is. Reward the ones that play well for your team.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, Chloe6124 said:

What your not getting is Ballard will reward him if he plays well. We have no idea how Williams would play either. I would rather take my chance on a one year deal then be tied to someone for four years. This signing is exactly who ballard is. Reward the ones that play well for your team.

Again, if he plays well the odds of Ballard paying him more than $13 M a year is a million to 1.  He wouldnt even pay Bell or Ab that.  He isn't going to pay Funchess that kind of cash.

 

And if he doesn't play well.....we don't pay him either.  

 

So he is a one year rental, but going by his career stats, not a very good rental when compared to other wrs out there.  That is what I keep saying.  There were much better options out there and that would have eliminated this charade game we keep playing every year at #2 going all the way back to A Johnson.

 

For example I do not recall one person on this board the past 2 months saying they want Devin Funchess as the Colts 2019 #2 wr.

 

I did hear a ton about Williams, Humphries, AB and OBJ.  Williams is rated pretty highly by just about everyone, including me and the eye test.  He is good.  Very good.  Which is why people had him going to the Colts.

 

So basically, since the chances of Williams not being here next year are pretty high, we are spinning our wheels once again at #2 instead of finding a more complete and better long term solution.  Because I am telling you, Funchess is nothing to write home about.  He is ok.  But he won't beat a NE or a KC with this athletic ability, and that is what we needed...more playmakers.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 3/12/2019 at 8:17 AM, GusFring said:

Yes. Just sit and be bored and disappointed together. 

 

Ahhhh...

 

Were you bored and disappointed when we won 9 of our last 10 last season, made the playoffs and won a post-seadon game?

 

Uhhhh....

 

Now that I think about it, you actually might have been. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Why would he get more then 13 million. 13 million is the going rate for a number two. Nobody is going to pay him Brown money. LMAO

Share this post


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

I have explained it.  You are choosing not to understand it.

 

I would rather have a better WR in Williams locked up for 2-4 years at $11 M per year than a lesser WR in Funchess for one year at $10-$13 M per year.  

 

Lets say Funchess does well.  The chances that we resign him are slim as his price will go up.  Lets say he doesn't do well.  The chances are we don't resign him as he well....sucks.

 

So instead we are wasting valuable cap space, resources, and time on a guy that probably won't be here next year regardless.  We have to do the same thing all over next year.

 

I would much rather have a better WR in Williams locked up for at least 2 years so that:

A.  We don't have to worry about a #2 wr for two years at least.  It's one less issue to worry about.

B.  If he does well we don't have to worry about him leaving after one year and having to find another WR all over again.

C. He gives the Colts time to either develop Cain or find another wr in the draft. 

D.  He is just a better WR than Funchess.

 

It really isn't that hard to figure out.

 

What you are saying is you would rather have someone like Funchess for one year at a potentially higher price than someone who is better locked up for 4 years at a potentially cheaper price.   It makes no sense.

 

You lock up better players...especially when the price is cheaper.

 

This isn't hard to understand.

Who says williams is better?  You?  Seems like Raiders were only team to throw "good wr" money at him.

time will tell.  Relax and enjoy the ride.

our OC knows williams well.  If he was as good as you think, Ballard would know.  He obviously sees something in funchess, even tho i believe hes a temporary stopgap.

  I'd go out on a limb and say Ballard is alot more qualified than either of us.  Sounds like you just like to complain about organizational decisions.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I can understand people being upset with our FA approach with cap space but Ballard has his game plan. He won’t overplay and he likes competition. He has been clear about those areas since he was introduced and his results have been hard to argue with for the most part. He takes the baseball approach of manufacturing runs and not home runs and I think he has earned that right. We still have the draft coming up to further bolster our squad.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, J@son said:

 

Just a quick reminder 

 

 

 

Thanks for sharing, it seems the sky is always falling with some fans

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, threeflight said:

I have explained it.  You are choosing not to understand it.

 

I would rather have a better WR in Williams locked up for 2-4 years at $11 M per year than a lesser WR in Funchess for one year at $10-$13 M per year.  

 

Lets say Funchess does well.  The chances that we resign him are slim as his price will go up.  Lets say he doesn't do well.  The chances are we don't resign him as he well....sucks.

 

So instead we are wasting valuable cap space, resources, and time on a guy that probably won't be here next year regardless.  We have to do the same thing all over next year.

 

I would much rather have a better WR in Williams locked up for at least 2 years so that:

A.  We don't have to worry about a #2 wr for two years at least.  It's one less issue to worry about.

B.  If he does well we don't have to worry about him leaving after one year and having to find another WR all over again.

C. He gives the Colts time to either develop Cain or find another wr in the draft. 

D.  He is just a better WR than Funchess.

 

It really isn't that hard to figure out.

 

What you are saying is you would rather have someone like Funchess for one year at a potentially higher price than someone who is better locked up for 4 years at a potentially cheaper price.   It makes no sense.

 

You lock up better players...especially when the price is cheaper.

 

This isn't hard to understand.

 

Now here's a crazy idea what if williams isn't as good as you think and he has the production of ryan grant this year, now we stuck with him or waste valuable cap space as you describe it.

 

Free Agents aren't sure things

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, SilentHill said:

 

why are you fixated on 13,000,000?

 

1st of all the deal is 10,000,000 w/ 3 million possible in incentives.

2nd of all, it is a 1 year deal. 1 year deals are generally higher than multi-year deals because the club doesn't have to commit to the player for more than.... you guessed it. One year.

 

Worst case scenario, we find ourselves w/ the most cap space again next year, and that isn't a bad thing.

 

I love the fact that $13m is continually mentioned, mostly because, if we do end up paying £13m it will prove @threeflight wrong as he will have met all of his incentives (ie had a great season)!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 3/12/2019 at 11:25 AM, Patrick Miller said:

I like the Funchess pick up. Everyone else we have behind Hilton sucks. There are still a lot of good free agents available. I think Ballard knows what he is doing.

Inman doesn't suck. Cain is unproven but showed something in camp. What do you like so much about Funchess? Is it the drops? At least Inman can hold on to the ball.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 3/12/2019 at 12:27 PM, needanoline63 said:

All these people saying “suck it up” or “build through draft”, how many times do you think we’re gonna strike gold in the draft?

Exactly. It has to be a little of both.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 hours ago, WoolMagnet said:

  I'd go out on a limb and say Ballard is alot more qualified than either of us.  Sounds like you just like to complain about organizational decisions.

Ballard - and his entire staff.  There are a bunch of people - paid professionals - that are working on this stuff day and night.

 

But I am sure we know more...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm going to give Ballard the benefit  of the doubt until he proves otherwise . 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

  • Thread of the Week

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • Young will likely go at No. 3 or No. 4 after teams trade up to draft their WB's. It would take 3 1st's to trade up that far granted we finish outside the top 20th in draft position.    I think it's more likely we package our first and a second if we really like a guy at 12-18th ish 
    • Yea, our division around that time was beastly in the RB department. In addition to MJ-D (2006), the Jags had Fred Taylor, so the Jags had a two-headed monster. The Titans once had Chris Johnson (2008). Then the Texans Arian Foster (2009) still gives me nightmares. Yea, their stats were padded a bit by a shoddy Colts run defense, but I also saw them running on other teams, so I think it was a combination of the two.
    • He's benched behind Ryan Fitzpatrick, once more-   https://www.si.com/nfl/2019/10/16/miami-dolphins-starting-quarterback-ryan-fitzpatrick-josh-rosen-benched
    • I don't believe that. I know for fact that in 2012, this was the wording-   Only players with a “major injury” who are placed on the IR list...   A major injury is described as an injury that renders the player unable to practice or play football for at least six weeks — or 42 calendar days — from the date of injury.   That designated player is eligible to return to practice if he has been on the IR list for at least six weeks from the date he was placed on Reserve. He is eligible to return to the active list if has been on the IR list for at least eight weeks from the date he is placed on Reserve.   The only change to that since is now up to 2 players can return, and I see no bye week exceptions anywhere, either.  I'd like to see that in NFL rules or operations print.
  • Members

×
×
  • Create New...