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

1 minute ago, threeflight said:

Being from MI originally I also watched a lot of Detroit Lion games and said last year on this board that the Ebron signing was a very sneaky good signing.  I really liked it.  Drafted him on every fantasy team I had as well last year.  I could always tell in Detroit he wasn't utilized correctly and he had a certain flash to him that I liked.

 

Funchess I have never really seen anything.  He will do Ok here.  But imo he is not worth the money and certainly not worth signing over other guys.  Or trading for.

You also crapped all over Ballard's draft and offseason last year. Maybe just let it play out before complaining. Like last year, it may just surprise you.

Share this post


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

 

You weren't okay with it last year, either. You spent most of the season complaining about Ballard, until the Colts made the playoffs, two of our rookies were All Pro, and Ballard got Exec of the Year. Then you offered a tepid mea culpa.

 

There's a significant difference between your preferred approach and Ballard's approach, in basically every circumstance.

I wasn't happy with taking a guard over someone else that high.  I have since said that he proved me wrong on that one and I was happy to eat crow.

 

I also was very critical of not taking a WR early and also especially not taking Maurice Hurst in the 5th when he dropped.  He is going to be a BEAST for the Raiders.  A beast.

 

As for Free agency I loved Ebron and Autry.  The other signings I was meh about and I don't think I was proven wrong about that. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, jameszeigler834 said:

How do you know we could go out there and regress completely from last year and have a horrible year for all we know.

Sorry....

 

But now you’re just arguing for the sake of arguing.

Share this post


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

I wasn't happy with taking a guard over someone else that high.  I have since said that he proved me wrong on that one and I was happy to eat crow.

 

I also was very critical of not taking a WR early and also not especially not taking Maurice Hurst in the 5th when he dropped.  He is going to be a BEAST for the Raiders.  A beast.

 

As for Free agency I loved Ebron and Autry.  The other signings I was meh about and I don't think I was proven wrong about that. 

 

"We the jury find the defendant, @threeflight, guilty of lying under oath."

Share this post


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

Just going to leave this right here.  

 

 

That is exactly right.  Game Changers.

 

You need them to win.  

 

We don't really have many.  Maybe Luck and Hilton at best.

 

Bell and AB were there.  They ARE GAME CHANGERS.  

 

Foolish to not make an effort to sign them. We are SB favs if we had.

 

You are all telling me you wouldn't want to be SB favorites this year?  

 

And the signings of those 2 would have barely dented our cap space.  Certainly better than $10 M on a Devin Funchess.

Share this post


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

Foolish to not make an effort to sign them. We are SB favs if we had.

 

You are all telling me you wouldn't want to be SB favorites this year?  

 

I hate this argument. It's so foolish.

Share this post


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

That is exactly right.  Game Changers.

 

You need them to win.  

 

We don't really have many.  Maybe Luck and Hilton at best.

 

Bell and AB were there.  They ARE GAME CHANGERS.  

 

Foolish to not make an effort to sign them. We are SB favs if we had.

 

You are all telling me you wouldn't want to be SB favorites this year?  

 

And the signings of those 2 would have barely dented our cap space.  Certainly better than $10 M on a Devin Funchess.

Did you even read that tweet. He said these FA signings were players who are not game changers So in other words the amount they got was ridiculous. 

Share this post


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

 

I hate this argument. It's so foolish.

I think it is pretty logical actually.


Those are guys still in their primes.  Not Andre Johnsons.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, jameszeigler834 said:

Here we go again another free agency filled with trash signings.

https://www.colts.com/news/spotrac-colts-have-most-valuable-2018-free-agent-class

 

The Indianapolis Colts aren’t reliant on free agency to build their team, but they do use it to supplement the weak spots on their roster. According to Spotrac, the Colts did a better job than any team this offseason in doing just that.

On Friday, Spotrac put out their grades for notable free agent signings by each team this year by identifying "all free agent contracts of at least $2M from each team, assessing a ‘Value Level’ for each based on $ vs. production."

Again, the Colts aren’t one to make splashy free agent signings — unless for the right price and circumstance — but the moves that they do execute, they tend to make them count. Per Spotrac:

“By far one of the most successful free agent classes in the league, the Colts took a few low-risk moves on bringing in (Eric) Ebron & (Ryan) Grant to add weapons for (Andrew) Luck, and both have been effective. Denico Autry has been one of the more productive edge defenders in the game, and Matt Slauson has been another positive piece to a finally improved offensive line.”

Share this post


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

Those are guys still in their primes.

 

A 30 year old WR is "in his prime"?

 

You must be delusional if you think ABs best years aren't behind him.

Share this post


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

I think it is pretty logical actually.


Those are guys still in their primes.  Not Andre Johnsons.

 

So by your logic, any time a team doesn't go hard after a 'game changer in his prime' it necessarily means they don't want to win a Super Bowl, right?

 

And the secondary aspect of that argument is that, if you go hard after a 'game changer in his prime,' it necessarily makes you a contender, right?

 

It's so easy when you know exactly how everything is going to work out.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Lucky Colts Fan said:

 

More like CULTURE CHANGERS.  :thmdown:

Pittsburgh was just fine for years with those guys.  The fact is AB hated Ben and both AB and Bell were allowed to dictate things because  coach Tomlin let them.  Might have been a 'black' thing I don't know.  But I know he lets things go that most coaches would not.

 

I would take a guess and say the coaching and management situation here would not let that happen.

Share this post


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

I wasn't happy with taking a guard over someone else that high.  I have since said that he proved me wrong on that one and I was happy to eat crow.

 

I also was very critical of not taking a WR early and also not especially not taking Maurice Hurst in the 5th when he dropped.  He is going to be a BEAST for the Raiders.  A beast.

 

As for Free agency I loved Ebron and Autry.  The other signings I was meh about and I don't think I was proven wrong about that. 

I seriously doubt the call in Hurst was Ballard’s to make.   He was likely taken off the board by the medical reports and what fail to notice was that 30 OTHER teams also failed to draft Hurst.  30 of 31 teams made him undraftable.

 

Also at that level...  the owner typically steps in to give a final thumbs up or down.  They don’t want a player who might die on the field playing for them.   

 

So to blame Hurst on Ballard is false. 

Share this post


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

Did you even read that tweet. He said these FA signings were players who are not game changers So in other words the amount they got was ridiculous. 

And I said I agree.  The only people who deserve that money are gamechangers.  

 

So we agree then.

2 minutes ago, BeanDiasucci said:

https://www.colts.com/news/spotrac-colts-have-most-valuable-2018-free-agent-class

 

The Indianapolis Colts aren’t reliant on free agency to build their team, but they do use it to supplement the weak spots on their roster. According to Spotrac, the Colts did a better job than any team this offseason in doing just that.

On Friday, Spotrac put out their grades for notable free agent signings by each team this year by identifying "all free agent contracts of at least $2M from each team, assessing a ‘Value Level’ for each based on $ vs. production."

Again, the Colts aren’t one to make splashy free agent signings — unless for the right price and circumstance — but the moves that they do execute, they tend to make them count. Per Spotrac:

“By far one of the most successful free agent classes in the league, the Colts took a few low-risk moves on bringing in (Eric) Ebron & (Ryan) Grant to add weapons for (Andrew) Luck, and both have been effective. Denico Autry has been one of the more productive edge defenders in the game, and Matt Slauson has been another positive piece to a finally improved offensive line.”

I can't take any article seriously that calls Ryan Grant 'effective'.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Here is the truth. If a player is really important to a team and a play maker they are not going to let themn go in their prime. Almost every signing has been ridiculous and most of these players are not worth it. At least at those prices. 

Share this post


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

I seriously doubt the call in Hurst was Ballard’s to make.   He was likely taken off the board by the medical reports and what fail to notice was that 30 OTHER teams also failed to draft Hurst.  30 of 31 teams made him undraftable.

 

Also at that level...  the owner typically steps in to give a final thumbs up or down.  They don’t want a player who might die on the field playing for them.   

 

So to blame Hurst on Ballard is false. 

 

Or, blame it all on Ballard. I think it was a perfectly reasonable stance, and like you said, so did 30 other teams. Teams take players off the board for bad medical all the time.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Lucky Colts Fan said:

 

A 30 year old WR is "in his prime"?

 

You must be delusional if you think ABs best years aren't behind him.

He is certainly worth every bit of a 3rd, a 5th, and $18 M a year.  And its not even close.

Share this post


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

 

So by your logic, any time a team doesn't go hard after a 'game changer in his prime' it necessarily means they don't want to win a Super Bowl, right?

 

And the secondary aspect of that argument is that, if you go hard after a 'game changer in his prime,' it necessarily makes you a contender, right?

 

It's so easy when you know exactly how everything is going to work out.

No.  But it isn't often you see players like Ab, Bell, and even OBJ being made available in the same year.  That happens very very rarely.  Players like that don't grow on trees.

Share this post


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

I can't take any article seriously

 

I can't take any of your posts seriously...

 

3 minutes ago, threeflight said:

Pittsburgh was just fine for years with those guys.  The fact is AB hated Ben and both AB and Bell were allowed to dictate things because  coach Tomlin let them.  Might have been a 'black' thing I don't know.  But I know he lets things go that most coaches would not.

 

Seriously?  You need to take a walk and clear your head before posting anymore of this nonsense.

Share this post


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

No.  But it isn't often you see players like Ab, Bell, and even OBJ being made available in the same year.  That happens very very rarely.  Players like that don't grow on trees.

 

Okay, so set aside your opinion of these players, their perceived issues and their greatness.

 

Do you think it's reasonable for a team to say 'we want to limit distractions in our program, so we're going to pass on talented players if they're more me-first than team-first'?

Share this post


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

I seriously doubt the call in Hurst was Ballard’s to make.   He was likely taken off the board by the medical reports and what fail to notice was that 30 OTHER teams also failed to draft Hurst.  30 of 31 teams made him undraftable.

 

Also at that level...  the owner typically steps in to give a final thumbs up or down.  They don’t want a player who might die on the field playing for them.   

 

So to blame Hurst on Ballard is false. 

It was a 5th round pick.

 

Worth the risk imo.

 

Instead we traded the pick I believe in the 5th and took Fountain lol...who looks....not good.

Share this post


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

This.

 

Humphries for 2 years and $20 M is imo a 1000000000 x better deal than signing Funch for 1 year and $10-13 M.  

 

It locks up a much better player at a cheaper price.  He could have been our next Brandon Stokley.  Instead we have our next Grant, A Johnson etc.  

 

And even if he does do well, we will have him for a year.  Whoopppee.  

 

It does nothing to solve the long term issue of WR need.  

 

Meanwhile a top 3 wr of all time gets traded for a 3rd and a 5th and we can't even consider it because of culture 'reasons'.

 

Imagine AB on this team.  Add Bell and Humphries.  We are super bowl favs imo.

 

The fan base would be incredibly stoked.

 

Instead we have....what we have.  

 

*Says a guy on a fan forum who thinks he knows more than the general manager of the year coming off one of the best offseasons in NFL history... 

 

I do agree we have what we have. And it's much better than the scenario you just posed, which is complete fantasy and ludicrous. 

Share this post


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

Worth the risk imo.

 

 

"Who cares if he dies on our practice field, we only spent a fifth rounder on him."

Share this post


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

Correct.  I have seen him play countless times.  

 

He is an 'ok' player.  Literally a dime a dozen player.

 

Just no point in doing this.  I would rather see our young guys play than to pay someone like him that much money.  For one year mind you.

 

Share this post


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

He is certainly worth every bit of a 3rd, a 5th, and $18 M a year.  And its not even close.

 

I heard this plenty of times before. Around this time in 2015, the Andre Johnson deal made the Colts the offseason darling. Many said they are one of the strongest SB contender. How did it work out?

Share this post


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

 

Okay, so set aside your opinion of these players, their perceived issues and their greatness.

 

Do you think it's reasonable for a team to say 'we want to limit distractions in our program, so we're going to pass on talented players if they're more me-first than team-first'?

My opinion is if you are a 4-12 team and have a new coach and are just trying to rebuild?  It is not worth signing players that are great but may have a red flag or two.

 

But when you have an Andrew Luck with 3 years already wasted and no longer a young guy, when you are coming off a 10-6 season, when you have $100 M to spend, and when you have a set coaching staff, GM and culture already in place?

 

It is wellllllllllll worth whatever risk there may be in signing a player or two of that caliber to try and win a SB.  And it isn't even a decision in my mind.

 

New England seems to have no issues doing it for example.  How much has their 'culture' been damaged by the signings of Moss, Revis, Gordon and how many others with risk?

 

Look, football players aren't Priests.  Everyone has red flags.  IF you don't have a culture on your team to handle it, then find a coach and GM who can implement that culture.

Share this post


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

 

"Who cares if he dies on our practice field, we only spent a fifth rounder on him."

If there was any risk of him dying...he wouldn't be playing.


Dying wasn't the issue.  The issue was would be play or not.

 

I think a risk on Hurst was well worth it rather than taking someone like a Fountain, or any 5th rounder for that matter.  Most never work out.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@threeflight I think you are single-handedly keeping this thread alive because you like the title so much.  Do you wish you had created this thread?  Maybe named it something similar like "Ballard STILL not impressing me"...

 

If someone just read the title, they might mistakenly think you were the OP.

 

And being compared to @GusFring is not a compliment.  :grumpy2:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Peterk2011 said:

 

I heard this plenty of times before. Around this time in 2015, the Andre Johnson deal made the Colts the offseason darling. Many said they are one of the strongest SB contender. How did it work out?

A Johnson was already deep into the spirals of being average or worse.

 

AB is still ballin'.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Funchess is the about same age as the Colts young guys, 24, vs. Krishawn Hogan, Daurice Fountain and Steve Ishmael at 23, Zach Pascal at 24, and Chester Rogers at 25. Why not see what young Funchess can do with defenses focusing on Hilton and Ebron, and A. Luck throwing him the ball. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Lucky Colts Fan said:

@threeflight I think you are single-handedly keeping this thread alive because you like the title so much.  Do you wish you had created this thread?  Maybe named it something similar like "Ballard STILL not impressing me"...

 

If someone just read the title, they might mistakenly think you were the OP.

 

And being compared to @GusFring is not a compliment.  :grumpy2:

I don't know who that is and I could care less.

Share this post


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

Funchess is the about same age as the Colts young guys mind you. 24 vs. Krishawn Hogan, Daurice Fountain and Steve Ishmael at 23, Zach Pascal at 24, and Chester Rogers at 25. Why not see what young Funchess can do with defenses focusing on Hilton and Ebron, and A. Luck throwing him the ball. 

Because those guys aren't making $10-13 M a year to find out.


Funchess is.  


The guy has to be the happiest person on the planet right now.

 

He just got $10-13 M to play football for a year when he was worth half that...if that.

 

 

Share this post


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

I don't know who that is and I could care less.

The phrase is "couldn't care less".

 

Doesn't the constant negativity get old even for you?

Share this post


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

I don't know who that is and I could care less.

 

But we should all care about your opinion, right?

 

tenor.gif?itemid=5636523

 

@threeflight is STILL not impressing me...

Share this post


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

New England seems to have no issues doing it for example.  How much has their 'culture' been damaged by the signings of Moss, Revis, Gordon and how many others with risk?

 

When they signed Moss, they were 3 times SB champions, and just lost to the Colts in the AFCGG. They had a boatload of veterans in their locker room (from Bruschi to Junior Seau, Ty Warren, Harrison, Seymour, etc.) to handle ANYONE in their locker room. 

 

They signed Revis for a bargain price, for practically a one year deal, not a multi year billion dollar deal. Gordon? He does not even belong to this list. He is not in that category. And he was a desperation move anyway, which didn't work out.

 

1 minute ago, threeflight said:

Look, football players aren't Priests.  Everyone has red flags.  IF you don't have a culture on your team to handle it, then find a coach and GM who can implement that culture.

 

Or, you don't rush it. You finish implementing that culture & locker room before you make those moves.

Share this post


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

How did the jags look last year?

Not great but cap space wasn't the problem.  They had two close games with the colts

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...