Jump to content
Indianapolis Colts

Archived

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

csmopar

FA Day 1 (officially starts @4pm)

Recommended Posts

1 minute ago, Chloe6124 said:

I put him ahead of hooker. I think he has made more big plays.  IF he has another big season next year he could make the pro bowl. He will make some coin.

It's all subjective of course, but I'd put Hunt and Autry both ahead of Moore.  4th would probably be a toss-up between Walker and Moore though.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
26 minutes ago, csmopar said:

 

 

 

All of the priority guys are already getting paid except Kelly, whose salary is already going to be on the books. It won't require much new money to get them re-signed...IF they sign them all...which they likely won't (Sheard, Funchess and Doyle).

 

Moore should be on that list though...so add him to Kelly.

 

Doubtful that Farley, Boehm and Rogers are priorities. And Brissett isn't going to re-signed. 

 

I just don't think this narrative is a good one. 

Share this post


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

It's all subjective of course, but I'd put Hunt and Autry both ahead of Moore.  4th would probably be a toss-up between Walker and Moore though.

I forgot about Autry. Ok I would say he is tied with Moore.

Share this post


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

 

All of the priority guys are already getting paid except Kelly, whose salary is already going to be on the books. It won't require much new money to get them re-signed...IF they sign them all...which they likely won't (Sheard, Funchess and Doyle).

 

Doubtful that Farley, Boehm and Rogers are priorities. And Brissett is going to re-signed. 

Why is everyone already righting off Funchess. If he comes in and ty has a huge year and he also has a big year everyone will want him resigned. Ballard will re sign him if he has a big year. Doyle I have to see how he plays.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

That's interesting. Premature to say he re-signed with NO.

 

Would be a nice fit in Miami.

Share this post


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

Why is everyone already righting off Funchess. If he comes in and ty has a huge year and he also has a big year everyone will want him resigned. Ballard will re sign him if he has a big year. Doyle I have to see how he plays.

Nobody is writing him off. We just don’t know about him. We’ve only mentioned the players that have already been playing for us

Share this post


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

 

That's interesting. Premature to say he re-signed with NO.

 

Would be a nice fit in Miami.

Would be hilarious if the Collins deal fell thru too

Share this post


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

 

That's interesting. Premature to say he re-signed with NO.

 

Would be a nice fit in Miami.

bad case of pre-mature e-speculation

Share this post


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

Why is everyone already righting off Funchess. If he comes in and ty has a huge year and he also has a big year everyone will want him resigned. Ballard will re sign him if he has a big year. Doyle I have to see how he plays.

 

Of those three...Funchess is the most likely IMO. But his cap hit is already on the books for at least $10M. I can't imagine Ballard going much higher than that on a multiyear deal.

 

The point is that we aren't talking about a ton of additional cap space to bring back that group (outside of Kelly and Moore maybe). But I think guys like Sheard and Doyle falling off the books will cancel a lot of that out.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, csmopar said:

Would be hilarious if the Collins deal fell thru too

 

Can you imagine how Ryan Grant felt? That would have been really rough. Lost out on $9.5M in gtd money...and a $10M signing bonus.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Virtuoso80 said:

 

I would have been happy to give him that deal. CB obviously had some reservations about him.

 

In Ballard we trust.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Virtuoso80 said:

 

This sounds like one of two things....

 

- we like Funchess better than Williams. Or don't like Williams at all... which with Sirianni and Reich having experience with him has to count for something

- we didn't want to sign a WR to a long-term deal? 

Share this post


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

This sounds like one of two things....

 

- we like Funchess better than Williams. Or don't like Williams at all... which with Sirianni and Reich having experience with him has to count for something

- we didn't want to sign a WR to a long-term deal

 

If this is the case, Cain must be the nect Jerry Rice.

Share this post


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

This sounds like one of two things....

 

- we like Funchess better than Williams. Or don't like Williams at all... which with Sirianni and Reich having experience with him has to count for something

- we didn't want to sign a WR to a long-term deal? 

Ballard also has yet to shell out a contract longer than 3 years. It may well be that we just didn't want to go to 4 years.

Share this post


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

This sounds like one of two things....

 

- we like Funchess better than Williams. Or don't like Williams at all... which with Sirianni and Reich having experience with him has to count for something

- we didn't want to sign a WR to a long-term deal? 

We agreed to terms with Funchess on day 1.  I think he was our 1st. choice.  

Share this post


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

This sounds like one of two things....

 

- we like Funchess better than Williams. Or don't like Williams at all... which with Sirianni and Reich having experience with him has to count for something

- we didn't want to sign a WR to a long-term deal? 

I’d guess that our number on Williams was either $10 mill per and we came up short, or our years were set at 3 and not 4.   Perhaps both?

 

But it’s near impossible to imagine we like Funchess more.  My mind won’t go there.   If given a choice wouldn’t everyone prefer Williams to Funchess.  Seems obvious on its face...

Share this post


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

I’d guess that our number on Williams was either $10 mill per and we came up short, or our years were set at 3 and not 4.   Perhaps both?

 

But it’s near impossible to imagine we like Funchess more.  My mind won’t go there.   If given a choice wouldn’t everyone prefer Wimmiams to Funchess.  Seems obvious on its face...

I feel the same way. But Ballard saw something in Leonard he liked... maybe he sees something in Funchess too.

Share this post


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

We agreed to terms with Funchess on day 1.  I think he was our 1st. choice.  

I think there’s a zero percent chance that Funchess was first choice.  

 

We checked with all receivers and found their market price was not to our liking.   Too many years and dollars.

 

We signed Funchess on Day One because he was the last option of a big receiver which was a preference.  If we waited we ran the risk of Funchess signing elsewhere.   We were not willing to do that.

Share this post


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

I’d guess that our number on Williams was either $10 mill per and we came up short, or our years were set at 3 and not 4.   Perhaps both?

 

But it’s near impossible to imagine we like Funchess more.  My mind won’t go there.   If given a choice wouldn’t everyone prefer Wimmiams to Funchess.  Seems obvious on its face...

They had comparable stats and comparable PFF grades this year(actually higher for Funchess PFF grade) for whatever that's worth. Funchess is younger too... I don't know. I would have chosen Williams, but they are probably not that far off of eachother. 

Share this post


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

They had comparable stats and comparable PFF grades this year(actually higher for Funchess PFF grade) for whatever that's worth. Funchess is younger too... I don't know. I would have chosen Williams, but they are probably not that far off of eachother. 

I would have chosen Williams too because he's a better deep threat but maybe Ballard and Reich view Funchess as a guy you can move around more and even play in that big slot role.

 

I wouldn't have shocked me if the Colts offered Williams a one year prove it deal as well considering his relatively down year.

Share this post


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

They had comparable stats and comparable PFF grades this year(actually higher for Funchess PFF grade) for whatever that's worth. Funchess is younger too... I don't know. I would have chosen Williams, but they are probably not that far off of eachother. 

Seemed like there a thousand posts yesterday talking about all the categories that Funchess was nearly last in.   Enough to choke a pig.   

 

Youd think TW was viewed far more favorably?    But you’re saying DF had the higher PFF grade?   Didn’t see that coming.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Williams has 22M guaranteed money and 11M per. So it's really just a 2 yr deal.

Share this post


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

Seemed like there a thousand posts yesterday talking about all the categories that Funchess was nearly last in.   Enough to choke a pig.   

 

Youd think TW was viewed far more favorably?    But you’re saying DF had the higher PFF grade?   Didn’t see that coming.

Funchess had a ton of drops and I bet this drops him in a lot of categories. There is a nice article by Zach Hicks on Stampede Blue with film tape of Funchess. I posted it yesterday in Funchess' thread but it didn't get much attention/reaction(at least by the lack of reactions to it on the forum - quotes, likes, etc.). Anyways Hicks went through some of his tape and he seems to think some of the things he's being criticized for are not fair - for example his route running. He says he was pleasantly surprised by his route running and separation. PFF's score seem to agree... he's ranked as "above average" receiver by their ratings and they do evaluate route running and ability to separate as part of their grade. 

 

Williams' last season grade was 65.9 vs 68.4 for Funchess. I would avoid saying Funchess was better than Williams because there are factors like situation, role, etc that effect those grades but overall I would say they probably had comparable seasons. Also... their 3-year PFF grade is nearly identical (71.0 vs 71.4)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No doubt Funchess was the colts number WR target. 

 

With that Williams deal Funchess should be within Ballard’s range if he has a big year. Receivers are not getting huge money. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
32 minutes ago, stitches said:

This sounds like one of two things....

 

- we like Funchess better than Williams. Or don't like Williams at all... which with Sirianni and Reich having experience with him has to count for something

- we didn't want to sign a WR to a long-term deal? 

 

I think it's the latter. I mean...I didn't really want Williams at that price...but he definitely offers a lot more to the offense than Funchess. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Someone posted in 2017 funchess only had 3 drops. He was sixth for the least drops. Also he had the highest contested catch rate. You can cherry pick all you want but my guess is hecis going to be very good.

Share this post


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

I’d guess that our number on Williams was either $10 mill per and we came up short, or our years were set at 3 and not 4.   Perhaps both?

 

But it’s near impossible to imagine we like Funchess more.  My mind won’t go there.   If given a choice wouldn’t everyone prefer Williams to Funchess.  Seems obvious on its face...

 

You would think they would. Same size...but Williams is much much faster...an actual deep threat and can run after the catch. Williams average YAC was 5 vs Funchess' 1.8. Over the course of 60 catches...that ~200 yards of production.

 

Williams is a superior WR in just about every statistic.

 

I wasn't sold on a big contract Williams...but would have been cool with it. Definitely seems like he would have been a far better addition.

Share this post


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

Funchess had a ton of drops and I bet this drops him in a lot of categories. There is a nice article by Zach Hicks on Stampede Blue with film tape of Funchess. I posted it yesterday in Funchess' thread but it didn't get much attention/reaction(at least by the lack of reactions to it on the forum - quotes, likes, etc.). Anyways Hicks went through some of his tape and he seems to think some of the things he's being criticized for are not fair - for example his route running. He says he was pleasantly surprised by his route running and separation. PFF's score seem to agree... he's ranked as "above average" receiver by their ratings and they do evaluate route running and ability to separate as part of their grade. 

 

Williams' last season grade was 65.9 vs 68.4 for Funchess. I would avoid saying Funchess was better than Williams because there are factors like situation, role, etc that effect those grades but overall I would say they probably had comparable seasons. Also... their 3-year PFF grade is nearly identical (71.0 vs 71.4)

 

I know this has been brought up quite a few times, but there is a pretty big bridge that separates Phillip Rivers from Cam Newton. I'm actually excited to see how Funchess performs with Luck.

Share this post


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

 

I think it's the latter. I mean...I didn't really want Williams at that price...but he definitely offers a lot more to the offense than Funchess. 

 

Probably gonna draft a receiver, so they like the idea of a quirky player like Funchess and the different ways you could possibly use him.  

Share this post


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

 

That's interesting. Premature to say he re-signed with NO.

 

Would be a nice fit in Miami.

He is a Miami kid

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, BleedBlu8792 said:

 

I know this has been brought up quite a few times, but there is a pretty big bridge that separates Phillip Rivers from Cam Newton. I'm actually excited to see how Funchess performs with Luck.

I think it is going to be fun. We have so many  targets. Especially if Doyle comes back. Funchess is going to create a lot of mismatch problems for defenses. It should really help TY.

Share this post


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

 

You would think they would. Same size...but Williams is much much faster...an actual deep threat and can run after the catch. Williams average YAC was 5 vs Funchess' 1.8. Over the course of 60 catches...that ~200 yards of production.

 

Williams is a superior WR in just about every statistic.

 

I wasn't sold on a big contract Williams...but would have been cool with it. Definitely seems like he would have been a far better addition.

Stats can mean very little 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No news on the Justin Houston front I guess?

Share this post


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

No news on the Justin Houston front I guess?

 

I really hope we are working on something with him. That's one guy we could really use for the next 2 years, so we can get Turay fully up to speed, and then let him take over. I doubt Houston is coming cheap though, I think he'll at least want what he was making in KC (~15/16M/yr). I'd pay him that for double digit sacks and his veteran leadership. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...