FA Agency Day 2 and beyond.

[stitches]

11 minutes ago, richard pallo said:

Tre Boston would be a nice replacement but he felt he was disrespected by us last year so signing him would be a real long shot.   I have real mixed feelings on whether to resign Gaethers because of his injury history.  

yeah... I remember there was something weird about his visit with us last summer and he felt irked about it. 

[RNGDShobby]

6 minutes ago, csmopar said:

refresh my memory, what'd we do to him again?

I read somewhere that he only met with very low brass, no one from high up spent any time with him. Guess he felt like he wasn't valued at all.

[csmopar]

 

[Restinpeacesweetchloe]

If we can get Geathers back one or two  year deal where only the first year is guaranteed I think we need to do that. Then draft a safety in case he gets injured again. Maybe  if Geathers shared time with someone  we draft would help his durability.

[Restinpeacesweetchloe]

29 minutes ago, csmopar said:

Gettleman's completely lost it.   If Eli couldnt play well with OBJ and Barkley both, how's he gonna play without OBJ

Some of the stuff coming out of his mouth makes it sound like he is on drugs. I heard Eli has now made more money then Peyton. That is crazy.

[Restinpeacesweetchloe]

30 minutes ago, stitches said:

yeah... I remember there was something weird about his visit with us last summer and he felt irked about it. 

I can imagine Ballard is very honest with players. To some I could imagine his bluntness could be a turnoff.

[TomDiggs]

33 minutes ago, csmopar said:

refresh my memory, what'd we do to him again?

 

I covered this in another thread but we started out by not having anyone of importance meet with him. No HC. No DC. No GM.

 

Then we low-balled him contract wise.

 

He said his visit basically included him touring the facilities, having lunch and playing basketball.

 

Then he went to AZ and they rolled out the red carpet and made him feel welcome and wanted.

 

Bear in mind that we brought him in around the exact same time as Vaccaro last year too. So he might have been leverage or they may have been leverage for each other and we ended up with neither.

 

Either way I doubt he would come back here unless we were offering him a solid deal. Which I doubt at this stage.

 

Eric Berry can play either S spot and would be great, but he has similar or worse health concerns compared to Geathers and he will cost a decent amount more.

 

I wouldn't mind looking at Jahleel Addae or Glover Quin if we were willing to go older and short term.

 

That all said, Farley played decently back in 2017 when he started and I could easily see us rolling with him and just adding depth and not a starting caliber guy if Geathers walks.

 

 

[PrincetonTiger]

3 minutes ago, Chloe6124 said:

Some of the stuff coming out of his mouth makes it sound like he is on drugs. I heard Eli has now made more money then Peyton. That is crazy.

DG is not very popular on Twitter 

[Restinpeacesweetchloe]

5 minutes ago, TomDiggs said:

 

I covered this in another thread but we started out by not having anyone of importance meet with him. No HC. No DC. No GM.

 

Then we low-balled him contract wise.

 

He said his visit basically included him touring the facilities, having lunch and playing basketball.

 

Then he went to AZ and they rolled out the red carpet and made him feel welcome and wanted.

 

Bear in mind that we brought him in around the exact same time as Vaccaro last year too. So he might have been leverage or they may have been leverage for each other and we ended up with neither.

 

Either way I doubt he would come back here unless we were offering him a solid deal. Which I doubt at this stage.

 

Eric Berry can play either S spot and would be great, but he has similar or worse health concerns compared to Geathers and he will cost a decent amount more.

 

I wouldn't mind looking at Jahleel Addae or Glover Quin if we were willing to go older and short term.

 

That all said, Farley played decently back in 2017 when he started and I could easily see us rolling with him and just adding depth and not a starting caliber guy if Geathers walks.

 

 

That sounds like a crazy story. It’s hard to picture the colts doing that. I hope they treat players that they really want better then that.

[csmopar]

2 minutes ago, Chloe6124 said:

That sounds like a crazy story. It’s hard to picture the colts doing that. I hope they treat players that they really want better then that.

MEH, that whole story is just very, very odd.  

[TomDiggs]

6 minutes ago, Chloe6124 said:

That sounds like a crazy story. It’s hard to picture the colts doing that. I hope they treat players that they really want better then that.

 

It almost sounds like the opposite of what I would expect of us.

 

But I believe Boston reported this to Josina Anderson last year if I am not mistaken. So it did not come from some random nonsense source but from someone who is a respected source and who heard it right from the player (allegedly).

 

Either way it was not a good look.

 

I will say this much, we haven't seen much in the way of player visits in the past couple years to judge our new regime.

 

I hated Grigson and was not a big Pagano fan, but I will say this much....they were closers. If someone got in the building with them it was rare for us to not sign them.

 

The only guys (off the top of my head) that I can remember in recent memory coming in and not signing were Boston, Vaccaro and Jensen last year. So it is not a true reflection yet on this regime. But that is one change that has been different compared to the prior regime.

[stitches]

13 minutes ago, Chloe6124 said:

I can imagine Ballard is very honest with players. To some I could imagine his bluntness could be a turnoff.

It was more along the lines of - they invited him, he flew in and put him in a room/gym and had him wait for several hours to meet someone and didn't meet any of the big decision-makers or coaches and they didn't offer him anything at the end... something like that. Don't quote me on that but there was some weird story like that. 

[PrincetonTiger]

2 minutes ago, csmopar said:

MEH, that whole story is just very, very odd.  

Agreed

[Restinpeacesweetchloe]

There is probably a lot more to the story. 

[csmopar]

1 minute ago, Chloe6124 said:

There is probably a lot more to the story. 

I'd be guessing he's not coming here again regardless. 

[shasta519]

1 hour ago, csmopar said:

 

 

Not really sure what the dilemma is. I would disagree that he is an impactful player. Ballard is playing it smart...letting him test the market...and he will bring him back on a deal that reflects the risk and production...which won't be much. 

[richard pallo]

3 minutes ago, TomDiggs said:

 

It almost sounds like the opposite of what I would expect of us.

 

But I believe Boston reported this to Josina Anderson last year if I am not mistaken. So it did not come from some random nonsense source but from someone who is a respected source and who heard it right from the player (allegedly).

 

Either way it was not a good look.

 

I will say this much, we haven't seen much in the way of player visits in the past couple years to judge our new regime.

 

I hated Grigson and was not a big Pagano fan, but I will say this much....they were closers. If someone got in the building with them it was rare for us to not sign them.

 

The only guys (off the top of my head) that I can remember in recent memory coming in and not signing were Boston, Vaccaro and Jensen last year. So it is not a true reflection yet on this regime. But that is one change that has been different compared to the prior regime.

 You're right it's not a good look.   It's out there and players see it too.  I wonder if stories like this coupled with Ballard's own admission of putting a value on a player and that's pretty much it might cause players to think twice about coming in for a visit.  That's not the kind of treatment I was expecting to hear about coming from the Colts. 

[TomDiggs]

1 minute ago, richard pallo said:

 You're right it's not a good look.   It's out there and players see it too.  I wonder if stories like this coupled with Ballard's own admission of putting a value on a player and that's pretty much it might cause players to think twice about coming in for a visit.  That's not the kind of treatment I was expecting to hear about coming from the Colts. 

 

Agreed for sure.

 

I try to take this all with a grain of salt because it is a guy in Boston who was * last year that he was on the market for so long and that safeties were getting disrespected price-wise.

 

And the Colts surely saw the depressed market and tried to buy low and he took offense.

 

The lack of meeting with top brass is extremely odd unless he was brought in only to kick the tires with no actual interest in signing him. Even so it is odd. And does not seem to meet our narrative, so who knows.

 

The tides have turned now. The safety market blew up and safeties want to cash in on that.

 

The sad part is that now that the fiasco is done, the safety money might come back down to Earth and dry up again. If so, players will get the same kind of "low ball" offers from the Colts and see what the market "was" just a few days ago and be ticked off again.

 

It is what it is lol.

[Superman]

1 hour ago, csmopar said:

Gettleman's completely lost it.   If Eli couldnt play well with OBJ and Barkley both, how's he gonna play without OBJ

 

Eli wasn't as bad as people seem to think. He completed 66% of his passes, 4,300 yards, his adjusted yards/attempt was 7.3, and he took care of the ball. 

 

And I think the Giants are saying without saying that they're going to keep Eli because they don't want to push him out the door (again) and face backlash from Giants/Eli fans. It's a legacy decision more than a football decision.

 

But, from a football strategy standpoint, all the things you ideally want to have around an old QB are the things you want to have around a rookie QB. And those are the things the Giants struggled with last season: OL play, secondary receiver, good defense, etc. 

 

They traded away an overpaid, underperforming pass rusher, which makes football/cap sense, and they got back a pretty good OL to shore up one of their biggest weaknesses right away. And this year's draft is stocked with good pass rush prospects.

 

They traded away a very good receiver for a pretty good draft package and a decent young prospect at safety, and they did so in a year where the draft is loaded with receiver talent.

 

They let Collins walk (there are conflicting reports that they could have traded him last year at the deadline for a good pick, and while that's possible, it's not confirmed), but got back Peppers, and again, this year's draft is loaded with safety talent (and I'm not the biggest Collins fans, so I think I get where they're coming from there). 

 

They now have #6, #17, #37, #70 (forfeited for Sam Beal, who didn't play last year but it still a highly ranked prospect), #95, and eight Day 3 picks. They're taking some cap pain in 2019, but they'll have around $80m in 2020, not counting potential rollover (which should be minimal).

 

Eli's contract is up after this season, and they can make a mutual decision about how to proceed. But there's no reason to force Eli out, when there are no surefire QB prospects right now. Maybe they like someone in the draft, but it's understandable if they don't; this year's QBs aren't exactly locks. 

 

They're laying the foundation for a rebuild, they've added good draft picks, and they'll be in good shape after 2019 to do pretty much whatever they want to do. I don't love they way they've handled the cap, and maybe they missed a chance to get something for Collins at the deadline, but overall, they've done a decent job of resetting. Everyone's stuck on the Eli decision, but a) I don't think Eli played as bad as everyone seems to think, and b) I think the Eli decision is more about legacy than about football.

[krunk]

 

Stephen Holder (@HolderStephen) · Twitter

https://twitter.com/HolderStephen

 

On a related note, I fully expect the Colts to draft a safety. And not necessarily in the late rounds, either.

4 hours ago · Twitter

[stitches]

 

[RNGDShobby]

Just now, stitches said:

 

And we miss out again. I'm heartbroken!!

 

 

 

[TomDiggs]

Another source on Brice.

 

I did not necessarily want him, but another visitor that left and signed elsewhere. Hopefully we decided we did not want him.

 

 

[Boiler_Colt]

18 minutes ago, krunk said:

 

Stephen Holder (@HolderStephen) · Twitter

https://twitter.com/HolderStephen

 

On a related note, I fully expect the Colts to draft a safety. And not necessarily in the late rounds, either.

4 hours ago · Twitter

Me too. Interesting enough the only time I saw Reich and Ballard sitting together at the combine on TV was when the Safeties were running the 40. Every other time they showed Reich, he was by himself.

 

Also, I noticed that after Abram ran his 40, Ballard picked up his phone and texted somebody.

 

Could mean something, could be conspiracy theory gibberish that's only in my head.

[#12.]

14 minutes ago, stitches said:

 

 

Thank god.

[RNGDShobby]

11 minutes ago, Boiler_Colt said:

Me too. Interesting enough the only time I saw Reich and Ballard sitting together at the combine on TV was when the Safeties were running the 40. Every other time they showed Reich, he was by himself.

 

Also, I noticed that after Abram ran his 40, Ballard picked up his phone and texted somebody.

 

Could mean something, could be conspiracy theory gibberish that's only in my head.

Abram would definitely be a good option for us either at 26 or 34. 

[Mr. Irrelevant]

19 minutes ago, TomDiggs said:

 

I did not necessarily want him, but another visitor that left and signed elsewhere.

 

Missing the Grigson days already? 

 

 

[TomDiggs]

3 minutes ago, Mr. Irrelevant said:

 

Missing the Grigson days already? 

 

 

 

Only from the closing aspect yes lol

 

If we still closed like back in those days then I would be fully content.

 

Still prefer it as it is now lol

 

And no guarantee we truly wanted some of these guys that left and went elsewhere. But still

[#12.]

21 minutes ago, Boiler_Colt said:

Could mean something, could be conspiracy theory gibberish that's only in my head.

 

Not crazy at all.  Important position in this defense and it looks like we will need one.

[csmopar]

3 minutes ago, TomDiggs said:

 

Only from the closing aspect yes lol

 

If we still closed like back in those days then I would be fully content.

 

Still prefer it as it is now lol

 

And no guarantee we truly wanted some of these guys that left and went elsewhere. But still

you're assuming that the player brought in met our specs. To which you, nor any one outside of the Colts org, knows that

[TomDiggs]

1 minute ago, csmopar said:

you're assuming that the player brought in met our specs. To which you, nor any one outside of the Colts org, knows that

 

Agreed

 

Which means you definitely did not even read the part of my statement above where i clearly stated "and no guarantee we truly wanted some of these guys that left and went elsewhere"

 

lol

[Restinpeacesweetchloe]

We will draft a safety and I think it will be with one of the second round picks. Even if we resign Geathers his inability to stay healthy we will have to.

[NewColtsFan]

49 minutes ago, TomDiggs said:

Another source on Brice.

 

I did not necessarily want him, but another visitor that left and signed elsewhere. Hopefully we decided we did not want him.

 

 

 

What?!?

 

We brought a guy in and then.....   we DIDN’T sign him?!?

 

But!   But!   But!   But!

 

We brought him IN! 

 

And the kid gets signed by another team.   Good for him.   Doesn’t mean he’s going to make the Bucs 53...   but at least he’s on the 90 for camp.

 

And we move on....

[shasta519]

58 minutes ago, stitches said:

 

 

Perfectly fine with me.

[Hoose]

+Brice was barely above camp body material. No loss. 

[Restinpeacesweetchloe]

If a safety we draft can come in and play right away it might be better to draft one of our own we know will fit our system.

[Colts_Fan12]

Glad I dont have to worry about that guy being here 

[Restinpeacesweetchloe]

Some small school players who the colts could look at. Would be a Leonard or a Moore situation.

 

 

[stitches]

 

[shasta519]

1 hour ago, Superman said:

 

Eli wasn't as bad as people seem to think. He completed 66% of his passes, 4,300 yards, his adjusted yards/attempt was 7.3, and he took care of the ball. 

 

And I think the Giants are saying without saying that they're going to keep Eli because they don't want to push him out the door (again) and face backlash from Giants/Eli fans. It's a legacy decision more than a football decision.

 

But, from a football strategy standpoint, all the things you ideally want to have around an old QB are the things you want to have around a rookie QB. And those are the things the Giants struggled with last season: OL play, secondary receiver, good defense, etc. 

 

They traded away an overpaid, underperforming pass rusher, which makes football/cap sense, and they got back a pretty good OL to shore up one of their biggest weaknesses right away. And this year's draft is stocked with good pass rush prospects.

 

They traded away a very good receiver for a pretty good draft package and a decent young prospect at safety, and they did so in a year where the draft is loaded with receiver talent.

 

They let Collins walk (there are conflicting reports that they could have traded him last year at the deadline for a good pick, and while that's possible, it's not confirmed), but got back Peppers, and again, this year's draft is loaded with safety talent (and I'm not the biggest Collins fans, so I think I get where they're coming from there). 

 

They now have #6, #17, #37, #70 (forfeited for Sam Beal, who didn't play last year but it still a highly ranked prospect), #95, and eight Day 3 picks. They're taking some cap pain in 2019, but they'll have around $80m in 2020, not counting potential rollover (which should be minimal).

 

Eli's contract is up after this season, and they can make a mutual decision about how to proceed. But there's no reason to force Eli out, when there are no surefire QB prospects right now. Maybe they like someone in the draft, but it's understandable if they don't; this year's QBs aren't exactly locks. 

 

They're laying the foundation for a rebuild, they've added good draft picks, and they'll be in good shape after 2019 to do pretty much whatever they want to do. I don't love they way they've handled the cap, and maybe they missed a chance to get something for Collins at the deadline, but overall, they've done a decent job of resetting. Everyone's stuck on the Eli decision, but a) I don't think Eli played as bad as everyone seems to think, and b) I think the Eli decision is more about legacy than about football.

 

Make no mistake...Eli torched the Colts on their home turf...and that was without OBJ.

 

I think people are bit too tough on Gettleman. I think he says some stuff that makes him sound antiquated and stubborn...and I thought he should have drafted a QB last year. But I understood the Barkley approach...as he would help them win now (if they caught lightning in a bottle for a final run with Eli) or he would play a big role for a rookie QB as he develop.

 

And I understand the approach he is taking now. Letting Collins go and getting Peppers, who is under control for three more seasons makes a ton of sense. Getting Zeitler for Vernon definitely makes sense. The OBJ trade is definitely a risky one...but one that can work out.

 

I fully expect them to draft someone like Haskins and let him sit behind Eli for a season...as they rebuild this year and next with the picks they have. Golden Tate fills the role of vet WR who can mentor young WRs. As long as Gettleman gives up his affinity for "big WRs that can't separate"...the NYG should be just fine on offense.