[Erickson] Clayton Geathers is finalizing a deal to return to the Colts (Merge)

[r a y s k i]

1 minute ago, NewColtsFan said:

 

Full disclosure....    I defended Grigson longer than most here.    I defended him until their was no more reason to do so.    He earned my trust with his handling of the first year,  and lost it by the end of year 4,  when it looked like Irsay was going to fire Pagano.    I said,  fine,  fire Pagano,  but fire Grigson too,  because he's the guy that didn't give Pagano talent.

 

And then, Irsay re-upped them both.

 

I've been impressed with Ballard since he arrived.   As someone who has followed the NFL for more than 50 years and covered it professionally for 30 years,  Ballard just oozes professionalism.  I think he's a terrific person and GM.     Do I think he's done every single thing right?    No.   But nobody in any sport does that.    When you make decisions in personnel,  you're going to make mistakes.

 

But the key is to make few of them, and have them be small ones.    Ballard has done that.

 

If bringing Geathers is a mistake,  then on a 1-year deal,  it's a small one.   If signing Funchess is a mistake,  then on a one year deal,  it's a small one.    They're off the books in a year if we want.

 

Ballard has my complete support,  not because I'm some FanBoy who values my opinion more than his decisions,  but because the man has earned my trust and respect in his two+ years with the Colts.....

 

Sorry this got so lengthy....    

 

Amen to that!

[NewColtsFan]

5 minutes ago, rayski said:

I'm very much aware how much CB loves Geathers and finds him an important part of our locker room. I yet to see an interview where anyone would say he helps disguising the defense. 

Not trying to be a smart butt but just never seen any valuation like that. Happy to take a look any time. 

 

I'm the wrong guy to find links to past articles in the website.   I'm terrible at it.

 

But in an article on Colts.com this year,  Ballard or ME said that Geathers is a leader on the defense...   he helps make sure everyone is where they're supposed to be.   That everyone is on the same page.    That's not the kind of thing that anyone would know about.   You can't see that by just watching the game.   But it was said...    and I think it's a quality that has value to team....

 

[DougDew]

8 minutes ago, NewColtsFan said:

 

Careful, Doug.....

 

Your true colors are showing......     

You mean honesty, right.

 

So tell me.  The player tests the market, then comes back.  Doesn't that inherently mean that we signed him for more than the other team would have.  That other teams rejected the price we bought at? 

 

We're not talking about outbidding for Suh, we're talking about a marginal player who probably is in the NFL because nobody else really wants him at this point.

 

How is that honestly thought of as being a good thing right at first blush?

[NewColtsFan]

Just now, DougDew said:

You mean honesty, right.

 

So tell me.  The player tests the market, then comes back.  Doesn't that inherently mean that we signed him for more than the other team would have.  That other teams rejected the price we bought at? 

 

How is that honestly thought of as being a good thing right at first blush?

 

Doug?

 

That's only true if it's true.

 

It could also mean a player has more value to us than he might to another team.   It might mean he was offered the same but the player would rather play for the team he knows in the city he likes.

 

There's value to a player in not having to up and move to another team every year or two.

 

You have no way of knowing what was offered to Geathers or anyone else.

 

As for honesty?    I guess it depends.     If you're honestly admitting that you're not much of a Ballard fan and you think Grigson was better than his critics say he was and that the real problem with the Colts in 2012-2016 was Pagano and not Grigson....   well,  then sure....   Honesty is your jam....  

 

Good luck with that....

 

[hoosierhawk]

10 minutes ago, Irish YJ said:

Using CBS ratings. https://www.cbssports.com/nfl/draft/prospect-rankings/wide-receivers/edge

 

If any of the top 6 Edge are there at 26, it's a no brainer to me. Including Polite. I'm more than fine with a passing down specialist for a year or two, until he becomes more well rounded. Out of college, his ceiling is higher than Turray's as a rusher, and he could easily be 30+% snap count guy day one. Turray was not the best vs the run either last year. And let's not forget Turray's injury history. 

 

If those 6 Edge aren't available, I go to DT. If one of the top 7-8 are there, I'd take them. Depending on who is there, might even take them before one of the 7-8 DEs. Even if I do get a DE at 26, I'm still looking for a DT at 34 if one of top 7-8 DTs are still there.

 

In short, as long as I'm not reaching more than 4-5 slots down (BPA) to fill those two needs, that's where I'm going. The delta, for instance, between a S ranked 27th (BPA) and a DE or DT ranked 31st, is next to nothing. If WR was not so deep, and so undervalued in this draft (due to runs on other positions), I'd take a WR BPA over a S as well. 

 

And like I said, improving the DL also directly impacts/improves the DB production. It's almost like a two for one. Give me a 

Wilkins  at 26, Omenihu at 34, I'm in heaven!

[DougDew]

4 minutes ago, NewColtsFan said:

 

Doug?

 

That's only true if it's true.

 

It could also mean a player has more value to us than he might to another team.   It might mean he was offered the same but the player would rather play for the team he knows in the city he likes.

 

There's value to a player in not having to up and move to another team every year or two.

 

You have no way of knowing what was offered to Geathers or anyone else.

 

As for honesty?    I guess it depends.     If you're honestly admitting that you're not much of a Ballard fan and you think Grigson was better than his critics say he was and that the real problem with the Colts in 2012-2016 was Pagano and not Grigson....   well,  then sure....   Honesty is your jam....  

 

Good luck with that....

 

Yes, all of those things could be true.  But none of that is implied when its said "Ballard lets his players test the market then brings them back."  I mean, that's pure spin of who knows what truth.

 

I am a Ballard fan.  And I was a Grigson fan more than a Pagano fan.  But none of that has anything to do with it.

[1959Colts]

 

[Restinpeacesweetchloe]

4 minutes ago, DougDew said:

You mean honesty, right.

 

So tell me.  The player tests the market, then comes back.  Doesn't that inherently mean that we signed him for more than the other team would have.  That other teams rejected the price we bought at? 

 

We're not talking about outbidding for Suh, we're talking about a marginal player who probably is in the NFL because nobody else really wants him at this point.

 

How is that honestly thought of as being a good thing right at first blush?

No it doesn’t always mean that. Rumor has it Desir had more money from another team. As long as the money difference isn’t life changing what’s so hard to understand the culture here is so good players want to come back. By letting Geathers test the market it puts trust in Ballard that he wasn’t trying to low ball him.

 

Dont be shocked since Geathers is a one year deal he get the amount of money he might get for two years. But with the one year deal there is no ramifications for the future. This could be similar to the funchess signing where it looks like we overpaid on a one year deal.

[r a y s k i]

1 minute ago, 1959Colts said:

 

*, jaw dropped. 

[EastStreet]

3 minutes ago, hoosierhawk said:

Wilkins  at 26, Omenihu at 34, I'm in heaven!

Wilkins at 26? Not happening lol. 

Omenihu... like him, but not at 34. That would be a huge reach.

[DougDew]

1 minute ago, Chloe6124 said:

No it doesn’t always mean that. Rumor has it Desir had more money from another team. As long as the money difference isn’t life changing what’s so hard to understand the culture here is so good players want to come back. By letting Geathers test the market it puts trust in Ballard that he wasn’t trying to low ball him.

 

Dont be shocked since Geathers is a one year deal he get the amount of money he might get for two years. But with the one year deal there is no ramifications for the future. This could be similar to the funchess signing where it looks like we overpaid on a one year deal.

Sure, a player may chose to take less money here than go to another team, for many reasons that may have little to do with who the GM is. 

 

But that's not implied by saying Ballard let HIS players do something, then HE brings them back. 

 

There is more to it than what Ballard does or doesn't do, unless maybe he's viewed as the almighty. 

[Restinpeacesweetchloe]

He doesn’t let every player test FA though. But I think in certain situations like Geathers it was smart so the player understands his worth and doesn’t feel cheated.

 

Next year and maybe this off season we are going to see a lot of players signed to extensions that he is not going to let get to FA.

[esmort]

1 hour ago, Colts_Fan12 said:

I'm just saying that the DEs at 26 will have flaws just like turray so why reach for one then?

 

What Safety do you think is worth pick #26? I'm not saying we won't pick one there, but I am not seeing how that is the value pick. I would rather go with a different position other than S in the 1st. I think one of the 2nd round picks would probably offer more value if we were looking for a safety.

[Colts_Fan12]

2 minutes ago, esmort said:

 

What Safety do you think is worth pick #26? I'm not saying we won't pick one there, but I am not seeing how that is the value pick. I would rather go with a different position other than S in the 1st. I think one of the 2nd round picks would probably offer more value if we were looking for a safety.

I like Abram and Adderley I'm also not against another position either I just feel like DE will be a reach 

[NewColtsFan]

8 minutes ago, DougDew said:

Yes, all of those things could be true.  But none of that is implied when its said "Ballard lets his players test the market then brings them back."  I mean, that's pure spin of who knows what truth.

 

I am a Ballard fan.  And I was a Grigson fan more than a Pagano fan.  But none of that has anything to do with it.

 

It's not pure spin.     Some GM's play hard ball.

 

"Here's our offer.   Take it or leave it.    And if you shop it,  we'll take the offer off the table and you can't come back to the team."

 

Ballard doesn't do that.    If he can't convince the player to sign up front before FA,  then he encourages the player to test the market to find out his true value.   And if they get a better deal, he says 'Great!   Happy for you!'     But he also says he'd appreciate if the player would give the Colts a chance to meet or beat any offer they get.    Maybe we'd like to bring the player back.

 

I suspect that's what happened with Desir.   

 

Ballard does this with enough honesty that players come back looking forward to playing with the Colts instead of being bitter and angry.    I think the only example I can think of would be Melvin.   Who seemed so upset that he apparently didn't give us a chance to meet or beat.   Otherwise,  players seem happy to try out the market and eventually come back happy to be with the Colts.    

 

I don't think every GM can do that with his players.  

[DougDew]

13 minutes ago, 1959Colts said:

 

I think Kevin is the media guy for the Colts.  And I know his job is to always look at something that says today and tomorrow is and will be better than yesterday.  And if you can point out how bad yesterday was, it makes today and tomorrow look that much better.  I get the use of juxtaposing.

 

But isn't scheme change a part of those overall numbers?  Even if the players were good enough for a second contract, they wouldn't have gotten one anyway, like Henry Anderson.  He just got a second contract with the Jets after having 7 sacks last year.

[DougDew]

14 minutes ago, NewColtsFan said:

 

It's not pure spin.     Some GM's play hard ball.

 

"Here's our offer.   Take it or leave it.    And if you shop it,  we'll take the offer off the table and you can't come back to the team."

 

Ballard doesn't do that.    If he can't convince the player to sign up front before FA,  then he encourages the player to test the market to find out his true value.   And if they get a better deal, he says 'Great!   Happy for you!'     But he also says he'd appreciate if the player would give the Colts a chance to meet or beat any offer they get.    Maybe we'd like to bring the player back.

 

I suspect that's what happened with Desir.   

 

Ballard does this with enough honesty that players come back looking forward to playing with the Colts instead of being bitter and angry.    I think the only example I can think of would be Melvin.   Who seemed so upset that he apparently didn't give us a chance to meet or beat.   Otherwise,  players seem happy to try out the market and eventually come back happy to be with the Colts.    

 

I don't think every GM can do that with his players.  

That's a lot of assumptions.  I simply assume that the players get an idea of what other teams will pay and then chose to sign with the Colts for whatever reason, including the monetary offer, which is likely higher.  And the reason Ballard wants him back is because there is a hole to fill, and Geathers isn't really much of a long term answer.  Glowinski is an example of a player who is.  I don't really see how the situation can be spun to be all that positive towards Ballard.  Paying higher than other suitors would for a stop gap player you need to fill a hole before draft day is fairly unspectacularly common, IMO.

[esmort]

Just now, Colts_Fan12 said:

I like Abram and Adderley 

 

The knock on Abram is his lack of coverage ability. I have seen Adderley all over the place in mock drafts but seems to be in the second more often than not. I am not sure either would be a value pick at #26. Not like there are 1 or 2 Safeties who are being talked about as consensus top 15-20 picks that happen to slide to us at #26.

[WoolMagnet]

40 minutes ago, DougDew said:

You mean honesty, right.

 

So tell me.  The player tests the market, then comes back.  Doesn't that inherently mean that we signed him for more than the other team would have.  That other teams rejected the price we bought at? 

 

We're not talking about outbidding for Suh, we're talking about a marginal player who probably is in the NFL because nobody else really wants him at this point.

 

How is that honestly thought of as being a good thing right at first blush?

There have been multiple players just this FA period that took less from current team to stay.  Barr comes to mind first.  Also , players restructure all the time and end up with "less".

The fact that Geathers stayed here may IMPLY  that we offered more, but in reality there are MANY other facors that these players weigh when making their decision.

[Colts_Fan12]

6 minutes ago, esmort said:

 

The knock on Abram is his lack of coverage ability. I have seen Adderley all over the place in mock drafts but seems to be in the second more often than not. I am not sure either would be a value pick at #26. Not like there are 1 or 2 Safeties who are being talked about as consensus top 15-20 picks that happen to slide to us at #26.

I'm not sure what to think about adderley the profile I read said he could play either spot at a high level and hes a good tackler but then I looked at the nfl.com one and they say he struggles at tackling and that he is more pure FS so idk 

[WoolMagnet]

16 minutes ago, DougDew said:

That's a lot of assumptions.  I simply assume that the players get an idea of what other teams will pay and then chose to sign with the Colts for whatever reason, including the monetary offer, which is likely higher.  And the reason Ballard wants him back is because there is a hole to fill, and Geathers isn't really much of a long term answer.  Glowinski is an example of a player who is.  I don't really see how the situation can be spun to be all that positive towards Ballard.  Paying higher than other suitors would for a stop gap player you need to fill a hole before draft day is fairly unspectacularly common, IMO.

Its common sense.

1. Ballard sets his value, makes his offer

2. Player accepts (glow,others) or tests narket (geathers,desir,etc)

3. Players sees his "real" value

4. Player weighs ALL points (not just $) 

5. Player makes decision.

 

Oh, and "over-paying" on 1 year contracts is fine.  They are TEMPORARILY filling a hole (part of the plan).  We saw what safeties are getting paid at the moment.

i just dont see what the problem is.  Ballard isnt done.

[esmort]

2 minutes ago, Colts_Fan12 said:

I'm not sure what to think about adderley the profile I read said he could play either spot at a high level and hes a good tackler but then I looked at the nfl.com one and they say he struggles at tackling and that he is more pure FS so idk 

 

Yeah he is all over the place ... I have seen him anywhere from an early 1st rounder to a late 3rd rounder (majority putting him somewhere in the 2nd). Seems to be a hard guy for a lot of people to pin down.

[DougDew]

11 minutes ago, WoolMagnet said:

There have been multiple players just this FA period that took less from current team to stay.  Barr comes to mind first.  Also , players restructure all the time and end up with "less".

The fact that Geathers stayed here may IMPLY  that we offered more, but in reality there are MANY other facors that these players weigh when making their decision.

 

3 minutes ago, WoolMagnet said:

Its common sense.

1. Ballard sets his value, makes his offer

2. Player accepts (glow,others) or tests narket (geathers,desir,etc)

3. Players sees his "real" value

4. Player weighs ALL points (not just $) 

5. Player makes decision.

 

Oh, and "over-paying" on 1 year contracts is fine.  They are TEMPORARILY filling a hole (part of the plan).  We saw what safeties are getting paid at the moment.

i just dont see what the problem is.  Ballard isnt done.

You're repeating things that I have implied could be happening.  I took issue with the statement that CB lets them (allows them) to test the market then brings them back.

 

He "allows".  Then "he brings".  What Ballard does or doesn't do may have very little to do with what happened.  It might be better said that Geathers is here mainly because of what other GMs DIDN'T do.

[Douzer]

Well, I'm happy Geathers will be back in 2019.

 

[NewColtsFan]

32 minutes ago, DougDew said:

That's a lot of assumptions.  I simply assume that the players get an idea of what other teams will pay and then chose to sign with the Colts for whatever reason, including the monetary offer, which is likely higher.  And the reason Ballard wants him back is because there is a hole to fill, and Geathers isn't really much of a long term answer.  Glowinski is an example of a player who is.  I don't really see how the situation can be spun to be all that positive towards Ballard.  Paying higher than other suitors would for a stop gap player you need to fill a hole before draft day is fairly unspectacularly common, IMO.

 

Interesting....

 

Your first sentence says my post of making a lot of assumptions.

 

Honestly,  I think yours is the post making the most assumptions.

 

We see things from two completely different stand points....

 

[MTC]

Isn't it a bit odd that no contract details were released? All we know is that it was for one year. 

[Fisticuffs111]

I think Rapp's my favorite safety in this class. I think he's got a really high floor, and while I totally get why people wouldn't want him in the first, I'd be really happy about him at #34. Heck, I'd probably be okay with him at #26 depending on how the board fell, but it'd have to be a pretty unfortunate draft for us if so.

[EastStreet]

If our need is SS, Adderley is definitely not our guy. Abrams is a "low" S, and struggles in coverage. Rapp is more well rounded but still nothing special. Thompson has good physical skills, but not the best instincts or FB IQ. 

 

None are rated higher than 5.91 (NFL.com) which means "chance to become an NFL starter". In other words, none of them are no brainer locks. Like I said earlier, it's a very meh year for Ss. 

[NewColtsFan]

1 minute ago, MTC said:

Isn't it a bit odd that no contract details were released? All we know is that it was for one year. 

 

It'll get out in the next 24-36 hours....

 

I don't think this is too much different than other contract signings....

 

[Restinpeacesweetchloe]

1 minute ago, MTC said:

Isn't it a bit odd that no contract details were released? All we know is that it was for one year. 

Yeah. Maybe tomorrow. I still think he will get paid well for the one year. Give him more money for this one year that he might get on multiple years. I think that rewards that respects the player but if injuries crop up again there are no long term ramifications.

[DougDew]

6 minutes ago, NewColtsFan said:

 

Interesting....

 

Your first sentence says my post if making a lot of assumptions.

 

Honestly,  I think yours is the post making the most assumptions.

 

We see things from two completely different stand points....

 

No reason to argue.  I like the signing.  It fills a need until we find something better, as did/do most of our FA signings.  I just found that spinning this rather unspectacular signing as some especially positive reflection on Ballard to be interesting.

 

And if not a stop gap true SS, Geathers may fit a more LB-ish role with us that has limited market appeal with others, so he might not have many choices other than to come back.  A rather easy signing for any GM.

[WoolMagnet]

4 minutes ago, DougDew said:

 

You're repeating things that I have implied could be happening.  I took issue with the statement that CB lets them (allows them) to test the market then brings them back.

 

He "allows".  Then "he brings".  What Ballard does or doesn't do may have very little to do with what happened.  It might be better said that Geathers is here mainly because of what other GMs DIDN'T do.

The only difference between what we are saying is you back-handed dig against Ballard.

  Its foolish to think our gm and organization doesnt gave an "advantage" over other gms and organizations as related to Geathers.  

  My gut tells me Geathers wanted to stay and we wanted him.   Ballard knows him well and set his value and made the offer.

  Now , with the contracts signed by Collins, Thomas, etc, Geathers HAD to test the market.  He most likely saw numbers similar to what Ballard offered and chose to stay where he was comfortable and excited about the future:

Speculation?  Yes, but just as much common sense.

[CR91]

5 minutes ago, MTC said:

Isn't it a bit odd that no contract details were released? All we know is that it was for one year. 

 

If I had to guess, i'd say 5-7 mil

[NewColtsFan]

1 minute ago, DougDew said:

No reason to argue.  I like the signing.  It fills a need until we find something better, as did/do most of our FA signings.  I just found that spinning this rather unspectacular signing as some especially positive reflection on Ballard to be interesting.

 

I know you're a proud contrarian....

 

I have no problem with that....

 

I just find some of your viewpoints.....     curious.....

 

[DougDew]

10 minutes ago, WoolMagnet said:

The only difference between what we are saying is you back-handed dig against Ballard.

  Its foolish to think our gm and organization doesnt gave an "advantage" over other gms and organizations as related to Geathers.  

  My gut tells me Geathers wanted to stay and we wanted him.   Ballard knows him well and set his value and made the offer.

  Now , with the contracts signed by Collins, Thomas, etc, Geathers HAD to test the market.  He most likely saw numbers similar to what Ballard offered and chose to stay where he was comfortable and excited about the future:

Speculation?  Yes, but just as much common sense.

Its not a backhanded dig.  In a sea of unknowns, pointing out the group of circumstances that may be negative is not a backhanded negative comment about anything.  It at the least is not unjustified within the broader circumstances of a positive comment that ignores all negative connotations.  

[ColtStrong2013]

Sorry if this has been mentioned already, as I haven't taken the time to read through very many comments on this thread, but in my eyes (which is often wrong) Ballard bringing in Funchess and Geathers back on one year deals is to build depth for whoever he is bringing in the draft. I could see a safety picked high and a 2nd or 3rd round receiver. These are low risk, high reward moves. Both of these guys could perform at a high level and make a compelling case for a multi year contract next offseason. 

 

I'm just happy to see Clayton back for another year. He's had poor luck with injuries. He's a good dude that players obviously relate to and love (based on several twitter posts.) I hope for his best and healthiest year this fall... 

[DougDew]

16 minutes ago, NewColtsFan said:

 

I know you're a proud contrarian....

 

I have no problem with that....

 

I just find some of your viewpoints.....     curious.....

 

I'm contrarian to spin.  It tends to show up in a lot of the comments about Ballard on this forum.   Gotta wonder why that happens since,  as I said, I'm glad he's here.  

[WoolMagnet]

9 minutes ago, DougDew said:

Its not a backhanded dig.  In a sea of unknowns, pointing out the group of circumstances that may be negative is not a backhanded negative comment about anything.  It at the least is not unjustified within the broader circumstances of a positive comment that ignores all negative connotations.  

Its cool.

I hav an older brother that you remind me alot of.

The major difference between him and me (perspective wise) can be summed up very easily.

If he or I would find a $20 bill:

I'd say "COOL, i found a $20!"

He'd say "DAMN, why wasnt it a $100?.  That sux!"

same scenario... vastly different perspectives.

[NewColtsFan]

4 minutes ago, DougDew said:

I'm contrarian to spin.  It tends to show up in a lot of the comments about Ballard on this forum.   Gotta wonder why that happens since,  as I said, I'm glad he's here.  

 

Because you make arguments that would suggest to many here that you're NOT glad he's here.

 

And you do that more than anyone else.

 

[DougDew]

Just now, WoolMagnet said:

Its cool.

I hav an older brother that you remind me alot of.

The major difference between him and me (perspective wise) can be summed up very easily.

If he or I would find a $20 bill:

I'd say "COOL, i found a $20!"

He'd say "DAMN, why wasnt it a $100?.  That sux!"

same scenario... vastly different perspectives.

Nice backhanded dig.

 

Sorry, seeing "Ballard lets his players test the market then brings them back" as nothing more than positive spin about possible reasons for a signing is not the same thing as choosing to see things negatively.