Jump to content
CR91

Colts in talks with Inman

Recommended Posts

 

 

  • Like 9

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If he can get Inman back we will have a pretty good receiving group. Hilton, funchess, and Inman. Let the young guys fight it out.

 

Ballards interview should be up soon. Lots of really cool stuff on Andrew walkers twitter feed from the interview. I tell you ballard has to be one of the most honest GM out there. He is a gem.

  • Like 6
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That'd be nice. I know Ballard/Reich said they can live with drops from guys like Ebron/Funchess, but we need some reliable hands to offset that.

 

At the very least, it'll create some much needed competition among the WR's.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think if Inman resigns it means drafting a high profile receiver is VERY unlikely.  Agree or disagree?

 

That means we are rolling with: 

Hilton, Inman, Funchess, Cain, Pascal and Rogers.  Not sure what all the contracts are, but it seems unlikely these guys don't have guaranteed money or that they would (re)sign all of them only to guarantee there isn't room for one of them.  They could nuke Pascal or Cain, but I hope they keep developing and stay with us.  

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think Johnson and fountain will also be fighting it out with Cain. We really don’t need to draft a WR until we know what we have. Especially if Inman re signs.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, JPFolks said:

I think if Inman resigns it means drafting a high profile receiver is VERY unlikely.  Agree or disagree?

 

That means we are rolling with: 

Hilton, Inman, Funchess, Cain, Pascal and Rogers.  Not sure what all the contracts are, but it seems unlikely these guys don't have guaranteed money or that they would (re)sign all of them only to guarantee there isn't room for one of them.  They could nuke Pascal or Cain, but I hope they keep developing and stay with us.  

I still think we draft a WR even if we re-sign Inman. The question will be where? Too strong a class to pass up on one completely.

  • Like 7

Share this post


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

I still think we draft a WR even if we re-sign Inman. The question will be where? Too strong a class to pass up on one completely.

I do too. On paper Hilton, Funchess, and Inman + Ebron and Doyle = decent. It is isn't great but good. Throw in a young talented rookie WR to go with those guys and we may really have something.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, 2006Coltsbestever said:

I do too. On paper Hilton, Funchess, and Inman + Ebron and Doyle = decent. It is isn't great but good. Throw in a young talented rookie WR to go with those guys and we may really have something.

Agreed. That will cover all bases for this year as far as WR goes. I would love Andy Isabella in the 3rd round, not sure if he makes it. However, a WR or two will fall from the 2nd round to the 3rd, and I hope we capitalize on that situation, whoever it turns out to be.

  • Like 5

Share this post


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

Agreed. That will cover all bases for this year as far as WR goes. I would love Andy Isabella in the 3rd round, not sure if he makes it. However, a WR or two will fall from the 2nd round to the 3rd, and I hope we capitalize on that situation, whoever it turns out to be.

Yeah I still think Ballard will take a WR in round 2 or 3. Not sure who though. I can see him going DL in round 1.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, 2006Coltsbestever said:

I do too. On paper Hilton, Funchess, and Inman + Ebron and Doyle = decent. It is isn't great but good. Throw in a young talented rookie WR to go with those guys and we may really have something.

We have three on rookie contracts. Lol

Share this post


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

We have three on rookie contracts. Lol

Yeah Cain could pan out, not sure though? This WR class coming out is very talented. I have very little doubt Ballard will go defense in round 1 but if he is in love with a WR in round 2, I could see him going that route. 

Share this post


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

I think Johnson and fountain will also be fighting it out with Cain. We really don’t need to draft a WR until we know what we have. Especially if Inman re signs.

 

But we Do know what we have. We have a Playmaker Star in TY. We have Funchess on a 1 year contract that so far in his career has been 'unspectacular'. Cain who flashed in camp but is coming off of a serious injury and still hasn't ever caught a nfl pass. Inman or not, outside of TY, we will have a WR group that are 'Just a guy' UNLESS we spend a High Draft pick on a WR. Which I doubt Ballard will do, but hope I am wrong.

  • Like 4

Share this post


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

I think if Inman resigns it means drafting a high profile receiver is VERY unlikely.  Agree or disagree?

 

That means we are rolling with: 

Hilton, Inman, Funchess, Cain, Pascal and Rogers.  Not sure what all the contracts are, but it seems unlikely these guys don't have guaranteed money or that they would (re)sign all of them only to guarantee there isn't room for one of them.  They could nuke Pascal or Cain, but I hope they keep developing and stay with us.  

 

Rogers and Pascal don't have any guaranteed money.  Cain has some guaranteed money but it's so small that it's essentially meaningless to the conversation.

 

I don't think WR will be a priority in the draft as I think the focus will heavily be on defense.  But if BPA a WR was taken high than there would be a battle for roster spots.

 

I would also note that I'm pretty sure Cain could be put on the practice squad.

 

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, LJpalmbeacher2 said:

 

But we Do know what we have. We have a Playmaker Star in TY. We have Funchess on a 1 year contract that so far in his career has been 'unspectacular'. Cain who flashed in camp but is coming off of a serious injury and still hasn't ever caught a nfl pass. Inman or not, outside of TY, we will have a WR group that are 'Just a guy' UNLESS we spend a High Draft pick on a WR. Which I doubt Ballard will do, but hope I am wrong.

Even a high draft pick there is no guarantee they can play. Ballard is not wasting a high draft pick on a WR. College football does a terrible job getting kids ready to be NFL WR.  Unless one of the studs fall to 26 we will go defense 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
45 minutes ago, JPFolks said:

I think if Inman resigns it means drafting a high profile receiver is VERY unlikely.  Agree or disagree?

 

That means we are rolling with: 

Hilton, Inman, Funchess, Cain, Pascal and Rogers.  Not sure what all the contracts are, but it seems unlikely these guys don't have guaranteed money or that they would (re)sign all of them only to guarantee there isn't room for one of them.  They could nuke Pascal or Cain, but I hope they keep developing and stay with us.  

I would tend to disagree ....... I STILL think that we get a WR talent in the draft

 

If you think about this group, we have one player shifty, and speedy player that can cleanly separate which is Hilton.  If HE gets hurt, we are in a BIG problem

 

We have no true depth there...... not good

 

The others are plus 6ft, type of recievers

 

I think a player like Cambell or Isabella, might be that player that can get open and move the sticks between the 20's

 

I love me some Butler, (Yeah.....  I liked him before it was COOL  :) ) and I know he is enormous, but he could stand still and catch the pass with his long arms (he doesnt need as much separation)

 

But think he may actually fall in round one..... and be gone before 34

 

 

We will see

 

 

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


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

Even a high draft pick there is no guarantee they can play. Ballard is not wasting a high draft pick on a WR. College football does a terrible job getting kids ready to be NFL WR.  Unless one of the studs fall to 26 we will go defense 

 

But you wouldn't want to draft on DL, would you? We drafted so many on front 7 last year(that are on rookie contracts) we should see what the kids can do before looking for their replacements.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
44 minutes ago, Jared Cisneros said:

I still think we draft a WR even if we re-sign Inman. The question will be where? Too strong a class to pass up on one completely.

Okay, let me be more specific.  Do you think we use one of our top 3 picks on a WR if we resign Inman?  I say no (though I have been advocating FOR doing just that, perhaps even with our first pick, as well as considering picking a high profile TE if one falls to us) but as much as I like Inman (and I do) there just isn't room.  It would likely mean of a 5 person roster, we have to lose Cain or Pascal at least.  (Plus Fountain which I fully expect short of camp injuries).  I though Pascal was on an upward arc last season and Cain is a complete ?   So, do we use a top pick, say one of our first 3, which will force us to cut at least one of the above 5 WRs.  

Share this post


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

Okay, let me be more specific.  Do you think we use one of our top 3 picks on a WR if we resign Inman?  I say no (though I have been advocating FOR doing just that, perhaps even with our first pick, as well as considering picking a high profile TE if one falls to us) but as much as I like Inman (and I do) there just isn't room.  It would likely mean of a 5 person roster, we have to lose Cain or Pascal at least.  (Plus Fountain which I fully expect short of camp injuries).  I though Pascal was on an upward arc last season and Cain is a complete ?   So, do we use a top pick, say one of our first 3, which will force us to cut at least one of the above 5 WRs.  

I'm guessing we draft a WR with our late 2nd or 3rd rounder. Ballard will find a value guy there that fell on his board IMO. I'm also guessing we keep 6 WR's on the roster, and 2 on the practice squad. Ballard is going to make it a priority that we find a solid WR2 this year.

Share this post


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

I'm guessing we draft a WR with our late 2nd or 3rd rounder. Ballard will find a value guy there that fell on his board IMO. I'm also guessing we keep 6 WR's on the roster, and 2 on the practice squad. Ballard is going to make it a priority that we find a solid WR2 this year.

You never know Funchess may be that guy and we don’t need a guy in the draft.  I really think he is going to let what we have play out. If  funchess is that guy we re sign him and don’t have to develop one.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, LJpalmbeacher2 said:

 

But you wouldn't want to draft on DL, would you? We drafted so many on front 7 last year(that are on rookie contracts) we should see what the kids can do before looking for their replacements.

I think WR is one of the biggest question marks of any draft position.  I think you can get a receiver anywhere in the draft. I just don’t put a lot of stock in WR early. It’s one of the hardest positions to learn in the nfl as a young player. A defensive player can come in and make a huge impact right away. 

Share this post


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

You never know Funchess may be that guy and we don’t need a guy in the draft.  I really think he is going to let what we have play out. If  funchess is that guy we re sign him and don’t have to develop one.

Funchess could be that guy, but there's no on-field practice time between now and the draft to determine that, so Ballard is going to have to determine whether he believes a draft pick at WR along with Funchess is necessary for the season. Personally, I think this is the right class and time to take one, but either of us could be right.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just my opinion but I think the chances of Funchess working out is 80% greater then a draft pick at wide receiver working our next year. Even if it is one at 26. We actually do know what we have on funchess because he has actually played in the NFL. A draft pick is just like cain we would have no idea.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
34 minutes ago, Valpo2004 said:

 

Rogers and Pascal don't have any guaranteed money.  Cain has some guaranteed money but it's so small that it's essentially meaningless to the conversation.

 

I don't think WR will be a priority in the draft as I think the focus will heavily be on defense.  But if BPA a WR was taken high than there would be a battle for roster spots.

 

I would also note that I'm pretty sure Cain could be put on the practice squad.

 

Thanks, I was aware that Cain and Pascal would be easy to walk away from, I wasn't sure about the contract(s) offered to Rogers and possibly to Inman.  It still seems unlikely they sign those guys with any intent of moving on from them.  Maybe I will be wrong though.  I'd rather see us invest spots in Cain (if he's healthy) and Pascal (who I think still has a lot of upside) than Rogers because though he could become a solid possession receiver overall, I don't see a lot of upside beyond status quo with less drops hopefully in the future.  Not a hater, not a fan, somewhere in between on his I guess.  

 

Thanks again for the info! 

Share this post


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

Just my opinion but I think the chances of Funchess working out is 80% greater then a draft pick at wide receiver working our next year. Even if it is one at 26. We actually do know what we have on funchess because he has actually played in the NFL. A draft pick is just like cain we would have no idea.

You sound like you are in the camp of not drafting a WR at all, is that correct? I will agree, we shouldn't take one in round 1, I would go DLine there but that is JMO. 

Share this post


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

I think if Inman resigns it means drafting a high profile receiver is VERY unlikely.  Agree or disagree?

 

That means we are rolling with: 

Hilton, Inman, Funchess, Cain, Pascal and Rogers.  Not sure what all the contracts are, but it seems unlikely these guys don't have guaranteed money or that they would (re)sign all of them only to guarantee there isn't room for one of them.  They could nuke Pascal or Cain, but I hope they keep developing and stay with us.  

I would agree.  But I also think that even if they don't sign Inman the Colts will not spend any of the first three picks on a WR, I think the signing of Inman just tips their hand a bit more.

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


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

I think Johnson and fountain will also be fighting it out with Cain. We really don’t need to draft a WR until we know what we have. Especially if Inman re signs.

 

How is that? 

 

Look at this way...if they sign Aaron Lynch to a one-year deal...do they pass on DEs? It's a very similar situation.

 

Sheard and Lynch = Funchess and Inman (all one-year deals)

Lewis and Turay = Fountain and Cain (all rookies last year)

 

Yes...Hilton is still here. But the Colts use 3-WR sets quite often...so they need three of them long-term.

Share this post


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

Just my opinion but I think the chances of Funchess working out is 80% greater then a draft pick at wide receiver working our next year. Even if it is one at 26. We actually do know what we have on funchess because he has actually played in the NFL. A draft pick is just like cain we would have no idea.

I agree with this, however, Funchess could be more of a bridge for the new drafted WR as well as being solid himself. Kind of a backdoor out. If he's great, we re-sign him, if not, the drafted receiver had a year to develop and he can take over next year. Just my armchair GM view on it! :thmup:

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, 2006Coltsbestever said:

You sound like you are in the camp of not drafting a WR at all, is that correct? I will agree, we shouldn't take one in round 1, I would go DLine there but that is JMO. 

I don’t have a issue in drafting one in a later round. I just think WR is such A ? whether they can play in the nfl I don’t think it’s a good idea in the first or second round. I think a WR in the later rounds can be just as good as one in the first round.

Everyone is talking up metcalf because of his physical traits. But what about his head and if he is smart enough to learn to run nfl routes ect.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
30 minutes ago, MikeCurtis said:

I would tend to disagree ....... I STILL think that we get a WR talent in the draft

 

If you think about this group, we have one player shifty, and speedy player that can cleanly separate which is Hilton.  If HE gets hurt, we are in a BIG problem

 

We have no true depth there...... not good

 

The others are plus 6ft, type of recievers

 

I think a player like Cambell or Isabella, might be that player that can get open and move the sticks between the 20's

 

I love me some Butler, (Yeah.....  I liked him before it was COOL  :) ) and I know he is enormous, but he could stand still and catch the pass with his long arms (he doesnt need as much separation)

 

But think he may actually fall in round one..... and be gone before 34

 

 

We will see

 

 

Mike, I strongly agree with your points.  I also wouldn't be surprised for them to find a later round WR they think meets a specific need in the  lineup.  I was more questioning whether we'd still take one of our top 3 picks to do so?  I don't think we have enough guys that can get separation.  I see some possession and tall guys who can jump catch stuff, but only one burner and no burner depth (at least from what I have observed from this group).  Inman gives us a reliable target on third down that I wouldn't hold my breath in hopes he doesn't drop it.  Like I said in an earlier post, I think Funchess is the guy I want for 3rd and super long, like 3rd and 15+ because his skill set fits that need (plus obviously in the red zone).  But 3rd and 4? Not so much.  I think Doyle, Inman and Hilton are our guys there (Rogers as well), but we don't know about Doyle's health and Rogers and Inman aren't really breakaway speed guys.  Pascal and Cain could be the answers to our needs short and long term OR neither could be on the team in a couple years.  We just don't know.  So I was all for spending a top pick (even in a defensive dominated draft) on the RIGHT WR should he be available.  OR, another way to go would be a top TE to give us depth and a dominant TE game second to none.  (Actually I find that idea more exciting, but not sure I will get my wish).  

 

Thanks for the info/feedback.  Great post.  

Share this post


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

I agree with this, however, Funchess could be more of a bridge for the new drafted WR as well as being solid himself. Kind of a backdoor out. If he's great, we re-sign him, if not, the drafted receiver had a year to develop and he can take over next year. Just my armchair GM view on it! :thmup:

Do you really think if he comes in and makes us a better team and is a difference maker we won’t re sign him. 

Share this post


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

Thanks, I was aware that Cain and Pascal would be easy to walk away from, I wasn't sure about the contract(s) offered to Rogers and possibly to Inman.  It still seems unlikely they sign those guys with any intent of moving on from them.  Maybe I will be wrong though.  I'd rather see us invest spots in Cain (if he's healthy) and Pascal (who I think still has a lot of upside) than Rogers because though he could become a solid possession receiver overall, I don't see a lot of upside beyond status quo with less drops hopefully in the future.  Not a hater, not a fan, somewhere in between on his I guess.  

 

Thanks again for the info! 

 

I would agree, it would be unlikely that we move on from Rodgers or Inman.  Unless someone blows away the coaches or something I would say 4 of the WR spots are locked down.  

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


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

We have three on rookie contracts. Lol

Exactly. I think Ballard would prefer to use Funchess and Inman as insurance this year to see how Cain and Fountain develop this season. 

 

Worst comes worse, we roll with TY/Funchess/Inman, and draft a top WR next year or pick one up in free agency. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


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

I would agree.  But I also think that even if they don't sign Inman the Colts will not spend any of the first three picks on a WR, I think the signing of Inman just tips their hand a bit more.

A follow up, if one of the top TE's are there when it is our pick, any chance you think we pounce on them? Do you see a need for a young TE that already know's how to play to go along with Doyle and Ebron? 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don’t think we need a tight end this year. Maybe next year but have to see how Doyle comes back and his effect on the team.

Share this post


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

I don’t have a issue in drafting one in a later round. I just think WR is such A ? whether they can play in the nfl I don’t think it’s a good idea in the first or second round. I think a WR in the later rounds can be just as good as one in the first round.

Everyone is talking up metcalf because of his physical traits. But what about his head and if he is smart enough to learn to run nfl routes ect.

Never know what Ballard may do but I would love for us to use at least the 1st 2 picks on defense. After that, if he went WR I would be ok with it if someone very talented is there.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Not to get started on the Funchess stuff again...but this would be a curious move. Funchess and Inman are very similar WRs with similar roles in this offense. Depth is nice I guess...but I think I would prefer that player be a draft pick/guy on rookie deal developing...not a vet.

 

Not really a fan of having both Inman and Funchess on the field...outside of red zone situations. I got the need for speed.

 

If they bring back Inman...I hope he gets a chance to compete for that starting X receiver spot. Now that will be interesting to watch. 

Share this post


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

Do you really think if he comes in and makes us a better team and is a difference maker we won’t re sign him. 

Of course we would re-sign him in that scenario. My issue is if we don't re-sign him (because he did poor), and we didn't draft a WR to develop just in case, we'd be back to square one next year at WR with a worse WR class to draft from and fewer picks. I just want it done right even if we have extra receivers that turn out to be good. You can never have too much of a good thing in football.

Share this post


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

Not to get started on the Funchess stuff again...but this would be a curious move. Funchess and Inman are very similar WRs with similar roles in this offense. Depth is nice I guess...but I think I would prefer that player be a draft pick/guy on rookie deal developing...not a vet.

 

Not really a fan of having both Inman and Funchess on the field...outside of red zone situations. I got the need for speed.

 

If they bring back Inman...I hope he gets a chance to compete for that starting X receiver spot. Now that will be interesting to watch. 

What are their roles? How can you say they have similar roles in the offense when we haven't seen Funchess in the offense yet?

Share this post


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

A follow up, if one of the top TE's are there when it is our pick, any chance you think we pounce on them? Do you see a need for a young TE that already know's how to play to go along with Doyle and Ebron? 

 

If they feel real good about the TE, I can definitely see it happen, given how much Reich's system uses TEs. Eagles - they had Burton and once Burton left for the Bears, they drafted Goedert within the first 2 picks, that is how much they valued good TEs if they had them rated high enough, IMO. 

 

If Inman is signed, the logical skill position within the first 3 picks becomes TE, more than WR, IMO.

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...