Jump to content
Fisticuffs111

Chad Forbes: Colts working on extensions for 4 players (AC, Kelly, Moore, Rigo)

Recommended Posts

Also speculates that this could leave Jabaal Sheard's future uncertain. Which wouldn't be a total surprise, always figured we might let him go once his contract is up.
 

 

  • Like 2
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I saw this, but I dont know how true it is. AC and Moore make sense, but why work on an extension with kelly when we have a fifth year option and Sanchez for two more years

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, CR91 said:

I saw this, but I dont know how true it is. AC and Moore make sense, but why work on an extension with kelly when we have a fifth year option and Sanchez for two more years


Doesn't Rigo only have one year left?

Also I think Forbes' pretty respectable.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Very pleased about the news of working on extensions for the core four.   Very pleased.

 

Very concerned if there is any truth to this rumor about releasing Sheard.  I won’t believe it until there’s something more concrete.    The guy has graded in or near the 90’s in his two seasons with us.   There aren’t many players in the NFL who grade out that way.   Ballard himself has noted that Sheard is a locker room leader.  Cutting a guy like that sends the exact wrong message at this important point in the rebuild. 

 

This is a very smart front office.   I’ll believe it when it happens and not a minute sooner.

  • Like 5
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


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

Very pleased about the news of working on extensions for the core four.   Very pleased.

 

Very concerned if there is any truth to this rumor about releasing Sheard.  I won’t believe it until there’s something more concrete.    The guy has graded in or near the 90’s in his two seasons with us.   There aren’t many players in the NFL who grade out that way.   Ballard himself has noted that Sheard is a locker room leader.  Cutting a guy like that sends the exact wrong message at thus important point in the rebuild. 

 

This is a very smart front office.   I’ll believe it when it happens and not a minute sooner.

 

Yeah, I like Sheard a lot. I wonder if part of it could be he might just wanna eventually test the market...potentially get one last big deal (if at all possible)? Or maybe like with Desir/Geathers, even though he's much more proven, let him test the market and see if we wanna match or go higher? I don't know, just guessing. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, Fisticuffs111 said:


Doesn't Rigo only have one year left?

Also I think Forbes' pretty respectable.

 

Yes, but then hes a restricted free agent

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

First one to call Sheard potentially getting cut. He's a respectable player, but he is being paid $8 million, and he can easily be replaced. 

  • Like 1
  • Haha 1
  • Confused 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, CR91 said:

 

Yes, but then hes a restricted free agent


Sure, but the point I thought you were trying to make was why sign him when he has two years left, when he only has one...right? Being an RFA just means you can match any deal made to retain him.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Fisticuffs111 said:


Sure, but the point I thought you were making was why sign him when he has two years left, when he only has one...right? Being an RFA just means you can match any deal made to him to retain him.

 

My point is theres no point extending him now when we basically have him for two more years (RFA basically means we'll get him back unless he gets an insane offer which I doubt). I dont know just seems weird. Ill wait til something more concrete is reported. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, Colts1324 said:

First one to call Sheard potentially getting cut. He's a respectable player, but he is being paid $8 million, and he can easily be replaced. 

Since we play 8 DL and want 10 on the roster, then NO, he can’t easily be replaced.   We can easily afford his salary and since we want our DL to come in waves (Ballard’s words) then we NEED Sheard.   

 

Cutting a player who has not underperformed is the wrong message to send to the team.

 

And I have to wonder where this info would come from?   The Cokts don’t leak.   So who would reveal this?   I don’t see what an agent would have to gain?   If Sheard gets cut, it will take no time to get a good offer.   This doesn’t add up for me at all.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, CR91 said:

 

My point is theres no point extending him now when we basically have him for two more years (RFA basically means we'll get him back unless he gets an insane offer which I doubt). I dont know just seems weird. Ill wait til something more concrete is reported. 

 

The reason to extend now instead of two years is that the asking price is only going to go up.   So try to lock him up sooner before the cost gets really crazy.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Who exactly is Chad Forbes?

  • Like 3

Share this post


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

 

The reason to extend now instead of two years is that the asking price is only going to go up.   So try to lock him up sooner before the cost gets really crazy.

 

You mean Kelly? Centers dont make ridiculous contracts

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

When this is through and the fa period, draft is done, if the Colts still have the most available cap space, we'll, I'd re-sign Ballard now as well! 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, CR91 said:

 

You mean Kelly? Centers dont make ridiculous contracts

If Kelley performs at an All-Pro Level next year, he will likely set the market for centers, $14-$15 million a year IMO. If we could get him extended for $10-$11 mill per year now why wouldn't we??

Especially if we could start the extension after next season. 

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, CR91 said:

 

You mean Kelly? Centers dont make ridiculous contracts

He’s going to be looking at $10 mill per soon.   Then you also have to pay AC and Q and Smith.  

 

Someday soon we’re going to be spending big $$$$ on the OL.   If this is true, Ballard is trying to keep costs under control.   Paying sooner rather than later is a way to do it. 

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Colts1324 said:

If Kelley performs at an All-Pro Level next year, he will likely set the market for centers, $14-$15 million a year IMO. If we could get him extended for $10-$11 mill per year now why wouldn't we??

Especially if we could start the extension after next season. 

 

Thats highly unlikely. You extend now and you lose the fifth year option.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just want to point out that this is Chad Forbes, who is known for throwing % at the wall and waiting to see if anything sticks. Just think about it - look at how tight of a ship Ballard is running. Practically nothing leaks until it's a done deal. I guess agents can leak that the Colts are working towards extensions, although... they don't really have much of an incentive to leak that info, while negotiations are going on. How in hell would this rando known for his false reports be the one with the scoop, rather than any of the big fish?

 

And the Sheard thing... who could possibly know that and why in hell would they leak it before it's a done deal, what would the people that know of such thing gain from a leak about potentially releasing Sheard before he's released? 

 

Hammer me if this truly happens, but this makes zero sense. IMO this again is Forbes throwing feces at the wall... 

  • Like 6
  • Thanks 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, CR91 said:

 

Thats highly unlikely. You extend now and you lose the fifth year option.

Yeah, I see both sides. I would expect an extension after next season. 

 

However, Ballard does always prefer to think ahead. Either way, expect Kelley to stay with us for many more years. 

Share this post


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

He’s going to be looking at $10 mill per soon.   Then you also have to pay AC and Q and Smith.  

 

Someday soon we’re going to be spending big $$$$ on the OL.   If this is true, Ballard is trying to keep costs under control.   Paying sooner rather than later is a way to do it. 

 

I get that, but that is still years dont the road. I rather take advantage of the fifth year option. Centers dont break the bank

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, CR91 said:

 

Thats highly unlikely. You extend now and you lose the fifth year option.

That’s not an automatic.   Every negotiation is different.   We can structure things any way we can as long as Kelly agrees. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


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

Just want to point out that this is Chad Forbes, who is known for throwing % at the wall and waiting to see if anything sticks. Just think about it - look at how tight of a ship Ballard is running. Practically nothing leaks until it's a done deal. I guess agents can leak that the Colts are working towards extensions, although... they don't really have much of an incentive to leak that info, while negotiations are going on. But the Sheard thing... who could possibly know that and why in hell would they leak it before it's a done deal, what would the people that know of such thing gain from a leak about potentially releasing Sheard? 

 

Hammer me if this truly happens, but this makes zero sense. IMO this again is Forbes throwing feces at the wall... 


I really thought his Sheard statement was a throwaway speculative bit. And he didn't say or imply anything about releasing him, at least that's not how I read it.

The Colts run a tight ship definitely, agreed on that. But then, Allbright called Houston potentially going to the Colts right before it happened. Could've been a lucky guess, sure, but I don't think it's impossible for leaks to get out here and there.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
36 minutes ago, CR91 said:

I saw this, but I dont know how true it is. AC and Moore make sense, but why work on an extension with kelly when we have a fifth year option and Sanchez for two more years

 

I can't vouch for the truth of the report, but i will say that players get extended right before or during that option year a lot. I am pretty sure Luck signed his deal right after we picked up his option... Grigson just adjusted the numbers so that he basically got paid more in that (technically) first year of the deal to compensate for the lower amount he was owed from the fifth year of the rookie deal.

 

Share this post


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

That’s not an automatic.   Every negotiation is different.   We can structure things any way we can as long as Kelly agrees

 

Not sure you can add an option to a contract. This isn't basketball

Share this post


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

Since we play 8 DL and want 10 on the roster, then NO, he can’t easily be replaced.   We can easily afford his salary and since we want our DL to come in waves (Ballard’s words) then we NEED Sheard.   

 

Cutting a player who has not underperformed is the wrong message to send to the team.

 

And I have to wonder where this info would come from?   The Cokts don’t leak.   So who would reveal this?   I don’t see what an agent would have to gain?   If Sheard gets cut, it will take no time to get a good offer.   This doesn’t add up for me at all.  

Colts D-Line for 2019: 

 

DE: 

Houston/FA/Turay/Lewis/Muhammad/ Sheard

 

DT: Autry/Hunt/Ward/draft pick

 

I fully expect us to draft a DT in the upcoming draft. That leaves us with 10 defensive lineman next year given we sign another edge rusher in FA. IF we draft a DE as well in the draft that leaves us with 11 players on the D-Line. 

 

You also have to take into account that Sheard likely wants to start, and he very well could have limited snaps next offseason. If he stays, that's great. More depth. We'll see. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, Fisticuffs111 said:


I really thought his Sheard statement was a throwaway speculative bit. And he didn't say or imply anything about releasing him, at least that's not how I read it.

True on second read, it indeed reads more like a wild speculation. Which again goes to my point - Forbes is known for wild speculations and false reports. He just throws stuff out there without any real sourcing, but pretending he's in the know. He seems a bit like a version of Brad Wells. 

 

Your read of that part - that we might let him go once his contract is up is reasonable, especially if the young players we've drafted or added over the last year and the ones we undoubtedly will add this year, show enough development to be trusted long-term. 

  • Like 2

Share this post


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

 

I can't vouch for the truth of the report, but i will say that players get extended right before or during that option year a lot. I am pretty sure Luck signed his deal right after we picked up his option... Grigson just adjusted the numbers so that he basically got paid more in that (technically) first year of the deal to compensate for the lower amount he was owed from the fifth year of the rookie deal.

 

 

Yes they discuss an extension after not before they excerise the fifth year

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, CR91 said:

 

Not sure you can add an option to a contract. This isn't basketball

 

Add an option?    Kelly already HAS an option.   But you can add more years after the option if the two sides want.

 

Extending the deal doesn’t automatically mean losing the option as you’ve stated.   Not that I’m aware of.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, Fisticuffs111 said:


I really thought his Sheard statement was a throwaway speculative bit. And he didn't say or imply anything about releasing him, at least that's not how I read it.

The Colts run a tight ship definitely, agreed on that. But then, Allbright called Houston potentially going to the Colts right before it happened. Could've been a lucky guess, sure, but I don't think it's impossible for leaks to get out here and there.

That is how I read it

    

   

  • Like 1

Share this post


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

 

Add an option?    Kelly already HAS an option.   But you can add more years after the option if the two sides want.

 

Extending the deal doesn’t automatically mean losing the option as you’ve stated.   Not that I’m aware of.

 

Im pretty sure once hes extended, the option is gone

Share this post


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

True on second read, it indeed reads more like a wild speculation. Which again goes to my point - Forbes is known for wild speculations and false reports. He just throws stuff out there without any real sourcing, but pretending he's in the know. He seems a bit like a version of Brad Wells. 

 

Your read of that part - that we might let him go once his contract is up is reasonable, especially if the young players we've drafted or added over the last year and the ones we undoubtedly will add this year, show enough development to be trusted long-term. 


You could very well be right. I guess I didn't know of Forbes' reputation that much. I only remembered that he was calling early on that the Browns could hire within for their HC...but then, that could've just been one of the feces flinging that actually stuck. Not to mention it was a vague report at the time.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
31 minutes ago, Fisticuffs111 said:


I really thought his Sheard statement was a throwaway speculative bit. And he didn't say or imply anything about releasing him, at least that's not how I read it.

The Colts run a tight ship definitely, agreed on that. But then, Allbright called Houston potentially going to the Colts right before it happened. Could've been a lucky guess, sure, but I don't think it's impossible for leaks to get out here and there.

BTW funny that you would mention Allbright because he's actually a LEGIT reporter and he does have sources. He's actually low key one of the best reporters that is not widely known to the public. So... about Allbright. He was calling out Forbes on his 'reporting' a while ago... Follow the replies to that one:

 

Here's pretty much the whole Denver locker room and some people already gone from it disputing his reports:

 

https://www.milehighreport.com/2019/2/8/18217442/teammates-former-teammates-and-insiders-respond-to-false-accusations-made-against-matt-paradis

 

 

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


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

BTW funny that you would mention Allbright because he's actually a LEGIT reporter and he does have sources. He's actually low key one of the best reporters that is not widely known to the public. So... about Allbright. He was calling out Forbes on his 'reporting' a while ago... Follow the replies to that one:

 

Here's pretty much the whole Denver locker room and some people already gone from it disputing his reports:

 

https://www.milehighreport.com/2019/2/8/18217442/teammates-former-teammates-and-insiders-respond-to-false-accusations-made-against-matt-paradis

 

 


Ah well that's interesting. And I totally agree on Allbright. Lotta people hated him before this offseason, before his accuracy had been kinda undeniable, but I always thought he had to have had some good connects.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Fisticuffs111 said:


Ah well that's interesting. And I totally agree on Allbright. Lotta people hated him before this offseason, before his accuracy had been kinda undeniable, but I always thought he had to have had some good connects.

BTW... I don't blame you for posting this report. I've done the same before(posted Forbes reporting) before I knew about his reputation too. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks to @Stiches and @Fisticuffs for dropping a large bucket of cold water on Forbes’ report.

 

I hope this goes away.....

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


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

BTW... I don't blame you for posting this report. I've done the same before(posted Forbes reporting) before I knew about his reputation too. 


Oh it's all good. I more just feel bad for potentially getting hopes up that Ballard was working on contract extensions. Ah well, live and learn.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, CR91 said:

 

Im pretty sure once hes extended, the option is gone

 

I might be misunderstanding, but i don't see why it would be important. Of course the option disappears when the new contract is signed, but what advantage does the label of being in an option year have over an extension?

 

If you are saying that it is unwise to give him the extension early because the option will be cheaper, then i guess i understand... but it is no guarantee that it will be cheaper because you may be able to get a better deal with an extension this offseason compared to next... also, failing to extend him could mean he tests the market and ends up on another team.

 

I don't know how much his fifth year option is worth, but it is probably pretty pricey when you consider his position... maybe it is still cheaper than he's worth, but it isn't the same as having an option on a QB, who, if he plays well could save you 15 mil or more on an option for that fifth season.

  • Like 1

Share this post


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

Thanks to @Stiches and @Fisticuffs for dropping a large bucket of cold water on Forbes’ report.

 

I hope this goes away.....

 


hah yeah, if this gets merged into FA news/wherever I wouldn't be upset. Didn't wanna get people's hopes up on what turns out to be a suspect report.

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Fisticuffs111 said:


Oh it's all good. I more just feel bad for potentially getting hopes up that Ballard was working on contract extensions. Ah well, live and learn.

I mean... it's reasonable to expect him to be working on an extension for AC for example, we've all been talking about it around here for the last week or so. It's not some extraordinary claim. The problem is when it's presented as a sourced info(which I doubt Forbes has), rather than as what we all do here - speculations and conjectures. 

  • Like 3

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.

  • Thread of the Week

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • Just avoid this website for about 30 seconds leading up to the pick. Not that hard to avoid this type of spoiler.
    • Fact - Dorsey put KC in a hole from a cap perspective Fact - Dorsey told Maclin via email that he was being released.  Fact - Dorsey was fired from KC Fact - KC went from ranked in the 20s offensively to the top 5 immediately after Dorsey was fired   Simply put, Dorsey didn't work out in KC. And firing someone via email is just *ic and cowardly. That is black and white.
    • You have a singularly unique viewpoint.   If only the real world was as black and white as you seem to think it is....   If only....  
    • If all are there, I take Wilkins 99% of the time and Simmons 1%. Like you've stated its unlikely though, so I'll go with Simmons (provided Dr's reports are good).  
    • I already pointed to 2 teams who got far more hosed this year than the Colts.  The Buccaneers and the Raiders.  Even the NFL came out and ADMITTED it was not a fair schedule.  So tell me, did they really care? Nope.  They had plenty of opportunity to pour over the schedules before they became public and make some adjustments.  They did not.  They have proven my point.  They do not care if schedules are unfair.   When I say to whine, just play your schedule, that refers to the difficulty this year of the teams we play and the locations of the games which are hard wired in and known to everyone the second the schedule comes out.  I am also not whining when I pointed to the schedule's order being particularly difficult with those three divisional games coming down the road.   Those are simply the teams hard wired in and the order, though not preferential, is not worth whining about.   It's a known reality you have to play all those teams in all those locations.     BUT.. and here is the massive distinction: The late night games and the nationally featured games are entirely and intentionally created all season.  Nobody denies this.   So for 10 of 13 seasons, they have INTENTIONALLY given us a horrendously unbalanced disadvantages, and they do not care.  The idea that they DO care at all about things like CTE is only because they don't want the lawsuits and they don't want the gravy train to be legislated by government to stop.  They don't want the PEOPLE to demand it.  Or for Moms to stop letting their hyper athletic kids to play football and instead guide them into other sports.  Of course soccer leads to more overall concussions per player worldwide at all levels, but the media simply doesn't care because the "world" game is off limits and the NFL is a big fat target to be taken down by a line of special interests in the USA.  It is a game that important to men and boys and often teaches them to work together for something bigger than themselves, to have discipline and focus, to stay out of trouble and put some effort into grades and it often gives kids without fathers in the home exposure to many father figures in the game, not just a head coach, but assistant positional coaches and coordinators, weight lifting/fitness coaches and team captains/leaders as well as peers who are more often doing the right things instead of the wrong things.  For whatever reason some would prefer to theorize, there are major forces out to destroy that lifeline for boys, young men and even full grown men.  But the NFL doesn't care about the health or those issues.  They only care that the supply of super freak athletes continues unabated and they don't care about fairness, equality or safety, they care about TV ratings (#1 show on every involved network) so those nearly insane rates keep growing and to keep butts in seats, gambling growing and thriving (wait til you see what is coming in that arena) and merchandise sales humming along.  If they have to screw the Colts and other teams along the way, it's no big deal to them.  If the refs just happen to screw the smaller markets at key moments of specific games to change who advances, well, that's just a happy coincidence that rings up a higher ticket on the cash machine.   And based on attitudes like "small markets like Indianapolis should be happy to just have a team" they have those people just where they want them.  Docile and willing to take any scraps they care to toss out.  That's how they con cities into terrible stadium deals (thank God Indianapolis representative are brilliant and have connected our convention business to the stadium literally to the stadium making us one of the top convention destinations in the world, but I digress).     Pointing out TRUTHS is not whining.  Pointing out and listing undeniable facts is not whining.  Whining about me doing that is whining.  Whining about me pointing out when your faux facts and belief in them as being naive is whining.   Not being able to tell the difference is also naive.  But alas. 
  • Members

    • 1959Colts

      1959Colts 1,882

      Senior Member
      Joined:
      Last active:
    • il vecchio

      il vecchio 107

      Member
      Joined:
      Last active:
    • HOF19

      HOF19 368

      Senior Member
      Joined:
      Last active:
    • Jared Cisneros

      Jared Cisneros 3,920

      Senior Member
      Joined:
      Last active:
    • Crofan

      Crofan 28

      New Member
      Joined:
      Last active:
    • The Peytonator

      The Peytonator 2,539

      Senior Member
      Joined:
      Last active:
    • ReMeDy

      ReMeDy 2,694

      Senior Member
      Joined:
      Last active:
    • Maniac

      Maniac 251

      Member
      Joined:
      Last active:
    • Luck 4 president

      Luck 4 president 923

      Senior Member
      Joined:
      Last active:
    • DrWhom

      DrWhom 30

      New Member
      Joined:
      Last active:
×
×
  • Create New...