Jump to content
Indianapolis Colts
Indianapolis Colts Fan Forum

Bridgewater could command 30m a year


Recommended Posts

  • Replies 149
  • Created
  • Last Reply
On 2/17/2020 at 2:49 PM, DaColts85 said:

That being said, players should demand money because it’s all short lived so make the money while you can. 

 

I get that, but atleast be realistic about your value. That's like me going to my boss and demanding to get paid 100 dollars an hour. It's not gonna happen.

Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, CR91 said:

 

I get that, but atleast be realistic about your value. That's like me going to my boss and demanding to get paid 100 dollars an hour. It's not gonna happen.

You can be replaced easier than a pro athlete. Plus you aren’t going to work everyday with the potential of a career ending injury. Contact and all that. Anything could happen but they have more bargaining than you do with your boss haha  

Link to post
Share on other sites
24 minutes ago, DaColts85 said:

You can be replaced easier than a pro athlete. Plus you aren’t going to work everyday with the potential of a career ending injury. Contact and all that. Anything could happen but they have more bargaining than you do with your boss haha  

 

All I'm saying is understand your value. Bridgewater is not a top 5 QB to be demanding 30 mil a year.

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

 

All I'm saying is understand your value. Bridgewater is not a top 5 QB to be demanding 30 mil a year.

The art of negotiating is to go high. He isn’t going to say yea I’ll settle for 20 or whatever you give me. Just like Dak. You start high and get them to meet or counter. 
 

That being said, FA allows for dumb money to be spent because of bidding wars. So he will get a good chunk of change. Maybe 25/26 per year for 4 years. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, DaColts85 said:

The art of negotiating is to go high. He isn’t going to say yea I’ll settle for 20 or whatever you give me. Just like Dak. You start high and get them to meet or counter. 
 

That being said, FA allows for dumb money to be spent because of bidding wars. So he will get a good chunk of change. Maybe 25/26 per year for 4 years. 

 

If he gets anything past 20, I'd be shocked.

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

 

If he gets anything past 20, I'd be shocked.

 

44 minutes ago, Dokken said:


I’d be shocked if any team signs him to any 4-5 year deal period. 

Prepared to be shocked. Nick Foles got a 4yr/ 88 mil contract. Based on reports of teams already wanting Teddy plus each year the dollar value rises in FA I would not be shocked at all for a 4 year deal of close to 25 per year. That’s the nature of FA. Teams are QB hungry and will spend cash. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, DaColts85 said:

 

Prepared to be shocked. Nick Foles got a 4yr/ 88 mil contract. Based on reports of teams already wanting Teddy plus each year the dollar value rises in FA I would not be shocked at all for a 4 year deal of close to 25 per year. That’s the nature of FA. Teams are QB hungry and will spend cash. 

 

Nick Foles was still riding off his super bowl high. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, DaColts85 said:

Regardless in my opinion teams have a higher regard for Teddy. 

 

Based on what? 5 games? Teams are extremely desperate if that's what their wasting their money on.

Link to post
Share on other sites

There are Matt Flynn’s of the world who get paid on less. Jimmy G didn’t have endless games under his belt before getting that big contract. It’s FA so don’t get caught up in to much other than teams see his ability and even in the said 5 games he wasn’t terrible. 5-0 I believe. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, DaColts85 said:

There are Matt Flynn’s of the world who get paid on less. Jimmy G didn’t have endless games under his belt before getting that big contract. It’s FA so don’t get caught up in to much other than teams see his ability and even in the said 5 games he wasn’t terrible. 5-0 I believe. 

 

5-0 on a really good saints team. Doesn't mean I wanna give him the keys to the franchise.

Link to post
Share on other sites
30 minutes ago, DaColts85 said:

 

Prepared to be shocked. Nick Foles got a 4yr/ 88 mil contract. Based on reports of teams already wanting Teddy plus each year the dollar value rises in FA I would not be shocked at all for a 4 year deal of close to 25 per year. That’s the nature of FA. Teams are QB hungry and will spend cash. 


I just don’t think a GM is that stupid, to put their job on the line for Teddy with a huge contract. 
 

Rotoworld reported 2 years ago, he would command 15M a season and it didn’t happen. 
 

 

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


I just don’t think a GM is that stupid, to put their job on the line for Teddy with a huge contract. 
 

Rotoworld reported 2 years ago, he would command 15M a season and it didn’t happen. 
 

 

GM’s have done dumber stuff. Read previous posts. Plus what root world posted 2 years ago has no relevance now.  

Link to post
Share on other sites
31 minutes ago, DaColts85 said:

YOU don’t!! That’s ok for you but a NFL team will. 

 

God help that team. They'll be like the jags. Broke and picking early.

Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, DaColts85 said:

Are you saying career or just last years? I’m referring to last year since that’s what the conversation has been on. 


Last season, but he’s never averaged 250 in a season period. Just like JB. 
 

Anyways, you like him I don’t and I think he’s overrated and coddled. It is what it is. 
 

Cheers
 

 

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

He isnt.  I dont care how much Payton loves Brees.  If Teddy is that guy,  they would ask Brees to retire

 

They would never ask Brees to retire.  It's like having the Colts ask Manning to retire or the Steelers asking Ben to retire.  He's an icon in NO.  They would never do that.  They would love to hold on to Teddy but their circumstances won't allow that to happen.  That's all there is to it.  Teddy has shown this year that he is a franchise QB.  If he goes to the right team he will be a winner.  And he gets to pick that team.  It doesn't get any better than that for him.  

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

They would never ask Brees to retire.  It's like having the Colts ask Manning to retire or the Steelers asking Ben to retire.  He's an icon in NO.  They would never do that.  They would love to hold on to Teddy but their circumstances won't allow that to happen.  That's all there is to it.  Teddy has shown this year that he is a franchise QB.  If he goes to the right team he will be a winner.  And he gets to pick that team.  It doesn't get any better than that for him.  


The Packers FO were ready for Favre to leave, because they had Rogers in the wings. The Colts cut Manning and drafted Luck. 
 

Sorry, but if Teddy was a Franchise QB, the Saints would lock him up.

 

There might be one “sucker GM” who will gamble on TB with a big contract, but I don’t see him sniffing a 20M a year contract. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
37 minutes ago, Dokken said:


The Packers FO were ready for Favre to leave, because they had Rogers in the wings. The Colts cut Manning and drafted Luck. 
 

Sorry, but if Teddy was a Franchise QB, the Saints would lock him up.

 

There might be one “sucker GM” who will gamble on TB with a big contract, but I don’t see him sniffing a 20M a year contract. 

There is a big difference in asking a QB to retire so his backup can take his place than being ready to move on because a player is older or injured.  Sorry that's apples and oranges.  The conversation was about asking Brees to retire so they could give it to Teddy.  Absurd.  Entirely different circumstances with Favre and Manning.  Your attempt to make them identical is laughable. 

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

There is a big difference in asking a QB to retire so his backup can take his place than being ready to move on because a player is older or injured.  Sorry that's apples and oranges.  The conversation was about asking Brees to retire so they could give it to Teddy.  Absurd.  Entirely different circumstances with Favre and Manning.  Your attempt to make them identical is laughable. 

Bottom line, NO doesn't let Ted walk if he's seen as a franchise guy. 

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

There is a big difference in asking a QB to retire so his backup can take his place than being ready to move on because a player is older or injured.  Sorry that's apples and oranges.  The conversation was about asking Brees to retire so they could give it to Teddy.  Absurd.  Entirely different circumstances with Favre and Manning.  Your attempt to make them identical is laughable. 


Manning won a SB with Denver and broke Brady’s TD record. Favre took the Vikes to the playoffs. Your a very funny, gullible and confused guy. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, EastStreet said:

Bottom line, NO doesn't let Ted walk if he's seen as a franchise guy. 

Bottom line, NO can't afford to pay both their current market value.  One had to go.  And it certainly wasn't going to be Brees. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, richard pallo said:

There is a big difference in asking a QB to retire so his backup can take his place than being ready to move on because a player is older or injured.  Sorry that's apples and oranges.  The conversation was about asking Brees to retire so they could give it to Teddy.  Absurd.  Entirely different circumstances with Favre and Manning.  Your attempt to make them identical is laughable. 

 

Umm if you havn't noticed Brees is older.  

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, richard pallo said:

Bottom line, NO can't afford to pay both their current market value.  One had to go.  And it certainly wasn't going to be Brees. 

If they saw Teddy as the franchise QB, NO would either 1) make the choice to keep him over Brees (which will be a 1 or 2 year deal at most), or 2) dump some others to make room. They have plenty of mediocre/average guys making more than they should (that could be replaced in the draft or FA) which is why they're hard against the cap in the first place.

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

If they saw Teddy as the franchise QB, NO would either 1) make the choice to keep him over Brees (which will be a 1 or 2 year deal at most), or 2) dump some others to make room. They have plenty of mediocre/average guys making more than they should (that could be replaced in the draft or FA) which is why they're hard against the cap in the first place.

They would never make the choice to keep Teddy over Brees when Brees is still showing he can with them a SB now.  If he was regressing maybe.  They would have to dump a lot of players to keep both thereby weakening the team and hurting their chances for an immediate SB run.  Counting on rookies and cheap FAs to fill the void is a a big gamble.  I think they are all in for this year and the last thing they would want to do is weaken the team by dumping players and keeping both QBs at market value. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Archived

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

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.


  • Thread of the Week

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • The best option may be trading a 3rd rounder for Darnold if the Jets get the no1 pick, and having him compete with Eason next year for the starting job. I also wouldn't mind signing Kelly back since he knows the playbook and has potential still. A competition with those three wouldn't hurt us much in the way of draft compensation, we can figure out if we have our franchise QB within the three, and still have a solid draft class.   Heck, in this scenario, Ballard could trade down in the 1st to acquire the 3rd round pick back he traded for Darnold. I trust his drafting skills enough that I believe he can hit on a late 1st round pick.
    • I agree to some extent. I hope Colts pursue the QB aggressively if Rivers leaves. I would be ok trading up too cause a solid QB can turn around an O completely.   Said it before and will again and again  Trading up for a QB is risky but I think its worth the risk and could potentially be monumental to the Colts success.   The key is getting the right guy.
    • I always loved Buckner and have been in favor of getting him since day 1. My issue is the offense. The QB issue, Mack being gone, will Pittman and Campbell be good? How will we replace Costanzo? We have a lot question marks right now, and although they should be answered by the end of the season, it all depends on the QB. We need to have an actual plan after Rivers this year instead of the 1 year band-aids. I don't blame Ballard for Lucks retirement, however, he needs to come up with something to try and fix the situation long-term. If Eason is that, ok, just don't let him rot on the bench like Kelly. I understand sitting him this year, just don't sign a veteran FA and have him sit a 2nd year in a row. That would be criminal. Start Eason, trade for a QB, draft one, I don't care. Just have a long-term plan for the future. That is our biggest weakness right now, and what will ultimately decide if we are playoff contenders for the next few years.
    • Don't rule out bringing Rivers back next year either. The options at QB in 21' are limitless as you can tell with the 50 gazillion threads.    I think the key is to continue to build the trenches.    There's a reason the DBs are on pace to shatter the INT for last year and its because Buckner!    
    • lol next you'll be wanting this guy 
  • Members

×
×
  • Create New...