Jump to content
Indianapolis Colts
Indianapolis Colts Fan Forum

Grigson: "Freeney is a Colt, period" [Merge]


Recommended Posts

Their is very little loyalty in business if their was you would get what we have had to do this offseason, to rebuild most of team from the ground up, look at the Patriots they retooled their team, released or traded all of their defense talent such as Bruschi, Harrison, law, I can go on and on, if you want loyalty it will more then likely come at the cost of winning and cap problems later on in a players career, sure they were great players but they got old and couldnt perform at the level they once could, Freeny will be no exception or any other player, you trade them while they still have value because winning demands that you do, also the cap hit would just set us back more not to mention sure we can all predict he will be able to play linebacker, but at his age and him never playing that position its not worth rolling the dice and setting us back

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 89
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

I wouldn't read too much into that quote.

Colts management has, in the past, said things that they had to take back.

I think I will cut the rookie GM some slack here, and allow him the flexibility to do what he thinks is right for the team, without taking away any of his tools to deal with the Freeney cap situation.

I agree about not reading too much into it. After all, Irsay said Manning would be back.

Link to post
Share on other sites

We can't pay him $19M next season, that must be addressed. Even of he stays I don't think he'll do well as a 3-4 OLB and will sign with a 4-3 team next year. If on draft day someone offers a late 1st or 2nd DO IT GRIGSON.

Completely agree...Maybe they are smokescreening the other NFL teams trying to drive up his value. Of course we're not gonna outright cut a guy that still is a pro bowl DE. So for other teams to get him, they will have to give up at least a high 3rd or 2nd.

Link to post
Share on other sites

The only way he gets released is if we're after bigger fish and need his cap space, but we're not. SO, we either wait for draft day to make the move, wait for the start of the season OR keep him. So ask yourself this question, how many teams have the cap space for him if he gets traded to them right now?

Link to post
Share on other sites

The franchise isn't asking him to be loyal. In my scenario above, they're asking him to accept guaranteed money equal to MORE than what he's due to make this year, plus bonuses and salary in each of the next three years. It works out in Freeney's favor, even if he's cut in training camp this year.

And, long story short, if Freeney or his agent are willing to make an idealistic stand similar to what you're suggesting they are, in the name of walking away from millions of guaranteed dollars, then they are being ridiculous. Loyalty isn't the currency of the NFL; currency is.

If Freeney did as you suggested, extend his contract, would that not give the Franchise more cap space. If your answer is yes, then Freeney is being a loyal Colt and helped the team. Now my question is, would this not make Freeney's contract more trade friendly as well?
Link to post
Share on other sites

"He will be a Colt" in the 2012 defense...pretty clear...if this is true without a contract extension, it is possible that the Colts want to find out if Freeney can be as effective in a new scheme before they offer him a huge 3 or 4 year deal and because he is such a great player they are willing to overpay this year to find out.......

Link to post
Share on other sites

If Freeney did as you suggested, extend his contract, would that not give the Franchise more cap space. If your answer is yes, then Freeney is being a loyal Colt and helped the team. Now my question is, would this not make Freeney's contract more trade friendly as well?

It would help the team, but not because of Freeney's loyalty to the team. It would be because he's getting paid more and in a better way than under his current contract. Please understand: we can cut Freeney on August 31st and not pay him a dime of that $14 million base salary (if I understand his contract correctly). If he agreed to an extension as I proposed, he'd get equal to his base salary of $14 million right now, plus another $2 million on June 1. It's to his benefit, dramatically so.

Can you imagine Freeney saying, "out of loyalty to the Colts, I'm agreeing to an extension that's going to guarantee me more money than the contract I'm on right now, and it's going to keep me with the Colts for the foreseeable future"? How does that make sense? Just because an extension would benefit the team doesn't mean Freeney's motivation is necessarily loyalty.

Loyalty to the team is what Reggie Wayne did when he turned down more money to come back to Indy as a free agent. If Freeney refuses an extension as proposed above, it's because his desire to leave outweighs his desire to cash a $14 million check from the Colts, and he thinks he can get that same money (or more) elsewhere. Loyalty is completely, totally, and in all other ways irrelevant.

As to whether it would make his contract more tradeable, the answer is yes. But it would drastically lower our incentive to trade him, because a) his cap hit would be significantly less, and b) we'd have paid him a $14 million bonus, essentially for the rights to trade him for a draft pick. That's not gonna happen. If we reach terms with Freeney on an extension, as proposed, it's reasonable to assume he'll play that contract out as a Colt, assuming he stays healthy and plays at a high level.

Link to post
Share on other sites

"He will be a Colt" in the 2012 defense...pretty clear...if this is true without a contract extension, it is possible that the Colts want to find out if Freeney can be as effective in a new scheme before they offer him a huge 3 or 4 year deal and because he is such a great player they are willing to overpay this year to find out.......

That's the flip side to it: see what he looks like in this scheme, and then offer him the extension after the season is underway.

The problem is that we don't have the cap space to fill out our 80 man roster at the moment, and the albatross is Freeney's $19 million cap hit.

Link to post
Share on other sites

It's about time for Mr. Freeney to get out of here. Love the guy and it was a privilege watching him play but we need to trade him or cut him ASAP. The complete rebooting of this franchise is already underway and we need some cap space to button up some things we have yet to address. See ya later 93

Link to post
Share on other sites

It would help the team, but not because of Freeney's loyalty to the team. It would be because he's getting paid more and in a better way than under his current contract. Please understand: we can cut Freeney on August 31st and not pay him a dime of that $14 million base salary (if I understand his contract correctly). If he agreed to an extension as I proposed, he'd get equal to his base salary of $14 million right now, plus another $2 million on June 1. It's to his benefit, dramatically so.

Can you imagine Freeney saying, "out of loyalty to the Colts, I'm agreeing to an extension that's going to guarantee me more money than the contract I'm on right now, and it's going to keep me with the Colts for the foreseeable future"? How does that make sense? Just because an extension would benefit the team doesn't mean Freeney's motivation is necessarily loyalty.

Loyalty to the team is what Reggie Wayne did when he turned down more money to come back to Indy as a free agent. If Freeney refuses an extension as proposed above, it's because his desire to leave outweighs his desire to cash a $14 million check from the Colts, and he thinks he can get that same money (or more) elsewhere. Loyalty is completely, totally, and in all other ways irrelevant.

As to whether it would make his contract more tradeable, the answer is yes. But it would drastically lower our incentive to trade him, because a) his cap hit would be significantly less, and b) we'd have paid him a $14 million bonus, essentially for the rights to trade him for a draft pick. That's not gonna happen. If we reach terms with Freeney on an extension, as proposed, it's reasonable to assume he'll play that contract out as a Colt, assuming he stays healthy and plays at a high level.

You just made my discussion on why not. It makes his contract more trade friendly. If Freeney extends it helps the Colts and takes away his ability to decide where he wants to play.
Link to post
Share on other sites

You just made my discussion on why not. It makes his contract more trade friendly. If Freeney extends it helps the Colts and takes away his ability to decide where he wants to play.

Okay, I get it now. Freeney would turn down $16 million guaranteed money in the name of not giving the Colts a window in which to trade him. That makes a lot of sense.

/sarcasm

Never mind the fact that the Colts aren't going to pay Freeney a $14 million signing bonus and then turn around and trade him. Being practical, an extension makes much more sense for Freeney than anything else. The only way he'd prefer to keep his current contract would be if he prefers to be cut. And maybe he does, but that isn't the smart decision. The smart decision is to agree to an extension. More money now, more money later. He can't lose.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I enjoy sarcasm, but just does not change the facts. If Freeney extends his contract, he is only guaranteed 1 year as a Colt then???? In 2013 Freeney could be traded to Washington, Miami, or BFE and why, because he has given away his say in where he goes. If Freeney does not want to extend, cut him and let him decide his own career.

Link to post
Share on other sites

There is something not right in this process with Freeney

In 2012 we have no shot at being a SB team. This team, in 2012, wont sniff the playoffs.

I am an eternal fan...... But it aint happening..... This year....

Maybe we strive and win 6-8 games.

He doesnt appear to have a true position at his size and pass rush only skillset in a 3-4

Losing 14 million in cap space opportunity, for a one year player, doesnt make sense to me.

Why not use this year to develop a player, that we can count on?

I think that we didnt get an attractive offer for Freeney, and the management felt that the

Potential team was only going to wait till Freeney was released, then scoop him up.

This MAY be posturing on the Colts side........

I still look for a draft day trade..........

Link to post
Share on other sites

two things...

1) we keep talking about freeney in 3-4, when Pagano has said repeatedly that it will be a 3-4/4-3 hybrid D. Freeney played more only on passing downs last year anyway, it probably will not be much different this year.

2) if you are Pagano, a D-oriented coach, do you want Freeney around to be able to scheme with? I would absolutely. We have been complaining about Meeks/Coyer and their lack of creativity. We are moving from a base 4-3 Tampa 2 kind of D to some kind of hybrid that we have not seen. Could be that it is Pagano who is insisting on having Freeney to fill out some of his plans for the D. Playoffs next year or not, you have to put some tools in the man's hand to allow him to shine in his strength.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Freeney did reportedly hire Condon recently.

It makes zero sense to keep him at a 19 million cap hit.

I agree 100% freeney no way no how needs to stay on roster for that cap hit . Its insane cut him lose what 6 mill sign a true 3-4 A Nt and a CB .We have too many needs to keep 1 and drop the rest like we have.I understand we are rebuilding Rome wasnt built in a day but with our cap space next year with all this dead money this year. Lets start building a competitive team now get the feel of the 3-4 with FA and draft picks get a TE CB NT,Then next year and beyond we can fill fewer holes on roster and be right back competing for AFC south title.
Link to post
Share on other sites

I enjoy sarcasm, but just does not change the facts. If Freeney extends his contract, he is only guaranteed 1 year as a Colt then???? In 2013 Freeney could be traded to Washington, Miami, or BFE and why, because he has given away his say in where he goes. If Freeney does not want to extend, cut him and let him decide his own career.

That's the way contracts work, my friend. Please understand, though, that the Colts have very little incentive to trade him after paying him $17 million in the first year of the contract. Especially when he'll be on the roster with a very realistic cap hit moving forward.

By your rationale, no player would ever agree to an extension. You're missing the point entirely.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I enjoy sarcasm, but just does not change the facts. If Freeney extends his contract, he is only guaranteed 1 year as a Colt then???? In 2013 Freeney could be traded to Washington, Miami, or BFE and why, because he has given away his say in where he goes. If Freeney does not want to extend, cut him and let him decide his own career.

That's the way contracts work, my friend. Please understand, though, that the Colts have very little incentive to trade him after paying him $17 million in the first year of the contract. Especially when he'll be on the roster with a very realistic cap hit moving forward.

By your rationale, no player would ever agree to an extension. You're missing the point entirely.

Another thing: If Freeney is as concerned about being traded as you think he is, we can simply put a no-trade clause in his contract. Problem solved.

Link to post
Share on other sites

The cap hit is for this year and this year only. We weren't gonna have a whole lot of money to spend anyway with all the dead-cap money we have anyway. Worse comes to worse we take the full cap hit and proceed forward. There's nothing else we can really get this year anyway.

Link to post
Share on other sites

The problem with paying him the 14 million base this year, is similar to the Panthers when they paid Peppers under the franchise tag. The next year he was gone.

It's the same thing Polian did with Edge. Paid him the franchise tag and then he was gone.

In all 3 cases, Freeney, Peppers & Edge, the team should have taken that one year money and made it part of a signing bonus and signed each of them to an extension. One would argue Peppers had the most left of these 3 examples and would deserve more money and/or a longer deal, but in all 3 cases it was foolish to pay the player what they did in that one year without having it lock them up for a least 2-3 more years or longer in Peppers case.

Link to post
Share on other sites

The problem with paying him the 14 million base this year, is similar to the Panthers when they paid Peppers under the franchise tag. The next year he was gone.

It's the same thing Polian did with Edge. Paid him the franchise tag and then he was gone.

In all 3 cases, Freeney, Peppers & Edge, the team should have taken that one year money and made it part of a signing bonus and signed each of them to an extension. One would argue Peppers had the most left of these 3 examples and would deserve more money and/or a longer deal, but in all 3 cases it was foolish to pay the player what they did in that one year without having it lock them up for a least 2-3 more years or longer in Peppers case.

I think that Polian's plan with Edge. They didn't want to lock him long term for the kind of money Edge wanted anymore because they knew he was close to being on the downside of his career which is why when he was a free agent Polian didn't offer Edge a huge contract to stay.

As for Freeney the reports are Freeney doesn't want to redo his contract or at least hasn't to this point, of course that can change. Till it does though the Colts can't make him sign an extension if he doesn't want too. Also who knows maybe the Colts don't want him to sign one because they want to see if Freeney is going to work in the new system or not. At this point if Freeney doesn't work out you have an out to let him go sign with another team rather than being locked into along term contract that would cost money to get out of.

Link to post
Share on other sites

The problem with paying him the 14 million base this year, is similar to the Panthers when they paid Peppers under the franchise tag. The next year he was gone.

It's the same thing Polian did with Edge. Paid him the franchise tag and then he was gone.

In all 3 cases, Freeney, Peppers & Edge, the team should have taken that one year money and made it part of a signing bonus and signed each of them to an extension. One would argue Peppers had the most left of these 3 examples and would deserve more money and/or a longer deal, but in all 3 cases it was foolish to pay the player what they did in that one year without having it lock them up for a least 2-3 more years or longer in Peppers case.

There's no point to an extension if we find out this year he doesn't really work in the new scheme. Better to take the hit now then not have to worry about anything for the future if he doesn't pan out or doesn't produce.

Link to post
Share on other sites

There's no point to an extension if we find out this year he doesn't really work in the new scheme. Better to take the hit now then not have to worry about anything for the future if he doesn't pan out or doesn't produce.

If you convert his salary to a signing bonus, and in turn lower his cap hit, you can give him the one year audition you're suggesting, and then release him after this season if it doesn't work out. Only issue is you'll be left with a dead cap hit after this season. The amount of the dead cap hit depends on the date of the release.

Link to post
Share on other sites

There's no point to an extension if we find out this year he doesn't really work in the new scheme. Better to take the hit now then not have to worry about anything for the future if he doesn't pan out or doesn't produce.

That is a fair point about taking the hit now, but @ 19 million it is foolish. He's better off being released and using the 14 million elsewhere. The decision can be made later in OTA's and training camp. They will know whether he's going to fit or not.

I think that Polian's plan with Edge. They didn't want to lock him long term for the kind of money Edge wanted anymore because they knew he was close to being on the downside of his career which is why when he was a free agent Polian didn't offer Edge a huge contract to stay.

As for Freeney the reports are Freeney doesn't want to redo his contract or at least hasn't to this point, of course that can change. Till it does though the Colts can't make him sign an extension if he doesn't want too. Also who knows maybe the Colts don't want him to sign one because they want to see if Freeney is going to work in the new system or not.

They they should have discarded him instead of tagging him. I know he wasn't offered a huge contract to stay. As I said above, the team will know at some point this off season whether Freeney fits the scheme or not, and the longer the wait the fewer trade partners they will have because the cap space will evaporate.

Edge had a franchise tag of 8.08 in 2005.

His contract in Arizona had 11.5 in guaranteed money 7 million signing bonus and 4.5 roster bonus due in year 1.

Mismanagement in my opinion.

Link to post
Share on other sites

That is a fair point about taking the hit now, but @ 19 million it is foolish. He's better off being released and using the 14 million elsewhere. The decision can be made later in OTA's and training camp. They will know whether he's going to fit or not.

They they should have discarded him instead of tagging him. I know he wasn't offered a huge contract to stay. As I said above, the team will know at some point this off season whether Freeney fits the scheme or not, and the longer the wait the fewer trade partners they will have because the cap space will evaporate.

Edge had a franchise tag of 8.08 in 2005.

His contract in Arizona had 11.5 in guaranteed money 7 million signing bonus and 4.5 roster bonus due in year 1.

Mismanagement in my opinion.

They wanted to bring him back for another run in 2005, it made sense to tag him that year. They didn't want to dump Edge, they just didn't want to pay him a big long term contract anymore. It's not like Edge didn't produce results either. We started 13-0 that year and we won about three of those games early in the season largely because of him running the ball because it took a while for the passing game to get going. Polian also knew the 2006 draft was supposed to be a running back deep draft and knew they had a pretty good chance at getting a running back in that draft that would be pretty good. He also knew they would still have Rhodes who had been a 1,000 yard back in the past. Since the guy they got and Rhodes played a huge role in us winning a Super Bowl and Edge went down hill very fast after he left Indy it's very hard to say Polian got that one wrong. It might have been about the last time Polian got something right but he got that one right.

Link to post
Share on other sites

If you convert his salary to a signing bonus, and in turn lower his cap hit, you can give him the one year audition you're suggesting, and then release him after this season if it doesn't work out. Only issue is you'll be left with a dead cap hit after this season. The amount of the dead cap hit depends on the date of the release.

How about take the 19Million cap hit with no strings attached and go about it that route? There's not many players we can get that are left on the F/A market or in the draft that would really impact the way that Freeney would be able to, even at this stage in his career. We are planning to be big spenders next year it looks like so why continue the string of dead cap hits into next year?

Link to post
Share on other sites

They wanted to bring him back for another run in 2005, it made sense to tag him that year. They didn't want to dump Edge, they just didn't want to pay him a big long term contract anymore. It's not like Edge didn't produce results either. We started 13-0 that year and we won about three of those games early in the season largely because of him running the ball because it took a while for the passing game to get going. Polian also knew the 2006 draft was supposed to be a running back deep draft and knew they had a pretty good chance at getting a running back in that draft that would be pretty good. He also knew they would still have Rhodes who had been a 1,000 yard back in the past. Since the guy they got and Rhodes played a huge role in us winning a Super Bowl and Edge went down hill very fast after he left Indy it's very hard to say Polian got that one wrong. It might have been about the last time Polian got something right but he got that one right.

It makes more sense giving him 3.5 million more and have him for 3 more years. You still have Rhodes and James/RHodes would cost more than Addai/Rhodes, but I would still take James 06-08 over Addai. James had more yards, Addai had more TD's but Arizona threw more in the RZ than the Colts. In hindsight it worked out, but I still feel it was the wrong decision and having James for 06-08 would have been better than Addai even if James wasn't in his prime.

Link to post
Share on other sites

It makes more sense giving him 3.5 million more and have him for 3 more years. You still have Rhodes and James/RHodes would cost more than Addai/Rhodes, but I would still take James 06-08 over Addai. James had more yards, Addai had more TD's but Arizona threw more in the RZ than the Colts. In hindsight it worked out, but I still feel it was the wrong decision and having James for 06-08 would have been better than Addai even if James wasn't in his prime.

That might have worked till 2008 but the plan with Addai was to get a back who would last beyond 2008. After 2008 Edge would have been done and we would have probably stil let Rhodes walk so now you are looking at a team with no running back as well as a bad o-line that had to be rebuilt at the sametime.

Also the Cardinals gave Edge 30 million over four years. That was more money than the Colts were willing to give Edge and more years than they were willing to give Edge because they knew his production wouldn't last the life of the contract to warrent that money and it didn't. Compare that to Addai's five year 11 .6 million dollar rookie contract for a team that did have cap concerns it's easy to see why the Colts weren't willing to pay that kind of money for Edge.

Edge is the one time Polian didn't over pay to keep a fan favorite here. Fans have spent the past year saying those contracts helped lead us to the mess we are in now with the cap. Now you are trying to rip Polian for making the hard call fans have said he should have done other times even though this move resulted in a Super Bowl win. Sorry, you can try to spin it however you want but this time Polian got it right. Like I said it might have been the last time Polian made the right call with someone's contract here but he got it right.

Link to post
Share on other sites

That might have worked till 2008 but the plan with Addai was to get a back who would last beyond 2008. After 2008 Edge would have been done and we would have probably stil let Rhodes walk so now you are looking at a team with no running back as well as a bad o-line that had to be rebuilt at the sametime.

Also the Cardinals gave Edge 30 million over four years. That was more money than the Colts were willing to give Edge and more years than they were willing to give Edge because they knew his production wouldn't last the life of the contract to warrent that money and it didn't. Compare that to Addai's five year 11 .6 million dollar rookie contract for a team that did have cap concerns it's easy to see why the Colts weren't willing to pay that kind of money for Edge.

Edge is the one time Polian didn't over pay to keep a fan favorite here. Fans have spent the past year saying those contracts helped lead us to the mess we are in now with the cap. Now you are trying to rip Polian for making the hard call fans have said he should have done other times even though this move resulted in a Super Bowl win. Sorry, you can try to spin it however you want but this time Polian got it right. Like I said it might have been the last time Polian made the right call with someone's contract here but he got it right.

We disagree end of story.
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...