Chris Ballard end of season presser tomorrow 1 pm

[shasta519 2,824]

6 minutes ago, Superman said:

 

I thought he had one year left, but you're right. Two years, then a void in 2023. So remove the contract part from the equation. Still would have to trade for him.

 

I think there would still be a new deal involved. They would have to do it the following offseason anyways...so getting it done a year early...could help to lock in a structure that makes it easier to extend players. And if you are trading for Stafford...you are committing to him as your starting QB for several years...and the contract is symbolic of that.

 

Trying to think of a recent QB trade (other than Foles)...but it just doesn't really happen at QB very often.

[Stephen 1,825]

Just now, shasta519 said:

 

I think there would still be a new deal involved. They would have to do it the following offseason anyways...so getting it done a year early...could help to lock in a structure that makes it easier to extend players. And if you are trading for Stafford...you are committing to him as your starting QB for several years...and the contract is symbolic of that.

 

Trying to think of a recent QB trade (other than Foles)...but it just doesn't really happen at QB very often.

I guess we'll  know in march

[shasta519 2,824]

4 minutes ago, Chloe6124 said:

Well if we have to add years that  would be a pass for me.

 

They wouldn't have to...but I think they would. But "adding years" only matters based on how a contract is structured. They could do it in a way that still allowed for outs.

 

Stafford will be 33...I don't think the Colts are trading for him to be a two-year rental. The draft capital wouldn't justify that. I think the idea would be to have him be their QB for the next half decade. And they would likely give him an extension next offseason (when he only has one year left on his deal) anyways...so adding years would happen at some point.

 

All moot...because I don't think Stafford gets dealt.

 

 

[Superman 9,189]

11 minutes ago, shasta519 said:

 

I think there would still be a new deal involved. They would have to do it the following offseason anyways...so getting it done a year early...could help to lock in a structure that makes it easier to extend players. And if you are trading for Stafford...you are committing to him as your starting QB for several years...and the contract is symbolic of that.

 

Trying to think of a recent QB trade (other than Foles)...but it just doesn't really happen at QB very often.

 

It's possible, but less definite than it would be if he had only one year like I thought.

[tvturner 279]

The Colts offense with Philip is the 3rd highest scoring offense in team history

He had the 2nd best single-season completion% in team history behind Manning

 

I wouldn't write him off

[Superman 9,189]

2 minutes ago, tvturner said:

The Colts offense with Philip is the 3rd highest scoring offense in team history

He had the 2nd best single-season completion% in team history behind Manning

 

I wouldn't write him off

 

Scored a lot of defensive TDs, so let's account for that. And completion percentage is going through the roof lately.

 

[compuls1v3 541]

30 minutes ago, TimetobringDfence! said:

I also got the vibe from Ballard that another lineman isn't as high on his list as many think. He kept reiterating how good our four guys we got now are upfront.

I got that vibe too.  Like we have the right group of guys, just gotta move them around.

[GoColts8818 4,562]

My takes:  wants to keep Rivers but both sides need time

 

likes Eason but isn’t sold on him as the backup yet let alone the starter.  I don’t expect the Colts to roll with him as the starter

 

he isn’t going to force the QB pick because he knows if he misses it he’s done.

 

he wants one QB to be the guy going forward and is willing to make a move if he feels “the” guy is within their reach

 

Like TY and wants him back if TY understands he’s not in his prime anymore. 

 

Hes not giving up on Campbell or Banogu yet but it’s put up or shut up time for them.  

 

he’d like to keep Walker, Jacoby, and Mack but seems realistic that they won’t be able too.

 

Loves the four starters on the line and think Painter and Holden have futures as depth but knows more needs to be done.

 

Defense is a work in progress.

 

Didnt say much about Autry or Houston’s futures.

 

made it clear they liked what Rhodes did but didn’t drop a hint about re-signing him or not.

 

has zero issue with the way Frank coaches and likes the staff but like anything it can always get better.  
 

Seems to view the window as wide open.  

[Smoke317 1,300]

I fear that if we bring Rivers back and he regresses any then the season will be lost and a waste because we could have had a younger guy who’s gonna be here for a few years.  A bad season could still be seen as a season of growth. So I definitely think we look at veterans like Stafford or possibly Carr.  Darnold could be in the mix (not a fan).  Or we go up in the draft and get our guy of the future.  We need to find a way to move up in the draft.  What would it take for us to get up from 21 to top 5?

[Shepman 139]

1 hour ago, Superman said:

 

That's an interesting perspective, and one that's as legitimate as anything anyone else has said.

 

To the bolded, fill me in. Who screwed who over, and what comments about JB was Ballard apologizing for at the end?? I feel like I missed a connection somewhere.

Last year Ballard stated the following which is what he referred to today in the presser about messing up and using the wrong choice of words.  Colts GM Chris Ballard says 'jury is still out' referring to Brissett as QB for 2020

[GoColts8818 4,562]

1 minute ago, Smoke317 said:

I fear that if we bring Rivers back and he regresses any then the season will be lost and a waste because we could have had a younger guy who’s gonna be here for a few years.  A bad season could still be seen as a season of growth. So I definitely think we look at veterans like Stafford or possibly Carr.  Darnold could be in the mix (not a fan).  Or we go up in the draft and get our guy of the future.  We need to find a way to move up in the draft.  What would it take for us to get up from 21 to top 5?

And if you force the pick and draft a guy whose a bust your going to set the franchise back five years and waste five years at least.  It cuts both ways.  There is no such thing as a sure thing in the NFL.  That’s why it’s best to trust guys like Ballard who have proven they can be trusted and if he rolls with Rivers know it’s a year by year commitment and if it doesn’t work one year you move on the next.  Better that than forcing the pick and being set back five years or longer on a miss.  

[danlhart87 7,379]

7 minutes ago, GoColts8818 said:

And if you force the pick and draft a guy whose a bust your going to set the franchise back five years and waste five years at least.  It cuts both ways.  There is no such thing as a sure thing in the NFL.  That’s why it’s best to trust guys like Ballard who have proven they can be trusted and if he rolls with Rivers know it’s a year by year commitment and if it doesn’t work one year you move on the next.  Better that than forcing the pick and being set back five years or longer on a miss.  

Some point Ballard is gonna have to take a risk whether it's trading 1 for Stafford or taking a QB in 1st possibly even trading up.

 

I am ok bringing Rivers back 1 year but I don't want him beyond that.

[tvturner 279]

11 minutes ago, Superman said:

 

Scored a lot of defensive TDs, so let's account for that. And completion percentage is going through the roof lately.

 

2020 (Rivers): 451 points scored, 42 points off of defensive TDs

2014 (Luck): 458 points scored, 12 points off of defensive TDs

2004 (Manning): 522 points scored, 24 points off of defensive TDs

 

It's still a top 10 scoring offense in team history accounting for defensive TDs

[Indeee 368]

The NFL has a QB issue right now and unfortunately our Colts are in that conversation. There are 13-15 teams including us that need QBs NOW or will within next couple years. That is major and should not be glossed over. Half the league. It will mean that a lot of teams will reach via draft and over pay via FA and when that happens it sometimes forces those who don't normally play that way to play that way.

 

With the QB class not as good/deep in 2022, the Colts are in a really tough spot. This is why Rivers is most likely the one Indy will end up with and Rivers will play this game of waffling until he gets his number or just shy of it and it won't be 15-18 mil. It will be higher, as NFL agents understand the landscape I alluded to above better than anyone. It's this that will hamper the Colts long term and short term other needs financially.

 

The Colts should tell Rivers to go pound sand and get the pieces needed other than the QB. Meaning don't over pay for the QB.

 

Trade for Darnold if available, sign Trubisky on an economically friendly prove it deal or bring back Chad. I know all these might be unpopular however we need to allow this team to compete as a team. Defense, special teams, running game, etc.

 

This team does not need a super star QB to win. All it needs is a top 10 defense, top 12 offense and a top 15 special teams unit to win. If these numbers or better are reached we are in contention every year.

[jvan1973 5,331]

3 minutes ago, Indeee said:

The NFL has a QB issue right now and unfortunately our Colts are in that conversation. There are 13-15 teams including us that need QBs NOW or will within next couple years. That is major and should not be glossed over. Half the league. It will mean that a lot of teams will reach via draft and over pay via FA and when that happens it sometimes forces those who don't normally play that way to play that way.

 

With the QB class not as good/deep in 2022, the Colts are in a really tough spot. This is why Rivers is most likely the one Indy will end up with and Rivers will play this game of waffling until he gets his number or just shy of it and it won't be 15-18 mil. It will be higher, as NFL agents understand the landscape I alluded to above better than anyone. It's this that will hamper the Colts long term and short term other needs financially.

 

The Colts should tell Rivers to go pound sand and get the pieces needed other than the QB. Meaning don't over pay for the QB.

 

Trade for Darnold if available, sign Trubisky on an economically friendly prove it deal or bring back Chad. I know all these might be unpopular however we need to allow this team to compete as a team. Defense, special teams, running game, etc.

 

This team does not need a super star QB to win. All it needs is a top 10 defense, top 12 offense and a top 15 special teams unit to win. If these numbers or better are reached we are in contention every year.

Bring back Chad.  

[Indeee 368]

1 minute ago, jvan1973 said:

Bring back Chad.  

As I said... most likely unpopular take

[Smoke317 1,300]

6 minutes ago, tvturner said:

2020 (Rivers): 451 points scored, 42 points off of defensive TDs

2014 (Luck): 458 points scored, 12 points off of defensive TDs

2004 (Manning): 522 points scored, 24 points off of defensive TDs

 

It's still a top 10 scoring offense in team history accounting for defensive TDs

You gotta take into account we faced the easiest schedule in the league too.  How many top defenses did we face this year?

[jvan1973 5,331]

Just now, Indeee said:

As I said... most likely unpopular take

Because it's terrible

[Superman 9,189]

6 minutes ago, tvturner said:

2020 (Rivers): 451 points scored, 42 points off of defensive TDs

2014 (Luck): 458 points scored, 12 points off of defensive TDs

2004 (Manning): 522 points scored, 24 points off of defensive TDs

 

It's still a top 10 scoring offense in team history accounting for defensive TDs

 

Assuming your stats are accurate, subtracting defensive TDs (didn't mention STs scores, btw):

 

2020: 409

2014: 446

2004: 498

 

There's a clear separation here, right? And top ten is different from top three. 

 

Not meant to be a knock on Rivers. Just saying total points and completion percentage aren't great indicators of whether a QB is good enough to contend with.

[Indeee 368]

1 minute ago, jvan1973 said:

Because it's terrible

Your opinion is documented.... 

[Superman 9,189]

21 minutes ago, Shepman said:

Last year Ballard stated the following which is what he referred to today in the presser about messing up and using the wrong choice of words.  Colts GM Chris Ballard says 'jury is still out' referring to Brissett as QB for 2020

 

JB must have taken exception to that comment. I had no problem with it, it was honest. They weren't sold on JB, and that comment made it obvious.

[Smoke317 1,300]

6 minutes ago, Indeee said:

The NFL has a QB issue right now and unfortunately our Colts are in that conversation. There are 13-15 teams including us that need QBs NOW or will within next couple years. That is major and should not be glossed over. Half the league. It will mean that a lot of teams will reach via draft and over pay via FA and when that happens it sometimes forces those who don't normally play that way to play that way.

 

With the QB class not as good/deep in 2022, the Colts are in a really tough spot. This is why Rivers is most likely the one Indy will end up with and Rivers will play this game of waffling until he gets his number or just shy of it and it won't be 15-18 mil. It will be higher, as NFL agents understand the landscape I alluded to above better than anyone. It's this that will hamper the Colts long term and short term other needs financially.

 

The Colts should tell Rivers to go pound sand and get the pieces needed other than the QB. Meaning don't over pay for the QB.

 

Trade for Darnold if available, sign Trubisky on an economically friendly prove it deal or bring back Chad. I know all these might be unpopular however we need to allow this team to compete as a team. Defense, special teams, running game, etc.

 

This team does not need a super star QB to win. All it needs is a top 10 defense, top 12 offense and a top 15 special teams unit to win. If these numbers or better are reached we are in contention every year.

Top 10 defense.  Top 12 offense. Don’t forget we faced the easiest schedule in the league.  And only got in because of expanded playoffs. I don’t know if those metrics will be enough if we face stiffer competition next year.  We still lose to the majority of AFC playoff teams every year. Have to fix that.  That’s the difference between 11-5 barely getting in and going on the road for wild card weekend or being a top 3 seed. This team should have been 12-4 at the worst. 13-3 was easily attainable with 6 All Pros. 

[Smoke317 1,300]

10 minutes ago, Indeee said:

The NFL has a QB issue right now and unfortunately our Colts are in that conversation. There are 13-15 teams including us that need QBs NOW or will within next couple years. That is major and should not be glossed over. Half the league. It will mean that a lot of teams will reach via draft and over pay via FA and when that happens it sometimes forces those who don't normally play that way to play that way.

 

With the QB class not as good/deep in 2022, the Colts are in a really tough spot. This is why Rivers is most likely the one Indy will end up with and Rivers will play this game of waffling until he gets his number or just shy of it and it won't be 15-18 mil. It will be higher, as NFL agents understand the landscape I alluded to above better than anyone. It's this that will hamper the Colts long term and short term other needs financially.

 

The Colts should tell Rivers to go pound sand and get the pieces needed other than the QB. Meaning don't over pay for the QB.

 

Trade for Darnold if available, sign Trubisky on an economically friendly prove it deal or bring back Chad. I know all these might be unpopular however we need to allow this team to compete as a team. Defense, special teams, running game, etc.

 

This team does not need a super star QB to win. All it needs is a top 10 defense, top 12 offense and a top 15 special teams unit to win. If these numbers or better are reached we are in contention every year.

Darnold, Trubisky, & Chad???  You’re trying to sink us to the bottom of the AFC South. 

[GoColts8818 4,562]

15 minutes ago, danlhart87 said:

Some point Ballard is gonna have to take a risk whether it's trading 1 for Stafford or taking a QB in 1st possibly even trading up.

 

I am ok bringing Rivers back 1 year but I don't want him beyond that.

I don’t think it’s going to be an issue beyond this year, and who knows it might not be this year, as I think if Rivers comes back it’s for one year and then he’s done. 
 

I think Ballard is willing to make a move for a guy who he thinks is “the” guy.  He’s not going to force it though just because the team needs a QB of the future and take a guy he doesn’t really believe in.  
 

I am NOT saying Ballard won’t find that guy this off-season.  I think he made it clear they are looking for him and if they find him they will try to get him.  I just don’t expect him to mortgage the future for a guy or force it is all.  

[compuls1v3 541]

1 minute ago, Smoke317 said:

Darnold, Trubisky, & Chad???  You’re trying to sink us to the bottom of the AFC South. 

Only way to get a pick in the top 10? LOL.... 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

to be clear, I would NEVER be FOR that kind of strategy.

[Indeee 368]

1 minute ago, Smoke317 said:

Top 10 defense.  Top 12 offense. Don’t forget we faced the easiest schedule in the league.  And only got in because of expanded playoffs. I don’t know if those metrics will be enough if we face stiffer competition next year.  We still lose to the majority of AFC playoff teams every year. Have to fix that.  That’s the difference between 11-5 barely getting in and going on the road for wild card weekend or being a top 3 seed. This team should have been 12-4 at the worst. 13-3 was easily attainable with 6 All Pros. 

I did state those numbers as an outlier and mentioned possibly posting numbers better than that. I think you get my point though. If this teams exceeds in ALL phases in the top echelon of effectiveness, a super star QB is not needed to constantly compete. A super star QB normally is utilized to over compensate for the areas of the team that are lacking. Teams has a defense in the 15-18 range and offense in top three. Its the "we give up 30 points a game but score 35 deal". We don't want that

[tvturner 279]

5 minutes ago, Smoke317 said:

You gotta take into account we faced the easiest schedule in the league too.  How many top defenses did we face this year?

2020:

Baltimore (2)

Pittsburgh (3)

Green Bay (13)

Buffalo (16)

 

2014: 

Baltimore (6)

Houston (7)

Patriots (8)

Dallas (15)

 

 

 

[jvan1973 5,331]

10 minutes ago, Indeee said:

Your opinion is documented.... 

It seems every GM in the league agrees.    Like you said,   many teams need a qb,  especially this year during covid.    He was never on a roster

[Indeee 368]

3 minutes ago, Smoke317 said:

Darnold, Trubisky, & Chad???  You’re trying to sink us to the bottom of the AFC South. 

Wow... seriously? You guys are really buying into this surface mentality too much. Other than Chad you are dealing with two QBs that have had serious coaching flaws. Darnold especially. Who cares if their metrics are not great at this point of their careers. With a better organization and coaching structure that can change. Here in Indy this team is built currently on playing great defense and a solid running game. In this formula you don't need a super star QB.

 

This is where the Indy fans are missing it imo. We are used to Manning (super star) with other than playoff/SB year, middle to less than average defense and Luck (super star) and terrible defense. We won games because of our super star QBs.

 

This team is not that. This team has the defense and the running game, that later year Manning and Luck never had. That's why you don't need an upper echelon QB. Sure it would be nice but not necessarily needed

[Chloe6124 9,805]

7 minutes ago, Indeee said:

Wow... seriously? You guys are really buying into this surface mentality too much. Other than Chad you are dealing with two QBs that have had serious coaching flaws. Darnold especially. Who cares if their metrics are not great at this point of their careers. With a better organization and coaching structure that can change. Here in Indy this team is built currently on playing great defense and a solid running game. In this formula you don't need a super star QB.

 

This is where the Indy fans are missing it imo. We are used to Manning (super star) with other than playoff/SB year, middle to less than average defense and Luck (super star) and terrible defense. We won games because of our super star QBs.

 

This team is not that. This team has the defense and the running game, that later year Manning and Luck never had. That's why you don't need an upper echelon QB. Sure it would be nice but not necessarily needed

When all is said and done yes we need a star QB. Every team needs a QB that can go run a two minute offense and be able to three down field and make plays  All four QB left in the afc are stars. Even in the NFC.

[richard pallo 2,570]

This 30 day window on Rivers is really telling.  It strikes me as an evaluation period more so for the Colts.  We tried one year at 25M does it make sense to do it again with him one year older?  The bar has been set as a playoff team.  What are the odds he can do it again?  If we fall short after investing another year in an older QB it will not be perceived as a good decision.  I am starting to think the Colts will use this time to gather information on the veteran marketplace.  Detroit just hired their new GM and Philly won't be too far behind.  I'm thinking we will know the availability of Stafford or Wentz fairly soon.  Most likely inside that 30 day window.  If they don't know then I don't think they will commit to Rivers until they know what other veteran choices they will have.  Now Rivers could retire and end it but if he does want to come back I don't think we will be in a rush to sign him until all other veteran options are considered.  I think the teams 1st choice will be to find another veteran QB to lead this team to a SB.  To trade up for a rookie seems like a real long shot to me.  The Titans found success with Tannehill.  No reason we couldn't do the same thing.  

[Indeee 368]

Just now, Chloe6124 said:

When all is said and done yes we need a star QB. Every team needs a QB that can go run a two minute offense and be able to three down field and make plays 

I agree. There has been moments where certain QBs have resurrected their careers with other teams after being thought of as busts. Tannehill is the most recent example. That's why you can't rule out Darnold or Trubisky, especially Darnold as Tannehill was with Gase too I believe so there is that. Tannehill has done well enough to get to AFC Champ game just a year ago with a team built with defense and running game. That's all I'm saying

[Chloe6124 9,805]

2 minutes ago, richard pallo said:

This 30 day window on Rivers is really telling.  It strikes me as an evaluation period more so for the Colts.  We tried one year at 25M does it make sense to do it again with him one year older?  The bar has been set as a playoff team.  What are the odds he can do it again?  If we fall short after investing another year in an older QB it will not be perceived as a good decision.  I am starting to think the Colts will use this time to gather information on the veteran marketplace.  Detroit just hired their new GM and Philly won't be too far behind.  I'm thinking we will know the availability of Stafford or Wentz fairly soon.  Most likely inside that 30 day window.  If they don't know then I don't think they will commit to Rivers until they know what other veteran choices they will have.  Now Rivers could retire and end it but if he does want to come back I don't think we will be in a rush to sign him until all other veteran options are considered.  I think the teams 1st choice will be to find another veteran QB to lead this team to a SB.  To trade up for a rookie seems like a real long shot to me.  The Titans found success with Tannehill.  No reason we couldn't do the same thing.  

Ballard was very clear this is exactly what they are doing.

[cdgacoltsfan 572]

40 minutes ago, Indeee said:

The NFL has a QB issue right now and unfortunately our Colts are in that conversation. There are 13-15 teams including us that need QBs NOW or will within next couple years. That is major and should not be glossed over. Half the league. It will mean that a lot of teams will reach via draft and over pay via FA and when that happens it sometimes forces those who don't normally play that way to play that way.

 

With the QB class not as good/deep in 2022, the Colts are in a really tough spot. This is why Rivers is most likely the one Indy will end up with and Rivers will play this game of waffling until he gets his number or just shy of it and it won't be 15-18 mil. It will be higher, as NFL agents understand the landscape I alluded to above better than anyone. It's this that will hamper the Colts long term and short term other needs financially.

 

The Colts should tell Rivers to go pound sand and get the pieces needed other than the QB. Meaning don't over pay for the QB.

 

Trade for Darnold if available, sign Trubisky on an economically friendly prove it deal or bring back Chad. I know all these might be unpopular however we need to allow this team to compete as a team. Defense, special teams, running game, etc.

 

This team does not need a super star QB to win. All it needs is a top 10 defense, top 12 offense and a top 15 special teams unit to win. If these numbers or better are reached we are in contention every year.

Oh no....not Chad again!

[Smoke317 1,300]

13 minutes ago, Indeee said:

Wow... seriously? You guys are really buying into this surface mentality too much. Other than Chad you are dealing with two QBs that have had serious coaching flaws. Darnold especially. Who cares if their metrics are not great at this point of their careers. With a better organization and coaching structure that can change. Here in Indy this team is built currently on playing great defense and a solid running game. In this formula you don't need a super star QB.

 

This is where the Indy fans are missing it imo. We are used to Manning (super star) with other than playoff/SB year, middle to less than average defense and Luck (super star) and terrible defense. We won games because of our super star QBs.

 

This team is not that. This team has the defense and the running game, that later year Manning and Luck never had. That's why you don't need an upper echelon QB. Sure it would be nice but not necessarily needed

There’s enough documented statistics that you could only be looking at the surface with Darnold & Trubisky.  Maybe they’re just not that good.  Plain and Simple.  Just because both were drafted high doesn’t mean they will ever be any good.  Honestly, nothing in their college numbers said that they should have been drafted that high anyway.  The only thing either have on Eason are that they were given the opportunity. 

[coming on strong 1,045]

it seems like ballard is fine withe the colts wrs and tight ends .   He loves pittman and cambell thinks ty still has good football left and loves the young guys potential like harris patmon dulin .   Same with the tight ends .   This tells me we are going for pass rusher corner and tackle early .  Ballard also is high on eason but wants one more year to watch him more .  I think colts will try to get a better QB then rivers in free agency or trades if not stick with rivers then move on to eason in 2022.

[Fluke_33 2,607]

Sounds like Mack and walker are gone.  I will root for them wherever they end up. 
 

also sounds like OL will be drafted early and often.  I look forward to that 

[Indeee 368]

13 minutes ago, Smoke317 said:

There’s enough documented statistics that you could only be looking at the surface with Darnold & Trubisky.  Maybe they’re just not that good.  Plain and Simple.  Just because both were drafted high doesn’t mean they will ever be any good.  Honestly, nothing in their college numbers said that they should have been drafted that high anyway.  The only thing either have on Eason are that they were given the opportunity. 

All that might be true. I just think it would be better to throw a more economic prove it deal to a guy like Trubisky, like the Titans did Tannehill then throw another 20-25 mil to Rivers. The potential 10 mil or more in savings could buy us another position of need and not really strap us that much in paying future guys like Nelson or Leonard. Either way I don't make the decisions good or bad

[ar7 247]

1 minute ago, coming on strong said:

it seems like ballard is fine withe the colts wrs and tight ends .   He loves pittman and cambell thinks ty still has good football left and loves the young guys potential like harris patmon dulin .   Same with the tight ends .   This tells me we are going for pass rusher corner and tackle early .  Ballard also is high on eason but wants one more year to watch him more .  I think colts will try to get a better QB then rivers in free agency or trades if not stick with rivers then move on to eason in 2022.

 

Yeah I agree it seems Ballard likes what they have at WR and TE. They are probably ok at WR for another year if they bring back Hilton. I can't say I feel the same about tight end. This team would really benefit if they were more explosive there. 

 

I think the only way they don't bring back Rivers is if they trade for Stafford, Wentz, or Darnold. Of course, they would need to want one of them and they would need to be available. Otherwise why not bring back Rivers? Even if they draft someone they are not going to be better than Rivers in year 1.  Hopefully things can get back to normal and they can see Eason in a full training camp and preseason games. Ballard isn't even comfortable with Eason as the backup at this point. (not saying that's wrong considering the circumstances) 

[TimetobringDfence! 411]

1 hour ago, Indeee said:

The NFL has a QB issue right now and unfortunately our Colts are in that conversation. There are 13-15 teams including us that need QBs NOW or will within next couple years. That is major and should not be glossed over. Half the league. It will mean that a lot of teams will reach via draft and over pay via FA and when that happens it sometimes forces those who don't normally play that way to play that way.

 

With the QB class not as good/deep in 2022, the Colts are in a really tough spot. This is why Rivers is most likely the one Indy will end up with and Rivers will play this game of waffling until he gets his number or just shy of it and it won't be 15-18 mil. It will be higher, as NFL agents understand the landscape I alluded to above better than anyone. It's this that will hamper the Colts long term and short term other needs financially.

 

The Colts should tell Rivers to go pound sand and get the pieces needed other than the QB. Meaning don't over pay for the QB.

 

Trade for Darnold if available, sign Trubisky on an economically friendly prove it deal or bring back Chad. I know all these might be unpopular however we need to allow this team to compete as a team. Defense, special teams, running game, etc.

 

This team does not need a super star QB to win. All it needs is a top 10 defense, top 12 offense and a top 15 special teams unit to win. If these numbers or better are reached we are in contention every year.

I think Chad Kelly is better than he gets credit for. But I want to say he signed with the Bills.