Jump to content
Indianapolis Colts
Indianapolis Colts Fan Forum

Matthew Stafford and the Lions have agreed to work on a trade (Merge)


Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, danlhart87 said:

That would be the ultimate up yours to Watson. 

 

You don't like it in Houston?

Well now you are the Lions QB 

 

:funny:

He has a no trade clause. He is only going to a team he chooses to.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 500
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

Please for the love of god Ballard don't give up a first for a stat QB

Rivers had really good teams, he just failed. Stafford was given the worst of the worst teams and coaches. He's a "stat" guy because that's all he has, just win a shoot out. He's no injury prone at al

You’re nuts if you wouldn’t give up the 21st pick for Stafford.    Sign me up. Pull the trigger, Ballard

Posted Images

9 minutes ago, w87r said:

He has a no trade clause. He is only going to a team he chooses to.

 

I don't think that actually gives him leverage. The Texans are gonna give him an ultimatum. Either play for team X or you're not getting traded at all.

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

 

I don't think that actually gives him leverage. The Texans are gonna give him an ultimatum. Either play for team X or you're not getting traded at all.

In that instance, he would still choose to. Its his choice. I imagine any team he wants to go to will give up a package good enough to get him. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, w87r said:

In that instance, he would still choose to. Its his choice. I imagine any team he wants to go to will give up a package good enough to get him. 

 

I don't think so. The Texans are gonna take the best offer no matter if Watson wants to play there or not.

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

He holds some cards.  There was a report that the deal to Indy is done and Stafford just needs to sign.  I could see where all compensation that goes back and forth between teams doesn't get executed until the moment Stafford signs a new contract.  I can see where we would have an advantage over SF at that point, if IND is where Stafford wants to go.

That was mentioned earlier in this thread. Apparently the guy that put that out is known for making a LOT of outlandish claims of "done deals" that never come close to being true. As much as I want to believe it, I'm taking his claims with a grain of salt.

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

 

I don't think so. The Texans are gonna take the best offer no matter if Watson wants to play there or not.

Again, a team he wants to go to will make the offer needed to acquire him.

 

It's been reported that he has thought it out and is prepared to sit and lose money if need be. At the end of the day it is his choice where he ends up and he is prepared to hold out If they try to trade him somewhere he doesn't want to go.

 

 

I get it though....you don't think so.

Link to post
Share on other sites
23 hours ago, hoosierhawk said:

Stafford could refuse to go to a team and threaten to hang it up and Detroit gets nothing. Stafford supposedly wants to end up in Indy according to a few sources and Detoit would be better off taking a little less from the Colts if the Colts offer is reasonable. Stafford wants out of Detroit period.

According to a report I seen on the Pat McAfee show the Colts was the 2nd choice for Stafford. 

San Francisco was #1. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Watson and the Texans will ultimately have to cooperate to get it done. The Texans will understandably insist on proper compensation, and  Watson may have to expand his wish list beyond the Jets and Miami. Perhaps a NFC team or two. But the Texans won't just trade him to anyone. They will need a clean break with a boatload of compensation, which won't happen if everyone isn't on the same page. No team will trade for Watson without the assurances that he will play for them. Too much at stake; too many moving parts. They'll be forced to find common ground, and it shouldn't be that hard. Any team needing a QB who is on Watson's approved list should be willing to move heaven and earth to get the guy. 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, w87r said:

Again, a team he wants to go to will make the offer needed to acquire him.

 

It's been reported that he has thought it out and is prepared to sit and lose money if need be. At the end of the day it is his choice where he ends up and he is prepared to hold out If they try to trade him somewhere he doesn't want to go.

 

 

I get it though....you don't think so.

 

You really see Watson sitting out and forfeiting 30 something million dollars.

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

 

You really see Watson sitting out and forfeiting 30 something million dollars.

Hes not going to have to. That's my point.

Link to post
Share on other sites
32 minutes ago, w87r said:

Hes not going to have to. That's my point.

 

But that's what saying. Either Watson plays for team X, plays for the Texans, or he sits out and loses millions.

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

 

But that's what saying. Either Watson plays for team X, plays for the Texans, or he sits out and loses millions.

He will not have to because a team he wants to go to, will give up the compensation needed to make the deal. The Texans are not going to just leave a distraction lingering around, they will move on. He doesn't have to forfeit "millions" to hold out and make things awkward for the team. Teams are not going to give up major compensation knowing he doesn't want to play for them. As @Hoose stated.

 

This back and forth is pointless. I told you 2 post ago, that "I get it, you don't think so". You have your opinion and I have mine.

 

What is the purpose of continuing the conversation with me?

 

Nothing you say will make me change my opinion on it. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, crazycolt1 said:

According to a report I seen on the Pat McAfee show the Colts was the 2nd choice for Stafford. 

San Francisco was #1. 

Could be. I read 2 or 3 reports that said Colts were #1. Probably only one person who knows for sure and we haven't heard from him.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
31 minutes ago, hoosierhawk said:

Could be. I read 2 or 3 reports that said Colts were #1. Probably only one person who knows for sure and we haven't heard from him.

The alarming thing to me is if Stafford goes to San Francisco he falls into that 70% tax bracket in CA. 

Add the cost of living between MI.,IN. and CA, that is a huge difference. People with big money are leaving CA in droves. 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, crazycolt1 said:

The alarming thing to me is if Stafford goes to San Francisco he falls into that 70% tax bracket in CA. 

Add the cost of living between MI.,IN. and CA, that is a huge difference. People with big money are leaving CA in droves. 

Agree with that entirely. Cost of living out of site ,Taxes out of site, politics,oh well. If he did end up in Frisco he would have some hellasious weapons to work with. OL not bad but nothing like the Colts but their WRs and TE much better than ours.

Link to post
Share on other sites

IMO if SF wants him they are in drivers seat to get him. They start with a better package simply by round 1 value alone. Again this is if they are willing to part with the first rounder. If so then colts would have to overbid to get him and I don’t see Ballard doing that. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, crazycolt1 said:

The alarming thing to me is if Stafford goes to San Francisco he falls into that 70% tax bracket in CA. 

Add the cost of living between MI.,IN. and CA, that is a huge difference. People with big money are leaving CA in droves. 

Thats a great point 

 

Buy a house in a nice part of Indy. $900K buys a mansion, $900K buys a only a very small house.... like REALLY small in SF area.

 

I have had two companies that wanted to move me to California over my career.  One in SF area and one down in Orange county.  I ultimately declined both, after looking at housing costs and taxes

 

My standard of living would have gone WAY back to pay for taxes and housing. The public schools were also rated very low in the area that they would move me 

 

If Stafford went to SF, he would bump from 7.25% up to 13.3% tax rate due to income, if my current search is correct

 

I would think Stafford is doing "the math" and thinking about family to compare.

 

Its beautiful in Northern California, There is so much to do. Depending on where you live, you can be 1-2 hours from snow skiing , or 1-2 hours from the beach.   The amazing mountains of Indiana cannot compare :)

 

in contrast, there is also the benefit of the poo on the streets, sky rocketing homeless issues, and the increasing crimes around the downtown.

 

If SF really wants Stafford, and Stafford wants to go, we may not enough chips on the table to stay in the bidding.

 

I think we will know soon enough........ If I am SF, I am keeping my options open to see if I can use my 12th pick in a package to get one of the top 4 QBs. 

 

If I am the Colts, knowing the 21st pick is a mile away from getting into a true trade position for a good  QB, I might move fast to close Stafford

 

But

Ballard hasnt allowed himself to get into any deep bidding wars.... I dont think he changes this approach for Stafford

 

If it gets crazy CB will fold the hand. We have decent cap space, and a pretty good team, due to CB being conservative with the money. Its a good thing.

 

It will be interesting to see what happens

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, Hoose said:

Watson and the Texans will ultimately have to cooperate to get it done. The Texans will understandably insist on proper compensation, and  Watson may have to expand his wish list beyond the Jets and Miami. Perhaps a NFC team or two. But the Texans won't just trade him to anyone. They will need a clean break with a boatload of compensation, which won't happen if everyone isn't on the same page. No team will trade for Watson without the assurances that he will play for them. Too much at stake; too many moving parts. They'll be forced to find common ground, and it shouldn't be that hard. Any team needing a QB who is on Watson's approved list should be willing to move heaven and earth to get the guy. 

The best thing for Watson is to swallow his pride, and make some nice public statement about David Culley.  That would set up the possibility of having a nice working relationship and team focused attitude. He can even fool himself into thinking that he won the battle with McNair by saying how the organization came around to his view of needing better hiring practices.

 

I've read reports where he also would consider LA Rams.  If he is considering teams with disparate records like the Rams and the Jets in the same breath, then he is obviously concerned about "market" more than winning.  

 

Taking everything into consideration, and if he keeps his stance about HOU, it sounds to me like he is more interested in going to a market where he can be accepted as the next Colin Kaeperneck social commentator through the eyes of the NFL after he plays through his next big contract.  Be a local media hero.

 

I think the guy is going to be a perpetual distraction no matter where he goes, and we'll see how badly any team that he wants to go to actually wants him there after how he has presented himself these past few weeks.

Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, hoosierhawk said:

Could be. I read 2 or 3 reports that said Colts were #1. Probably only one person who knows for sure and we haven't heard from him.

That one person may be mrs stafford and not Matthew stafford   Lol. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Still think my offer of a our first and second this year and our second next year for Stafford and their second this year is a better offer.

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

 

Still think my offer of a our first and second this year and our second next year for Stafford and their second this year is a better offer.

 

Too much for me. They can have him. Someone else will come available like possibly Dak where we wouldn't need to trade for him. If we were to give up that much draft capital I'd rather go all out and get Deshaun Watson whom you can build around for another 10 plus years. 

 

This also may open the door for top QBs to fall a bit more in the draft if San Fran doesn't need one anymore. I bet Ballard could deal up a bit to get a Lance or Fields. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, BProland85 said:

 

Too much for me. They can have him. Someone else will come available like possibly Dak where we wouldn't need to trade for him. If we were to give up that much draft capital I'd rather go all out and get Deshaun Watson whom you can build around for another 10 plus years. 

 

This also may open the door for top QBs to fall a bit more in the draft if San Fran doesn't need one anymore. I bet Ballard could deal up a bit to get a Lance or Fields. 

Dak will cost way too much

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, danlhart87 said:

Dak will cost way too much

Not in draft picks. And I'm willing to bet Dak would sign for right around 35 mil per season. 

 

I'm more concerned about the draft picks we would lose if we went with the Stafford deal. Draft picks are gold to Ballard, and that's a lot to give up for a 33 year old QB who's never been considered one of the better QBs in the league. The Buckner deal was different in that Ballard got a 26 year old All Pro. 

 

If we don't like signing Dak to that much money, then you go up and get your guy around pick 10 overall to be your future. You could always sign a Ryan Fitzpatrick or Andy Dalton as a bridge QB for the 2021 season. 

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

 

Still think my offer of a our first and second this year and our second next year for Stafford and their second this year is a better offer.

Soo....I'm not sure how that can be SF's offer since they don't even have a 3rd round pick in 2021. That was traded away as part of the Trent Williams trade.

 

Not directing that at you, just pointing out the flaw in the original "source".

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

Soo....I'm not sure how that can be SF's offer since they don't even have a 3rd round pick in 2021. That was traded away as part of the Trent Williamson trade.

 

Not according to tankalton. Lions have the 72nd pick.

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

 

Not according to tankalton. Lions have the 72nd pick.

The Tweet says 49ers would give their 2021 2nd, 2021 3rd, 2022 2nd, and 2022 3rd picks to Detroit for Matthew Stafford. 49ers don't have a 2021 3rd.

Link to post
Share on other sites

The discussion about the cost of living in the SF Bay area, together with the horrendous tax situation there, bears repeating. Going to a CA team has MAJOR consequences on your ultimate salary. CA has a 13% top end income tax; they have their own Alternative Minimum Tax; when combined with the federal capital gains tax, the CA capital gains tax is the highest in the world. Oh, and their property taxes are insanely high as well. Combine that with the price of real estate out there, and you get my drift. Its a wonderful place weather wise; the scenery is amazing; but the financial cost is prohibitive. That HAS to make a team like the Colts far more attractive. Which is why I doubt SF is Stafford's first choice. 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
32 minutes ago, Shive said:

The Tweet says 49ers would give their 2021 2nd, 2021 3rd, 2022 2nd, and 2022 3rd picks to Detroit for Matthew Stafford. 49ers don't have a 2021 3rd.

 

Oops. My mistake.

Link to post
Share on other sites
53 minutes ago, Shive said:

The Tweet says 49ers would give their 2021 2nd, 2021 3rd, 2022 2nd, and 2022 3rd picks to Detroit for Matthew Stafford. 49ers don't have a 2021 3rd.

 

Apparently the 49ers are getting comp picks.

 

https://ninerswire.usatoday.com/2021/01/14/2021-nfl-draft-49ers-picks-robert-saleh/amp/?__twitter_impression=true

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

Doing the math..... and using this approach to value each pick

https://www.cbssports.com/nfl/draft/news/nfl-draft-2020-pick-trade-value-chart-creating-a-blueprint-for-draft-moves-by-using-past-trades/

The 49rs 2nd and 3rd (Comp Pick) = 470+95 = 565

2022

2nd and 3rd (Comp pick) worth = 270+95 = 390

 

Total "value" = 955

 

Our first is worth 800 and our third is worth 170 = 970

 

We are in the ballpark......  IF we are interested.......  CB may want someone else... A HUGE possibility

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

Rams become a player in the Stafford game...

 

 

 

ESPN's Jeremy Fowler reports the Rams have "explored the possibilities" of trading for Matthew Stafford.

For what it's worth, the Rams' earliest pick in the 2021 draft is No. 57 overall. It's unclear what would happen with Jared Goff's lucrative (and nightmarish) contract on the books for the next four years, but Stafford himself even reportedly considers Los Angeles a legitimate contender for his services. With former Rams director of college scouting Brad Holmes now making decisions as Detroit's GM, you don't have to squint to see the two sides coming to some type of agreement for the 32-year-old immediately following the Super Bowl. The Lions are still ideally looking to trade Stafford before March 21 since his roster bonus would then cost the front office another $10 million on the books for 2021.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Many NFL executives believe the 49ers are the front runners to acquire Matthew Stafford. The 49ers currently have the number 12th overall pick which they would trade back to the Lions. Two things: 1. How much does the Lions value 12 over 21? Especially if they will be in a position to take one of the top 4 QB's if they fall out of the top 10. 2. Will 21 be enough for Ballard to get Stafford to Indy? This is a QB driven offseason, and while I don't agree Stafford should be acquired for a 1st its the best option we have right now. Wentz NO, Jameis NO, Jimmy G NO, Watson pipe dream, Dak not leaving Dallas, Darnold maybe.

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 1/29/2021 at 6:42 AM, MikeCurtis said:

Thats a great point 

 

Buy a house in a nice part of Indy. $900K buys a mansion, $900K buys a only a very small house.... like REALLY small in SF area.

 

I have had two companies that wanted to move me to California over my career.  One in SF area and one down in Orange county.  I ultimately declined both, after looking at housing costs and taxes

 

My standard of living would have gone WAY back to pay for taxes and housing. The public schools were also rated very low in the area that they would move me 

 

If Stafford went to SF, he would bump from 7.25% up to 13.3% tax rate due to income, if my current search is correct

 

I would think Stafford is doing "the math" and thinking about family to compare.

 

Its beautiful in Northern California, There is so much to do. Depending on where you live, you can be 1-2 hours from snow skiing , or 1-2 hours from the beach.   The amazing mountains of Indiana cannot compare :)

 

in contrast, there is also the benefit of the poo on the streets, sky rocketing homeless issues, and the increasing crimes around the downtown.

 

If SF really wants Stafford, and Stafford wants to go, we may not enough chips on the table to stay in the bidding.

 

I think we will know soon enough........ If I am SF, I am keeping my options open to see if I can use my 12th pick in a package to get one of the top 4 QBs. 

 

If I am the Colts, knowing the 21st pick is a mile away from getting into a true trade position for a good  QB, I might move fast to close Stafford

 

But

Ballard hasnt allowed himself to get into any deep bidding wars.... I dont think he changes this approach for Stafford

 

If it gets crazy CB will fold the hand. We have decent cap space, and a pretty good team, due to CB being conservative with the money. Its a good thing.

 

It will be interesting to see what happens


Man, what a refreshing post filled with great info and some well-reasoned thoughts. 
 

My company is HQ’d in New York and I have had chances to leave Indy to move there. But cost of living and family considerations made the decision to stay in Indy easy. But who knows what is important to Stafford. He may think that winning is most important and that the 9ers provide the best chance of that. Plus being in the NFC and away from Mahomes and the other really good QBs in the AFC may be very appealing. And if family considerations are important maybe the cultural opportunities in the Bay Area outweigh the cost of living which by the way does not have to permanent. 
 

All of this is meant to say we don’t have any idea what drives a player’s preference. On top of that, it is also very likely out of Stafford’s hands anyway. The Lions may take into account Stafford’s preferences but in all likelihood take the best offer they get. 
 

And I really appreciate your comments on Ballard. I am wholly impressed with his patience. It has and will serve the Colts well in the long run. My guess is he would be willing to come off some of his conservative beliefs to land a QB that may put the the Colts over the top.  We saw that with the Buckner deal last year. 
 

My guess is that the price for Stafford gets to high and that Sam Darnold is under center for Indy in 2021. 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Shive locked and unlocked this topic

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...