Colts Trade for Wentz (details in first post)

[Superman]

9 minutes ago, King Colt said:

OK I agree Wentz is seen as a project now and that is scary. The part of him that upsets him when he is in competition for the starting job is telling. Since when do athletes on teams not accept the challenge of competitors? 

 

Legitimate concern. But Schefter is saying Wentz and Pederson went over two months without talking last season.

 

Imagine being the starting QB, struggling most of the season, team not winning but you're still in the hunt for the division, and your offensive minded HC isn't doing whatever it takes to get on the same page with you. And he's the primary play caller.

 

And then they bench you for a rookie, and completely change the offense to accommodate him.

 

I'm not saying Wentz had no share in the blame here, he likely did. But I personally wouldn't be convinced that the staff in general would support me.

[Restinpeacesweetchloe]

Looks like these leadership issues are being debunked pretty quick lol. 

[Superman]

1 minute ago, Shafty138 said:

That was a complete vote of confidence, A necessary gesture to show the public, team, and qb, that you consider the qb a legitimate option as a starter, rather than an oh crap emergency  fill in.....

 

That said, I never had a problem with that job deal..... It was obviously completely a superficial gesture, And not a mistake.... It was a calculated move.   Why is that so hard to see?  He had zero other options, it was two weeks before kickoff.... It was JB or Tebow....lol.  

 

Seriously, only way that contract would have been a mistake is if it were for multiple years, and kept them from signing players they wanted.......as I said above, it was two weeks before the season, there was no signing of consequence they missed because of paying JB, as far as FA..... Maybe they could have extended another upcoming FA, but that's all conjecture..... They had the money and cap space, and no plans for it ... Made absolute sense at the time.  Sorry just tired of people revising that situation and having slightly selective memories.

 

End Rant......lol

 

The strategy was obvious, and well motivated. I think they overshot their mark, probably didn't have to give JB another $28m. But the approach was obviously to add some stability, and to support their new starter.

[Valpo2004]

32 minutes ago, MarquisJ said:

 What was that they said about his character and leadership?

 

I'm already excited for the season and we havn't hit the draft or FA. 

[NewColtsFan]

1 hour ago, Myles said:

It just makes me wonder if Ballard and Reich will try to inch towards that 74% rate.   If they do 60 plays a game, they'd need Wentz to miss 15 plays a game.   That's not likely.   But if they are close and the last game is meaningless, they could sit Wentz and maybe keep their 1st round pick.  

Missing one game doesn’t get you to below 75 percent.

 

In a 16 game schedule, you can’t play more than 12.    This year with a probable 17 games schedule, 12 is clearly the number of games. 
 

I don’t see the Colts starting Eason for five games. 

[BlackTiger]

3 minutes ago, Superman said:

Schefter is saying Wentz and Pederson went over two months without talking last season.

 

This helps clear some things up.  This whole deal seemed a little strange to me, as far as I know Carson never formally asked for a trade.  The Eagles were acting like they still had to move him though.

 

Stafford and Watson both made it pretty clear they wanted a trade, while Carson came off a little indecisive. 

[Valpo2004]

26 minutes ago, kb123456 said:

based on the 3/2 picks, clearly the colts were the only team interested,  why didnt they wait for the 10M march roster bonus to be paid by Eagles.  Either that or philly would have released him with an even bigger dead cap hit and colts could have got him off waivers.

 

Philly could have probably dumped him off for a 7th round pick to someone to avoid paying that bonus.  

 

Someone else would have taken him. . . they just might not have bid as high as the Colts.

[RollerColt]

2 minutes ago, NewColtsFan said:

Missing one game doesn’t get you to below 75 percent.

 

In a 16 game schedule, you can’t play more than 12.    This year with a probable 17 games schedule, 12 is clearly the number of games. 
 

I don’t see the Colts starting Eason for five games. 

Something will have gone terribly wrong if Eason is starting five games. Injuries? 

[DiogoSales]

36 minutes ago, MarquisJ said:

 What was that they said about his character and leadership?

ohhh that's nice to see! Classy move!

[DougDew]

Hmmm.  Some of what went on in Philly sounds like Wentz was set up to fail.  Wonder why.

[Zoltan]

38 minutes ago, CR91 said:

 

Great to see

[PrincetonTiger]

1 hour ago, Superman said:

 

As of March 19 2021.

I understand

 

  Just saying hat those numbers from the podcast are off

[Zoltan]

6 minutes ago, DougDew said:

Hmmm.  Some of what went on in Philly sounds like Wentz was set up to fail.  Wonder why.

Honestly I think it goes back to when Chip Kelly was the HC and fought Roseman for control of personnel, and Roseman lost. ever since Kelly was fired and Roseman got control again and seems like he has slowly tried to grab more control from the Head coach. This lead to almost firing Pederson in 2016, Pederson having to fight to keep Frank as OC, then Pederson threatening to quit after the 2019 season when they fired his OC Groh. When you have so much dysfunction between the front office and head coach, I think that spreads into the locker room.

[craigerb]

1 hour ago, Myles said:

2022 Roster Bonus: $1,000

Who decided on this insult?

[DougDew]

14 minutes ago, Zoltan said:

Honestly I think it goes back to when Chip Kelly was the HC and fought Roseman for control of personnel, and Roseman lost. ever since Kelly was fired and Roseman got control again and seems like he has slowly tried to grab more control from the Head coach. This lead to almost firing Pederson in 2016, Pederson having to fight to keep Frank as OC, then Pederson threatening to quit after the 2019 season when they fired his OC Groh. When you have so much dysfunction between the front office and head coach, I think that spreads into the locker room.

Yeah.  The Philly problems predate 2020.  

 

As a Colts fan, I would approach Wentz as not being a cause of a problem but a victim of a problem.  Not to say that he doesn't need coaching again, but Philly has had signs of dysfunction way before Wentz was being viewed as being an issue, IMO.

[Chucklez]

8 minutes ago, craigerb said:

Who decided on this insult?

I'd take a $1,000 bonus just for being employed by my employer....

[luv_pony_express]

2 hours ago, Myles said:

I wonder if Ballard Roseman have an agreement that the Colts won't try to get under the 75% of plays.   For instance, if the Colts are up 34-7 in week one, will the Colts pull Wentz for the 4th quarter.   Same with a game where the Colts are being crushed will they pull Wentz. Pull him from the last couple minutes of the game if it is out of reach?   Just to build some plays against the 75% so that if Wentz get hurt in week 14 we could still have a shot to keep our 1st round pick.  We would need him not to play in 4 full games worth of plays to keep the 1st round pick.   

I seriously doubt it.  And if it isn’t contractual, it doesn’t matter anyway.  I wouldn’t be surprised if it came up in conversation between the two.  But, if you’re going to set quantified conditions, you’re going to have to put some benchmarks somewhere.

 

For Roseman’s sake, it would be hard to get a backup QB 25-30% of a team’s snaps by coach’s decision — unless he’s no longer the backup.  Most NFL games don’t have many, if any, garbage minutes.  And even when they do, you’re usually talking about 3 or 6 snaps max.

[Myles]

36 minutes ago, NewColtsFan said:

Missing one game doesn’t get you to below 75 percent.

 

In a 16 game schedule, you can’t play more than 12.    This year with a probable 17 games schedule, 12 is clearly the number of games. 
 

I don’t see the Colts starting Eason for five games. 

I know and stated that.  

I meant do you bring Eason in for cleanup minutes throughout the season so that if Wentz gets injured in week 14, maybe the chance is there of still getting below 75% or 70%.

 

I don't think it will happen and I think there may be an unwritten rule GM's have about doing such a thing.

 

Just fun discussion.

[cdgacoltsfan]

So, I'm assuming Chad Kelly won't be our starting QB next year. So unfair!

[Superman]

Just now, cdgacoltsfan said:

So, I'm assuming Chad Kelly won't be our starting QB next year. So unfair!

 

Chad Kelly is QB1, Wentz is being brought in as a veteran backup.

[luv_pony_express]

49 minutes ago, Superman said:

 

Legitimate concern. But Schefter is saying Wentz and Pederson went over two months without talking last season.

 

Imagine being the starting QB, struggling most of the season, team not winning but you're still in the hunt for the division, and your offensive minded HC isn't doing whatever it takes to get on the same page with you. And he's the primary play caller.

 

And then they bench you for a rookie, and completely change the offense to accommodate him.

 

I'm not saying Wentz had no share in the blame here, he likely did. But I personally wouldn't be convinced that the staff in general would support me.

Not to mention the very decision to draft that same rookie under the circumstances in which they did.

 

Forget about what impact that might’ve had on Wentz’s psyche.  What about the use of a 2nd round pick to backup a guy you had just signed for 4 years/$128M?  I get that Wentz never has been on Manning’s level - but can you imagine Polian having done that?  You have an aging roster, lots of needs, and you use your 2nd round pick on a likely backup QB?

 

I guess Wentz’s injuries played a role in that.  And I get that.  You never know how somebody is going to bounce back.  But still, if you were that concerned about Wentz’s health, why the contract?  Why not at least let him test FA?

[NewColtsFan]

7 minutes ago, Myles said:

I know and stated that.  

I meant do you bring Eason in for cleanup minutes throughout the season so that if Wentz gets injured in week 14, maybe the chance is there of still getting below 75% or 70%.

 

I don't think it will happen and I think there may be an unwritten rule GM's have about doing such a thing.

 

Just fun discussion.

Fair enough...   on those terms, I can see it. 
 

My bigger concern is with those posters who seem to be plotting and scheming ways to avoid surrendering the first round pick.   Those people are working too hard on a real long shot. 

[MarquisJ]

 

[Superman]

Just now, luv_pony_express said:

Not to mention the very decision to draft that same rookie under the circumstances in which they did.

 

Forget about what impact that might’ve had on Wentz’s psyche.  What about the use of a 2nd round pick to backup a guy you had just signed for 4 years/$128M?  I get that Wentz never has been on Manning’s level - but can you imagine Polian having done that?  You have an aging roster, lots of needs, and you use your 2nd round pick on a likely backup QB?

 

I guess Wentz’s injuries played a role in that.  And I get that.  You never know how somebody is going to bounce back.  But still, if you were that concerned about Wentz’s health, why the contract?  Why not at least let him test FA?

 

I don't have a problem with drafting a QB in the second round (I wasn't a fan of Hurts, but that's a different topic). Better to have it and not need it, than need it and not have it. We've had our franchise level QB go down enough in the last decade to really appreciate that. 

 

And they signed Wentz after he came back in 2018, and looked like he was physically capable of getting back to his old self. He never quite performed over the next two seasons.

 

I never liked the structure of the contract. The staggered guarantees and the bonuses and whatnot, they were locked in for four years, which was pretty unprecedented for signing a guy two years early. Going early on your young QB is supposed to give the team flexibility, not tie them down. But that seems to be the approach now, as Goff, Mahomes and Watson have the same structure. Mahomes guarantees stagger two years in advance, so they're basically locked in until 2025, unless they cut him in the next 30 days.

 

Rather than that structure, they could have just waited a year. At this point, he would just be a free agent, finishing his fifth year option. Their plan now seems half-baked.

 

I'm off topic. They could have still fully supported their supposed franchise QB, despite drafting Hurts in the second round. Seems like they let him deteriorate on a fundamental level, then benched him when his performance faltered, with little help in between.

[Restinpeacesweetchloe]

Wow they got him to Indy fast. Looks like he was picking up his pass to get into the building. That’s what it looked like in his hand.

[HoosierHero]

23 minutes ago, cdgacoltsfan said:

So, I'm assuming Chad Kelly won't be our starting QB next year. So unfair!

Wait! People actually think Wentz is going to be the starter? Sucker born every minute I guess. 

[Four2itus]

35 minutes ago, DougDew said:

Yeah.  The Philly problems predate 2020.  

 

As a Colts fan, I would approach Wentz as not being a cause of a problem but a victim of a problem.  Not to say that he doesn't need coaching again, but Philly has had signs of dysfunction way before Wentz was being viewed as being an issue, IMO.

My guess is it was an unfortunate marriage. Sometimes, one side of an incompatibility is covered up by the flexibility or perhaps strength/understanding of the other side.....or vise versa. Sometimes though, a little dysfunction on both sides goes full dumpster fire over time with both sides unable to reconcile that actions of the other. 

 

Maybe Wentz was that one kind of personality that the Eagles staff just could not work with....and maybe the staff was that one kind of staff that was the opposite of what Wentz needed to develop (after Frank's departure). I saw his abilities when tied to Frank Reich as key to this whole thing. Frank is a teacher who understands many kinds of personalities and players.

 

For all we know, Frank may have been his (Wentz) main advocate while with the Eagles staff. 

[DougDew]

17 minutes ago, Four2itus said:

My guess is it was an unfortunate marriage. Sometimes, one side of an incompatibility is covered up by the flexibility or perhaps strength/understanding of the other side.....or vise versa. Sometimes though, a little dysfunction on both sides goes full dumpster fire over time with both sides unable to reconcile that actions of the other. 

 

Maybe Wentz was that one kind of personality that the Eagles staff just could not work with....and maybe the staff was that one kind of staff that was the opposite of what Wentz needed to develop (after Frank's departure). I saw his abilities when tied to Frank Reich as key to this whole thing. Frank is a teacher who understands many kinds of personalities and players.

 

For all we know, Frank may have been his (Wentz) main advocate while with the Eagles staff. 

Its certainly possible.  I think the entire situation is difficult to judge or comment on.  All we can really do is to have an open unbiased mind and judge for ourselves using the things that happen while under our observation.

[Colts1324]

46 minutes ago, Chloe6124 said:

Wow they got him to Indy fast. Looks like he was picking up his pass to get into the building. That’s what it looked like in his hand.

I thought the Colts were not allowed to be in contact with Wentz until the start of the new year? March 10th(I believe)

[Myles]

1 hour ago, NewColtsFan said:

Fair enough...   on those terms, I can see it. 
 

My bigger concern is with those posters who seem to be plotting and scheming ways to avoid surrendering the first round pick.   Those people are working too hard on a real long shot. 

Yeah, I wouldn't want to see them get crazy with it.   If the Colts are up 24-7 with 4 minutes left in the 4th, I'd like to see Eason come in and hand the ball off to Taylor and Co 3 times or more if a first down is achieved.   

[Lancer1]

4 minutes ago, Colts1324 said:

I thought the Colts were not allowed to be in contact with Wentz until the start of the new year? March 10th(I believe)

I think it only becomes an issue if the Eagles complain about "tampering", something they're unlikely to do in this case.

 

The Colts may not have even arranged this trip, except for the Owner probably loaning Wentz the use of his plane to get here and begin his housing search.

[wordofmouth]

For those bringing up the idea of intentially keeping Wentz under 75% of snaps, first of all, as stated previously, that is the equivelant of 4 games, so unless he completely sucks or misses several games with injury that is unlikely. 

More importantly, there is no way Ballard "pulls a fast one" on the Eagles and intentially keeps him under that number. 

Yes it would result in a short term vicory but it would hurt Ballard's ability to business with other GM's in the future. 

 

I can't attest to Ballards honesty and integrity ( although it seems quite high) but I can tell you that he is smart enouth to know that developing such a reputation would not be at all wise. 

[Nickster]

2 hours ago, Shafty138 said:

That was a complete vote of confidence, A necessary gesture to show the public, team, and qb, that you consider the qb a legitimate option as a starter, rather than an oh crap emergency  fill in.....

 

That said, I never had a problem with that job deal..... It was obviously completely a superficial gesture, And not a mistake.... It was a calculated move.   Why is that so hard to see?  He had zero other options, it was two weeks before kickoff.... It was JB or Tebow....lol.  

 

Seriously, only way that contract would have been a mistake is if it were for multiple years, and kept them from signing players they wanted.......as I said above, it was two weeks before the season, there was no signing of consequence they missed because of paying JB, as far as FA..... Maybe they could have extended another upcoming FA, but that's all conjecture..... They had the money and cap space, and no plans for it ... Made absolute sense at the time.  Sorry just tired of people revising that situation and having slightly selective memories.

 

End Rant......lol

I’ve heard that before.  28 mill could have gotten us a couple of really talented players last season.

 

I was against it from the start.

 

I like BAllard.  I think Wentz will good.  Don’t think Ballard is infalliable.  Brisett deal was silly.  The dude ain’t no good.  

[Nickster]

3 hours ago, crazycolt1 said:

I take it you haven't been paying much attention to McCaffrey and what he did so far in his career. 

You may take him lightly but you can bet no defensive coordinator is going to. 

He’s terrific man But they’ve not won 17 games the last three years.  Not feeling him as the savior of the Texans.

 

his rookie year he was a third down back.  That was the only year they were good.

 

So you think Houston will be better with Mccaffrney and without Watson.

 

ok fine.  Free country.  Sorta

[BrickHead]

Colts contact with Wentz is allowed with permission from the Eagles. No different than a team giving a player permission to contact (or the players agent contact) other teams seeking a trade.

[jvan1973]

7 minutes ago, Nickster said:

I’ve heard that before.  28 mill could have gotten us a couple of really talented players last season.

 

I was against it from the start.

 

I like BAllard.  I think Wentz will good.  Don’t think Ballard is infalliable.  Brisett deal was silly.  The dude ain’t no good.  

If there were more free agents Ballard felt were worth it he would have signed them.    They had the money to do so.  JBs contract didn't stop anything

[PrincetonTiger]

6 minutes ago, BrickHead said:

Colts contact with Wentz is allowed with permission from the Eagles. No different than a team giving a player permission to contact (or the players agent contact) other teams seeking a trade.

[chickenMan]

On 2/18/2021 at 1:01 PM, The Fish said:

Wentz had the Eagles over the table and there weren't other buyers. Weird situation, but Ballard didn't overpay at all given what all of the other options would have cost. And no, Trubisky wasn't an option.

Trubisky is the best option if you want the first overall pick of the 2022 NFL Draft

[throwing BBZ]

5 hours ago, DougDew said:

Ok.  If we're going to talk about the Eagles here, and why they traded Wentz, searching for reasons, I've asked this question in other threads.

 

Why did Roseman draft Jalen Hurts in the 2nd round (when their positional player roster is getting old) 9 months AFTER extending Wentz to a huge contract and AFTER he just finished a season with a 93 QBR on a declining team?

 

Wentz play and his contract says he is the starter.  No question, he is the starter.

 

Why do that?  Its not Favre.  Its not Rogers.  Wentz is 28. He's not 38 and uttering the word retirement sometimes in pressers.

 

So I would not point to any disfunction we see in 2020 as being the focus of the locker room issues.  I see it starting before then.  I see it being the reason Roseman drafted Hurts to begin with.  What are/were the issues in the Philly locker room during the 93 QBR 2019 season that prompted Roseman to start a QB controversy by using good capital to draft Hurts when there was no QB issues before?

 

 Naa! It is the value of the QB position. Concerns with Wentz and injuries x the grade they had on Hurts. You have to have a QB, including a good backup.  

[chickenMan]

32 minutes ago, Nickster said:

He’s terrific man But they’ve not won 17 games the last three years.  Not feeling him as the savior of the Texans.

 

his rookie year he was a third down back.  That was the only year they were good.

 

So you think Houston will be better with Mccaffrney and without Watson.

 

ok fine.  Free country.  Sorta

McCaffrey is amazing but if Deshaun Watson can’t save the Texans, McCaffrey won’t either