MMQB: How the Wentz trade went down

[EastStreet 10,254]

Just now, Zoltan said:

MN also had a horrendous defense early in the season.

We played plenty of teams with bad Ds. Every single AFCS team had a bad pass D (bottom 10), yet we didn't see those type of routes/plays against them. That's 6 games throughout the season they could have worked.

[Zoltan 749]

Just now, EastStreet said:

We played plenty of teams with bad Ds. Every single AFCS team had a bad pass D (bottom 10), yet we didn't see those type of routes/plays against them. That's 6 games throughout the season they could have worked.

Meh, no reason debating the past, time to look to the future of the offense.

[EastStreet 10,254]

6 minutes ago, Zoltan said:

Meh, no reason debating the past, time to look to the future of the offense.

My hope is that we aren't as dink/dunk as we have been, at least later in the season once Wentz figures out the mechanics, and our scheme. At the end of the day, if we're top 10 in deep ball accuracy, I would hope we are not bottom 10 in attempts. Not that I want to go all air raid, I just want Ds to have to defend the entire field. 

[NewColtsFan 9,739]

12 minutes ago, EastStreet said:

My hope is that we aren't as dink/dunk as we have been, at least later in the season once Wentz figures out the mechanics, and our scheme. At the end of the day, if we're top 10 in deep ball accuracy, I would hope we are not bottom 10 in attempts. Not that I want to go all air raid, I just want Ds to have to defend the entire field. 

For what it’s worth, it’s my understanding the Colts were top-10 in so-called “chunk plays”.   Which I believe are plays over 20 yards.  
 

I think Ballard mentioned this in a recent interview...  

[J@son 918]

9 hours ago, Dingus McGirt said:

Apparently, he got a pretty strong "ego-check" from Pittman.

 

Based on what? I just listened to pittman describe the conversation and I didn't get that at all. 

[EastStreet 10,254]

3 minutes ago, NewColtsFan said:

For what it’s worth, it’s my understanding the Colts were top-10 in so-called “chunk plays”.   Which I believe are plays over 20 yards.  
 

I think Ballard mentioned this in a recent interview...  

We were bottom 5 in air yards per attempt. That's a pretty simple and specific stat. 

 

Not sure which chunk play stat you're referring too, but that doesn't surprise me either. It doesn't mean though that we weren't bottom half of the league in deep attempts. IIRC, in terms of pass catcher YACatch (all positions), we had 3 guys in the top 20 (Taylor, Hines, Pittman), and a few more inside the top 64. That's pretty helpful I assume when it comes to calculating chunk. 

[NewColtsFan 9,739]

1 minute ago, EastStreet said:

We were bottom 5 in air yards per attempt. That's a pretty simple and specific stat. 

 

Not sure which chunk play stat you're referring too, but that doesn't surprise me either. It doesn't mean though that we weren't bottom half of the league in deep attempts. IIRC, in terms of pass catcher YACatch (all positions), we had 3 guys in the top 20 (Taylor, Hines, Pittman), and a few more inside the top 64. That's pretty helpful I assume when it comes to calculating chunk. 

Honestly,  I’m not sure which stat I’m referring to either!  I’ve listened to too many interviews and podcasts.   I think Ballard was trying to say this offense couldn’t have been too conservative if we were top-10 in explosive plays. 
 

Anyway....    your passing stats are interesting and give needed context,  thanks. 

[EastStreet 10,254]

1 minute ago, NewColtsFan said:

Honestly,  I’m not sure which stat I’m referring to either!  I’ve listened to too many interviews and podcasts.   I think Ballard was trying to say this offense couldn’t have been too conservative if we were top-10 in explosive plays. 
 

Anyway....    your passing stats are interesting and give needed context,  thanks. 

I think you can be both chunky, and explosive, without necessarily going deep a lot.  Lot's of factors on both the run and pass side. We obviously had some good YACatch guys which helped. As far as rushing I know were were near bottom early season, but got pretty darn good later season. I follow FBO explosive play stats, and I know we were ranked pretty good passing wise. Like I said, rushing wise, bad early, good later. 

 

Long ball though, we had a few moments. Like I said in several other threads, I just want a good balance. Run/pass balance, and good balance within the passing game (deep/intermediate/short). I don't want to be anything close to Arian's risk it biscuit either, just consistently using some early read deep shots, early in games to keep Ds honest and on their heals. At least that's what I hope we evolve to as Wentz finds he sea legs.

[Dingus McGirt 1,662]

8 hours ago, J@son said:

 

Based on what? I just listened to pittman describe the conversation and I didn't get that at all. 

Well - he's worn #11.  He asked if he could have it with the Colts - a 2nd year wide receiver said no.  CJ said ok.  He held his ego "in-check."

[J@son 918]

16 hours ago, Dingus McGirt said:

Well - he's worn #11.  He asked if he could have it with the Colts - a 2nd year wide receiver said no.  CJ said ok.  He held his ego "in-check."

 

According to pittman, it went like this;

 

Carson: hey man how do you feel about the number? 

 

Pitt: hey I think I'm gonna keep it

 

Carson: aight cool. No problem 

 

 

That does t sound like Carson displayed any ego in the first place.  You have to come at someone with an ego in order to be kept in check

[TomDiggs 543]

I loved reading the article when I first saw it, so thanks @Superman for posting it here to come back to.

 

I found many things fascinating about it but two big takeways for me:

 

1) People are wired differently. Not all QBs are wired the same. Not everyone sees you draft a guy behind them and gets like A.Rodgers and goes into F it mode and wins MVP as a result. Some people look over their shoulder and don't deal with it well. That's fine. You need to know what motivates people. Heck at my job we literally had to take a training for supervisors on "what motivates me" to find out our own motivations and that of our employees. Knowing what motivates someone goes a long way. If you know and ignore it (or worse do the opposite of it), shame on you.

 

2) I also found the "good cop" / "bad cop" stuff interesting. It makes sense. I get it. Someone will play the good role here and someone the bad and hopefully he will take to it in Indy like he did in his best season in Philly. I found it very, very interesting that he did NOT take well to Mike Groh as the "bad cop" which led to Groh being fired and now Groh is on our staff as our WR coach. That should be interesting. He now has Reich, P.Taylor and Groh all around to know what works and (importantly in Groh's case) what didn't work with him in Philly.

 

Also interesting that his good cop / bad cop roles that worked best were the HC being his big supporter, his OC being neutral and his QB coach being the one that was hard on him.

 

This means the higher ranking coaches and the ones calling the plays and scheming the game-plans had his back.  The position coach could be critical but it didn't strain those game-planning relationships and made it easy to talk to those coaches, etc.

 

When Groh was his OC and the bad cop it went sour with him having his HC and his QB coach in his corner.

 

Not sure what this all means but maybe it means a good recipe for success is Reich/Brady being supportive in some fashion along with Taylor and Milanovich being the bad cop.

 

I am actually eager to see it all play out now. 

 

 

[shasta519 3,062]

On 2/22/2021 at 3:33 PM, Shive said:

If this is what was happening with Wentz and the Eagles, I can definitely understand the issues, because I am 100% this type of person. If there's organizational changes, as long as you communicate the why, I'm good. I may not agree with it, but I understand the reason for the change. If you say "this is what we're doing now, because I said so" you've completely lost my buy-in and I tend to get pretty frustrated and defiant.

I agree. Communication is key. 

 

But you would still do your job to the best of your ability. You wouldn’t suddenly become really bad at your work because you weren’t satisfied with knowing the why of those changes.
 

And you would tackle any new responsibilities head-on as well. You wouldn’t just shake off what you were told to now do and revert to your previous workflow. 
 

I have seen people do that...and it almost always ends the same way. 

[shasta519 3,062]

42 minutes ago, TomDiggs said:

I loved reading the article when I first saw it, so thanks @Superman for posting it here to come back to.

 

I found many things fascinating about it but two big takeways for me:

 

1) People are wired differently. Not all QBs are wired the same. Not everyone sees you draft a guy behind them and gets like A.Rodgers and goes into F it mode and wins MVP as a result. Some people look over their shoulder and don't deal with it well. That's fine. You need to know what motivates people. Heck at my job we literally had to take a training for supervisors on "what motivates me" to find out our own motivations and that of our employees. Knowing what motivates someone goes a long way. If you know and ignore it (or worse do the opposite of it), shame on you.

 

2) I also found the "good cop" / "bad cop" stuff interesting. It makes sense. I get it. Someone will play the good role here and someone the bad and hopefully he will take to it in Indy like he did in his best season in Philly. I found it very, very interesting that he did NOT take well to Mike Groh as the "bad cop" which led to Groh being fired and now Groh is on our staff as our WR coach. That should be interesting. He now has Reich, P.Taylor and Groh all around to know what works and (importantly in Groh's case) what didn't work with him in Philly.

 

Also interesting that his good cop / bad cop roles that worked best were the HC being his big supporter, his OC being neutral and his QB coach being the one that was hard on him.

 

This means the higher ranking coaches and the ones calling the plays and scheming the game-plans had his back.  The position coach could be critical but it didn't strain those game-planning relationships and made it easy to talk to those coaches, etc.

 

When Groh was his OC and the bad cop it went sour with him having his HC and his QB coach in his corner.

 

Not sure what this all means but maybe it means a good recipe for success is Reich/Brady being supportive in some fashion along with Taylor and Milanovich being the bad cop.

 

I am actually eager to see it all play out now. 

 

 

It won’t be Taylor. I think he’s here to be part of that support system. A coach with a really vague title but a very specific role. 

[shasta519 3,062]

1 hour ago, TomDiggs said:

I loved reading the article when I first saw it, so thanks @Superman for posting it here to come back to.

 

I found many things fascinating about it but two big takeways for me:

 

1) People are wired differently. Not all QBs are wired the same. Not everyone sees you draft a guy behind them and gets like A.Rodgers and goes into F it mode and wins MVP as a result. Some people look over their shoulder and don't deal with it well. That's fine. You need to know what motivates people. Heck at my job we literally had to take a training for supervisors on "what motivates me" to find out our own motivations and that of our employees. Knowing what motivates someone goes a long way. If you know and ignore it (or worse do the opposite of it), shame on you.

 

2) I also found the "good cop" / "bad cop" stuff interesting. It makes sense. I get it. Someone will play the good role here and someone the bad and hopefully he will take to it in Indy like he did in his best season in Philly. I found it very, very interesting that he did NOT take well to Mike Groh as the "bad cop" which led to Groh being fired and now Groh is on our staff as our WR coach. That should be interesting. He now has Reich, P.Taylor and Groh all around to know what works and (importantly in Groh's case) what didn't work with him in Philly.

 

Also interesting that his good cop / bad cop roles that worked best were the HC being his big supporter, his OC being neutral and his QB coach being the one that was hard on him.

 

This means the higher ranking coaches and the ones calling the plays and scheming the game-plans had his back.  The position coach could be critical but it didn't strain those game-planning relationships and made it easy to talk to those coaches, etc.

 

When Groh was his OC and the bad cop it went sour with him having his HC and his QB coach in his corner.

 

Not sure what this all means but maybe it means a good recipe for success is Reich/Brady being supportive in some fashion along with Taylor and Milanovich being the bad cop.

 

I am actually eager to see it all play out now. 

 

 

Double post.

[shasta519 3,062]

On 2/22/2021 at 10:47 PM, EastStreet said:

I think you can be both chunky, and explosive, without necessarily going deep a lot.  Lot's of factors on both the run and pass side. We obviously had some good YACatch guys which helped. As far as rushing I know were were near bottom early season, but got pretty darn good later season. I follow FBO explosive play stats, and I know we were ranked pretty good passing wise. Like I said, rushing wise, bad early, good later. 

 

Long ball though, we had a few moments. Like I said in several other threads, I just want a good balance. Run/pass balance, and good balance within the passing game (deep/intermediate/short). I don't want to be anything close to Arian's risk it biscuit either, just consistently using some early read deep shots, early in games to keep Ds honest and on their heals. At least that's what I hope we evolve to as Wentz finds he sea legs.

NFL.com has them at #10 for >20 yard pass plays with 56.

 

STATS has them down at #19 for >25 yard pass plays with 27.

 

That’s a big discrepancy...but I have no reason to question the accuracy of either source. So assuming that’s correct...I think it speaks to them having shorter pass plays that turned into chunk plays, but not necessarily explosive plays. And that Rivers wasn’t throwing many passes with >25 air yards.
 

And for >40 yard pass plays...they are middle of the pack with 8. We know two of those were Pitt’s short crossing routes. I know Hilton, MAC, Johnson and Pascal all had a 40+ yard deep pass...but I can’t remember the other two.

[Dingus McGirt 1,662]

8 hours ago, J@son said:

 

According to pittman, it went like this;

 

Carson: hey man how do you feel about the number? 

 

Pitt: hey I think I'm gonna keep it

 

Carson: aight cool. No problem 

 

 

That does t sound like Carson displayed any ego in the first place.  You have to come at someone with an ego in order to be kept in check

Guess I mistated things.

[Nickster 927]

On 2/22/2021 at 11:50 AM, Superman said:

 

There are a ton of teams already over the cap. I'm sure there are a few who might have been interested in Wentz, but couldn't take on a $25m/year player right now.

 

And others who might have been interested for less draft comp, so never engaged once they became aware of Philly's initial asking price.

25 Mill for a starting QB is average.  I don't think the money was the factor for most teams interested in Wentz.  I mean maybe.

The Colts were definitely in a position to "afford" a QB since the only one we were paying was a 4th round rookie contract guy, but I don't think the fact that Wentz' cap hit was only 25 or so mill was what kept interest away.

 

The market is difficult to read right now.  Matthew Stafford was coveted way beyond what I think he's worth.  Could be proven wrong about that too.  Wentz seems to be pretty cheap to me.

 

Last year Winston and Newton were basically paid nothing.  It will be interesting to see how the rest of the QB dominoes in the league fall.

[coltsfansince65 853]

On 2/22/2021 at 11:22 AM, Arodgers12 said:

Colts could have went to the SB last year had they got past the Bills. They were good enough. You guys think you would have beaten KC?

If KC played as poorly as they did in the SB, yes.

[2006Coltsbestever 22,593]

On 2/22/2021 at 11:22 AM, Arodgers12 said:

Colts could have went to the SB last year had they got past the Bills. They were good enough. You guys think you would have beaten KC?

I doubt it but we had Buffalo beat, they had every little break go their way and only beat us by 3.

[Arodgers12 361]

50 minutes ago, coltsfansince65 said:

If KC played as poorly as they did in the SB, yes.

The AFC was wide open. You guys were good enough.

[NewColtsFan 9,739]

On 2/22/2021 at 7:37 AM, Superman said:

https://www.si.com/nfl/2021/02/22/mmqb-carson-wentz-trade-washington-front-office-tim-tebow

 

Good stuff included. Wentz requested a trade after the season ended, the Eagles gave his agent permission to talk to other teams, Ballard gave the Eagles a deadline, and now Wentz has been traded. There's some good commentary that fills in some gaps about the way things fell apart in Philly, and how the trade came together.

I’ve been listening to some YouTube clips from Rich Eisen and Dan Patrick as they talk about this deal. 
 

Some posters here seem to be under the impression that because there were no other offers, the NFL view of Wentz is that he sucks.   No interest.   But that’s not the impression I’m getting.  
 

What I’m getting is Wentz’s agent talked to teams and it sounds like he informed them that Wentz’s first choice was Indy.  So other teams thought they didn’t want to bring in a guy who didn’t really want to be with them,  he wanted to be with the Colts.    Those teams liked Wentz, and had interest,  but what’s the point if he doesn’t really want to be on your team?

 

I think that’s a totally different narrative than...    Wentz sucks, not interested.  
 

Note:  I responded to your post as it seemed the most reasonable place to put it. 

[Superman 9,562]

31 minutes ago, NewColtsFan said:

I’ve been listening to some YouTube clips from Rich Eisen and Dan Patrick as they talk about this deal. 
 

Some posters here seem to be under the impression that because there were no other offers, the NFL view of Wentz is that he sucks.   No interest.   But that’s not the impression I’m getting.  
 

What I’m getting is Wentz’s agent talked to teams and it sounds like he informed them that Wentz’s first choice was Indy.  So other teams thought they didn’t want to bring in a guy who didn’t really want to be with them,  he wanted to be with the Colts.    Those teams liked Wentz, and had interest,  but what’s the point if he doesn’t really want to be on your team?

 

I think that’s a totally different narrative than...    Wentz sucks, not interested.  
 

Note:  I responded to your post as it seemed the most reasonable place to put it. 

 

Yeah, the idea that Wentz wasn't good enough to draw more interest isn't something I agree with. The combination of his cap number + a lot of teams being over the cap, the Eagles setting their initial asking price high to weed out looky-loos, and Wentz's stated preference to go to Indy, I think those combined factors eliminated potential suitors from consideration right off the bat. And good for us.

[EastStreet 10,254]

16 hours ago, shasta519 said:

NFL.com has them at #10 for >20 yard pass plays with 56.

 

STATS has them down at #19 for >25 yard pass plays with 27.

 

That’s a big discrepancy...but I have no reason to question the accuracy of either source. So assuming that’s correct...I think it speaks to them having shorter pass plays that turned into chunk plays, but not necessarily explosive plays. And that Rivers wasn’t throwing many passes with >25 air yards.
 

And for >40 yard pass plays...they are middle of the pack with 8. We know two of those were Pitt’s short crossing routes. I know Hilton, MAC, Johnson and Pascal all had a 40+ yard deep pass...but I can’t remember the other two.

You have to be careful about the descriptor, and what the stat truly means. I look at simple deep ball attempts to tell me how many times we threw deep. 

 

And like you see in the above, some measure differently ( 20y vs 25y). And I'm assuming those two count YAC. Some stats account for air yards only. Some air yards + YAC.

 

It's also fair to look at %s. Some Os possess the ball for instance far less, but their % of deep passes might be higher. All in all, like I said, I keep it simple, using attempts. I think we were around 20ish. I know we were worse early, then better around mid season, then back again, then up again late. But overall, below average. 

 

FBO is pretty good to look explosive plays if you have time. Lots of detail.

[shasta519 3,062]

12 hours ago, 2006Coltsbestever said:

I doubt it but we had Buffalo beat, they had every little break go their way and only beat us by 3.

Every break? Pascal clearly fumbled and they let the Colts keep the ball. That was a huge break.

[2006Coltsbestever 22,593]

3 minutes ago, shasta519 said:

Every break? Pascal clearly fumbled and they let the Colts keep the ball. That was a huge break.

That was 1 play and time wasn't on our side at that point anyway. Leading up to that they had a couple of long shoe string catches, they fumbled the ball 15 yards backwards and still ended up with it, we had an offsides penalty that gave them a TD instead of a FG, and we missed a chip shot FG. "Every" I guess was the wrong word to use but they got "a lot" of lucky breaks. You get my point, I am sure you watched the game.

[Myles 4,326]

19 hours ago, Superman said:

 

Yeah, the idea that Wentz wasn't good enough to draw more interest isn't something I agree with. The combination of his cap number + a lot of teams being over the cap, the Eagles setting their initial asking price high to weed out looky-loos, and Wentz's stated preference to go to Indy, I think those combined factors eliminated potential suitors from consideration right off the bat. And good for us.

I'll add that the Eagles didn't really stress the want to get rid of Wentz as early as others like Stafford.  I'm sure some teams were holding out a little longer to see if Watson, Ryan, Wilson or others would really be available.    Add in that many of the teams in need of a QB have good draft position to get one and this offseason was kind of a "perfect storm" for lots on interest in any 1 QB.  There are still so many QB's possibly available.  Darnold, Cam, Winton, Trubisky, Foles, Fitz and several others.   Granted those are not the caliber of Wilson and Watson. 

[OffensivelyPC 1,130]

21 hours ago, Superman said:

 

Yeah, the idea that Wentz wasn't good enough to draw more interest isn't something I agree with. The combination of his cap number + a lot of teams being over the cap, the Eagles setting their initial asking price high to weed out looky-loos, and Wentz's stated preference to go to Indy, I think those combined factors eliminated potential suitors from consideration right off the bat. And good for us.

The first thing about any negotiation you need to know is: who's got what leverage?  Colts knew the market and the other serious contenders.  The Eagles only leverage walked out the door when the Bears tapped out.  They were wishing upon coins before flipping them into the fountain at that point. 

 

It honestly would not surprise me at all if there was some collusion claim against Reich and the Colts for tampering with Wentz and his agent to ensure a move to Indy.  Maybe it was all circumstantial, but uhh... Ballard and Reich aren't stupid.  I mean, I might try to throw floaters out there to assist in eliminating the Bears competition - hence Wentz' agent stating Indy as his preference.  It's a natural conclusion to jump to in the first place, so like I said, maybe there were never any "unofficial" conversations.  Just saying, wouldn't surprise me if it happened either.

[jvan1973 5,603]

20 minutes ago, OffensivelyPC said:

The first thing about any negotiation you need to know is: who's got what leverage?  Colts knew the market and the other serious contenders.  The Eagles only leverage walked out the door when the Bears tapped out.  They were wishing upon coins before flipping them into the fountain at that point. 

 

It honestly would not surprise me at all if there was some collusion claim against Reich and the Colts for tampering with Wentz and his agent to ensure a move to Indy.  Maybe it was all circumstantial, but uhh... Ballard and Reich aren't stupid.  I mean, I might try to throw floaters out there to assist in eliminating the Bears competition - hence Wentz' agent stating Indy as his preference.  It's a natural conclusion to jump to in the first place, so like I said, maybe there were never any "unofficial" conversations.  Just saying, wouldn't surprise me if it happened either.

I think the Eagles gave permission to his agent to reach out to teams

[Superman 9,562]

29 minutes ago, OffensivelyPC said:

It honestly would not surprise me at all if there was some collusion claim against Reich and the Colts for tampering with Wentz and his agent to ensure a move to Indy.

 

If Wentz's agent told the Colts 'we'll resist a trade to any other team, so just make your best offer and sit tight,' that would be problematic. But that would be mostly impossible to prove, unless someone was careless in the process.

 

Short of any actual evidence, I don't know why anyone would go down that path. The Eagles got fair value for Wentz, based on precedent. And if the Bears wanted Wentz, they could have just made a better offer and gotten the deal done. Reports say they never actually made an offer.

[Fisticuffs111 2,005]

Dumb question but are there any rules for players/teammates when it comes to tampering. Was surprised to see several players already giving interviews about Wentz.

[OffensivelyPC 1,130]

12 minutes ago, Superman said:

 

If Wentz's agent told the Colts 'we'll resist a trade to any other team, so just make your best offer and sit tight,' that would be problematic. But that would be mostly impossible to prove, unless someone was careless in the process.

 

Short of any actual evidence, I don't know why anyone would go down that path. The Eagles got fair value for Wentz, based on precedent. And if the Bears wanted Wentz, they could have just made a better offer and gotten the deal done. Reports say they never actually made an offer.

And there is no evidence right now. I wouldn't like that sort of gamesmanship, if you can call it that, from the Colts. But sometimes it feels like things worked out a little too nicely. But then again, the value in this trade depends on Wentz, so we've officially won nothing as of this moment. 

[Superman 9,562]

21 minutes ago, Fisticuffs111 said:

Dumb question but are there any rules for players/teammates when it comes to tampering. Was surprised to see several players already giving interviews about Wentz.

 

My understanding is that players can talk all they want, as long as they aren't involved in negotiating or representing any of the parties in the deal. 

[Valpo2004 1,626]

On 2/22/2021 at 1:20 PM, Chloe6124 said:

I don’t like comparing this to Luck or Manning bur he could be the type where he is going to have those bad plays but will give us five or six wow plays a game that help us win.  I would take that over a game manager any day.

 

What a unusual circumstance for Reich to get a QB he helped draft but via trade. 

 

Every QB is going to have bad plays. . . but I think Reich's offense helps cut down on those.

 

All we need is the QB to play in the system and not try to play hero ball.  

[Superman 9,562]

6 minutes ago, OffensivelyPC said:

And there is no evidence right now. I wouldn't like that sort of gamesmanship, if you can call it that, from the Colts. But sometimes it feels like things worked out a little too nicely. But then again, the value in this trade depends on Wentz, so we've officially won nothing as of this moment. 

 

Colts didn't have a lot of competition on this trade, but they still made a legitimate offer. A first and a third is more than I initially thought it would take.

[OffensivelyPC 1,130]

55 minutes ago, Superman said:

 

Colts didn't have a lot of competition on this trade, but they still made a legitimate offer. A first and a third is more than I initially thought it would take.

You think they put too much on the table?  I mean, you never truly know how much another team is willing to jump you.  I wonder if that was the Colts initial offer and once competition started phasing out, they pull the, "well the deal has changed" card.  Is that even feasible?  I mean you can offer what you want, but is it wise to change your offer after other potential trade partners drop out?  It'd prolong negotiations and I suppose for Ballard, if you feel you can rehab Wentz, keep the offer competitive and the deadline so you absolutely know how to prepare for FA and the draft.  I guess I just answered my own question, but I've typed enough that I'm not deleting it lol.

[Wentzszn 10,410]

Reichs media availability today had some pretty funny questions. One asked about loss confidence in a player.  

[Superman 9,562]

2 minutes ago, OffensivelyPC said:

You think they put too much on the table?  I mean, you never truly know how much another team is willing to jump you.  I wonder if that was the Colts initial offer and once competition started phasing out, they pull the, "well the deal has changed" card.  Is that even feasible?  I mean you can offer what you want, but is it wise to change your offer after other potential trade partners drop out?  It'd prolong negotiations and I suppose for Ballard, if you feel you can rehab Wentz, keep the offer competitive and the deadline so you absolutely know how to prepare for FA and the draft.  I guess I just answered my own question, but I've typed enough that I'm not deleting it lol.

 

The reporting says the Colts made one offer, and no one else actually submitted an official offer.

 

I personally thought the market for Wentz would be less favorable for the Eagles, but apparently I was wrong. I'm fine with the deal, but I don't think we robbed the Eagles or anything like that.

[Superman 9,562]

16 minutes ago, Chloe6124 said:

Reichs media availability today had some pretty funny questions. One asked about loss confidence in a player.  

 

I'm listening right now. Same old questions as always.

[jvan1973 5,603]

52 minutes ago, Superman said:

 

I'm listening right now. Same old questions as always.

Is he even allowed to talk about Wentz?  If not,  what's the point of the  media availability?

[Superman 9,562]

9 minutes ago, jvan1973 said:

Is he even allowed to talk about Wentz?  If not,  what's the point of the  media availability?

 

He does media availability for the Combine at this time every year, so this is making up for that since there's no Combine. Just so happens that all anyone wants to talk about is the one thing he can't talk about.

 

In 25 minutes, just one question about player evaluation.