Jump to content
Indianapolis Colts
Indianapolis Colts Fan Forum

We will finally pay for an A tier pass-catcher.


Recommended Posts

We MUST, right? I understand that Ballard does not value them very much, he's shown this clearly in the business he does. I understand that he believes that we can be great without elite pass-catchers, I actually genuinely understand it. I am in the minority (I think) that believes that a run HEAVY, time-of-possession playstyle can be a championship caliber team in today's NFL. I'm not here to criticize Ballard,

 

HOWEVER,

 

We MUST now, right? Hilton is on his way out. Doyle is on his way out. Even if one of those guys decide to give it another go, we MUST go A tier at this point. Not middle of the pack affordable like we usually do (especially at those positions.) I think now there is just no way around it, I think we finally bring in that BIG name WR or TE, and I'm excited about it. (I'm still debating how much I actually THINK we will, I just know that if we don't, when we commence the annual off-season burn-everything-down, I will finally be part of the uprising LOL).

 

We cannot go slightly above average wideout and slightly above average TE, ONE of the two bust be top end of the position. Seeing as we don't have capital to draft one, it has to be a FA. Wonder who that may be....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Even if Allen Robinson at 2 years $30 mil. is the best we can do, I would be happy with that. It would fit with the outside WR profile that Wentz likes and Frank likes, and we can augment with the draft for the rest for youthful speed, and can also add Zach Ertz if he does not cost too much.

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well, some unknown dude from BUF named Davis caught 4 TD passes against KC. 

 

I don't think the WR, the OC, or the HC had much to do with making that happen.  I think its about the QB looking at the defense with 12 seconds remaining on the play clock and knowing where to throw the ball....and having the time to do it.

 

Having said that, the Colts should probably upgrade the WR group. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, DougDew said:

Well, some unknown dude from BUF named Davis caught 4 TD passes against KC. 

 

I don't think the WR, the OC, or the HC had much to do with making that happen.  I think its about the QB looking at the defense with 12 seconds remaining on the play clock and knowing where to throw the ball....and having the time to do it.

 

Having said that, the Colts should probably upgrade the WR group. 

Gabriel Davis was someone that was starting to get a lot of hype pre-draft as a potential steal based on his projected draft position. He was taken where he was projected to go and is looking to have been a steal in the 4th. Honestly though, sometimes a WR just matches up very well against the coverage and feasts.

 

I agree with the overall sentiment though and your last comment.

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Shive said:

Gabriel Davis was someone that was starting to get a lot of hype pre-draft as a potential steal based on his projected draft position. He was taken where he was projected to go and is looking to have been a steal in the 4th. Honestly though, sometimes a WR just matches up very well against the coverage and feasts.

 

I agree with the overall sentiment though and your last comment.

That's good to know.  Wish Ballard would have taken him then, LOL.

 

Kind of like Austin Collie, and the success he had with PM.  Collie was a 4th rounder who I think was leading the NFL in passing yards when he got his first concussion.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don’t really see any WR lining up to come catch passes from Carson Wentz. Remember that FA is more about where the player wants to go, and not who has the money. I’ve said this in another topic, but people are eventually going to realize that Indy is not an attractive market.

  • Haha 2
  • Sad 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Defjamz26 said:

I don’t really see any WR lining up to come catch passes from Carson Wentz. Remember that FA is more about where the player wants to go, and not who has the money. I’ve said this in another topic, but people are eventually going to realize that Indy is not an attractive market.

 

This. People don't seem to remember this when projecting receivers signing somewhere. Their entire success relies on the QB.

 

Especially a guy like A Robinson that people keep projecting to us. I'd bet anything he isn't signing here, unless we go get a Wilson or Rodgers before hand. This guy has played his entire career with trash QBs, now he finally gets to pick where he plays... he sure as hell ain't coming here to catch balls from Wentz lol

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, 07dleigh said:

We MUST, right? I understand that Ballard does not value them very much, he's shown this clearly in the business he does. I understand that he believes that we can be great without elite pass-catchers, I actually genuinely understand it. I am in the minority (I think) that believes that a run HEAVY, time-of-possession playstyle can be a championship caliber team in today's NFL. I'm not here to criticize Ballard,

 

HOWEVER,

 

We MUST now, right? Hilton is on his way out. Doyle is on his way out. Even if one of those guys decide to give it another go, we MUST go A tier at this point. Not middle of the pack affordable like we usually do (especially at those positions.) I think now there is just no way around it, I think we finally bring in that BIG name WR or TE, and I'm excited about it. (I'm still debating how much I actually THINK we will, I just know that if we don't, when we commence the annual off-season burn-everything-down, I will finally be part of the uprising LOL).

 

We cannot go slightly above average wideout and slightly above average TE, ONE of the two bust be top end of the position. Seeing as we don't have capital to draft one, it has to be a FA. Wonder who that may be....


I think you’re going to be very disappointed.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, NorthernColt said:

 

This. People don't seem to remember this when projecting receivers signing somewhere. Their entire success relies on the QB.

 

Especially a guy like A Robinson that people keep projecting to us. I'd bet anything he isn't signing here, unless we go get a Wilson or Rodgers before hand. This guy has played his entire career with trash QBs, now he finally gets to pick where he plays... he sure as hell ain't coming here to catch balls from Wentz lol


The people projecting Robinson to us?   Mostly very young, very inexperienced, journalist wannabes.   Not to be taken too seriously.   Honestly.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

29 minutes ago, NewColtsFan said:


I think you’re going to be very disappointed.  

 

What choice will we have atp though if Hilton and Doyle hang 'em up? I don't think CB would sentence this offense to a third round TE and Keelan Cole as starters, especially with Irsay * off.

 

You don't feel like his hand is almost forced at this point? I feel it is.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, 07dleigh said:

 

What choice will we have atp though if Hilton and Doyle hang 'em up? I don't think CB would sentence this offense to a third round TE and Keelan Cole as starters, especially with Irsay * off.

 

You don't feel like his hand is almost forced at this point? I feel it is.

Ballard won’t have trouble explaining why we can’t afford to give Adams 6 years and $150 million or more.    Or why we’re not likely to give Robinson 4 years and $65 million, at least.    Irsay understands the salary cap. 
 

Could I be wrong?   Sure.  But I don’t see this happening.    Maybe if you can get a player like Godwin or Gallup cheaper, but only because they’re coming off major knee injuries.    Otherwise, I see us trying to sign someone who is not a sexy name to a modest contract with the goal that he out performs his contract.  

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

“A” pass catcher?  Instead of paying for a big FA signing we could acquire Calvin Ridley for a future conditional pick.  11m cap hit this coming year.  Very affordable and if he produces he’s well worth the pick and an extension.  He’s only 25yrs old.  I could see Ballard exploring something like this versus the big FA signing.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

43 minutes ago, richard pallo said:

“A” pass catcher?  Instead of paying for a big FA signing we could acquire Calvin Ridley for a future conditional pick.  11m cap hit this coming year.  Very affordable and if he produces he’s well worth the pick and an extension.  He’s only 25yrs old.  I could see Ballard exploring something like this versus the big FA signing.


The only way we’d trade for Ridley is if he agrees to an extension when we do the deal.   Just like we did with Buckner.   And we did similar with Wentz. 
 

We’re not trading a Day 2 pick for one year with the hope it works out.   Why?   Because we’re screwed either way.   
 

Two scenarios…. In the first, it doesn’t work out for whatever reason, and then we will have traded a valuable Day Two pick for a one year rental.   Not good.   In the second version, Ridley comes and has a very good, maybe even great year and then what?   He has ALL THE LEVERAGE!   We have to sign him to whatever deal he wants.  Because if we don’t meet his price, another team likely will.   And he’d become a free agent and leave.   And as all of that plays out, we still have Pittman and Taylor to sign to extensions after next year.    
 

We will have painted ourselves into a corner.  
 

So the only way we’re trading for Ridley is to get an extension agreed to as part of the deal as we’ve done before. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, NewColtsFan said:


The only way we’d trade for Ridley is if he agrees to an extension when we do the deal.   Just like we did with Buckner.   And we did similar with Wentz. 
 

We’re not trading a Day 2 pick for one year with the hope it works out.   Why?   Because we’re screwed either way.   
 

Two scenarios…. In the first, it doesn’t work out for whatever reason, and then we will have traded a valuable Day Two pick for a one year rental.   Not good.   In the second version, Ridley comes and has a very good, maybe even great year and then what?   He has ALL THE LEVERAGE!   We have to sign him to whatever deal he wants.  Because if we don’t meet his price, another team likely will.   And he’d become a free agent and leave.   And as all of that plays out, we still have Pittman and Taylor to sign to extensions after next year.    
 

We will have painted ourselves into a corner.  
 

So the only way we’re trading for Ridley is to get an extension agreed to as part of the deal as we’ve done before. 

If Ridley goes anywhere, he will go to a team like Philly, where the Falcons would get their 15th and 19th 1st round picks along with a player like Reagor. Colts do not have draft capitol for Ridley. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, richard pallo said:

“A” pass catcher?  Instead of paying for a big FA signing we could acquire Calvin Ridley for a future conditional pick.  11m cap hit this coming year.  Very affordable and if he produces he’s well worth the pick and an extension.  He’s only 25yrs old.  I could see Ballard exploring something like this versus the big FA signing.

Falcons would never part with Ridley for anything less than 1st round picks. Philly as example could make a trade happen, not Indy

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Indeee said:

If Ridley goes anywhere, he will go to a team like Philly, where the Falcons would get their 15th and 19th 1st round picks along with a player like Reagor. Colts do not have draft capitol for Ridley. 


Ridley is not going to command the price of two 1st round picks plus a player.   Way too high.  
 

That said, I could see is getting outbid even if we have interest.    Still, there is a cloud of mystery around Ridley.   No one seems to know exactly why he didn’t play much this last season.   That will have to be thoroughly vetted. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

We better not be spending future premier picks on any position that's not QB. If Ballard gives up future 1st for someone like Ridley before he addresses QB, I think I would be done with him. This would be clear sign to me that he's doing things to save his job, rather than to take care of this team's future. 

  • Like 5
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, NewColtsFan said:


The only way we’d trade for Ridley is if he agrees to an extension when we do the deal.   Just like we did with Buckner.   And we did similar with Wentz. 
 

We’re not trading a Day 2 pick for one year with the hope it works out.   Why?   Because we’re screwed either way.   
 

Two scenarios…. In the first, it doesn’t work out for whatever reason, and then we will have traded a valuable Day Two pick for a one year rental.   Not good.   In the second version, Ridley comes and has a very good, maybe even great year and then what?   He has ALL THE LEVERAGE!   We have to sign him to whatever deal he wants.  Because if we don’t meet his price, another team likely will.   And he’d become a free agent and leave.   And as all of that plays out, we still have Pittman and Taylor to sign to extensions after next year.    
 

We will have painted ourselves into a corner.  
 

So the only way we’re trading for Ridley is to get an extension agreed to as part of the deal as we’ve done before. 

It was a no brainer to trade a 1st for Buckner and extend him.  He finished up having a great year with the 49er’s and they had cap problems and had to choose who to extend.  Exit Buckner for a 1st and we could easily reward him with an extension.  The only thing that’s similar is both teams were in cap trouble.  Other than that Ridley’s situation is entirely different.  He didn’t even play last year for some unknown personal reasons.  And a team is supposed to reward him with an extension and signing bonus.  What if the situation resurfaces again?  Too risky for me.  I would want to see him play, return to form and then absolutely reward him with a contract.  I don’t see him having any leverage at all.  The team has franchise tags at their disposal for multiple years if they choose.  That’s what happened to Robinson and Goodwin last year and likely Adams this year.  So if he has a good year the team has the tag as a last resort.  You definitely vent out his personal issues and if he clears then it’s an option that would definitely be on the table for me.  If Wentz is our QB then we need to get him some weapons.  Getting Ridley and signing Ertz or another TE would work out perfectly I would think.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Indeee said:

If Ridley goes anywhere, he will go to a team like Philly, where the Falcons would get their 15th and 19th 1st round picks along with a player like Reagor. Colts do not have draft capitol for Ridley. 

Calvin Ridley is not netting 2 first rounders 

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, richard pallo said:

It was a no brainer to trade a 1st for Buckner and extend him.  He finished up having a great year with the 49er’s and they had cap problems and had to choose who to extend.  Exit Buckner for a 1st and we could easily reward him with an extension.  The only thing that’s similar is both teams were in cap trouble.  Other than that Ridley’s situation is entirely different.  He didn’t even play last year for some unknown personal reasons.  And a team is supposed to reward him with an extension and signing bonus.  What if the situation resurfaces again?  Too risky for me.  I would want to see him play, return to form and then absolutely reward him with a contract.  I don’t see him having any leverage at all.  The team has franchise tags at their disposal for multiple years if they choose.  That’s what happened to Robinson and Goodwin last year and likely Adams this year.  So if he has a good year the team has the tag as a last resort.  You definitely vent out his personal issues and if he clears then it’s an option that would definitely be on the table for me.  If Wentz is our QB then we need to get him some weapons.  Getting Ridley and signing Ertz or another TE would work out perfectly I would think.  


You just explained why your idea is not going to happen.   Because you’d want to WAIT and see how he does before you make a commitment.  And the moment you do that Ridley has all the leverage.    The Colts would have already invested a high draft pick,  that gives him leverage.  If he doesn’t like our offer in a year, he can go elsewhere.  That gives him leverage.   
 

Ballard does NOT want to use the TAG on him or anyone else.   I don’t think he’s done it once.  The TAG is what other teams do.  Ballard does not want to do that.  He wants to pay his own.   He’s willing to let some players test free agency so they know their true value.   He does NOT want to TAG a just traded for guy after one year.  Bad for his business.  

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, NewColtsFan said:


You just explained why your idea is not going to happen.   Because you’d want to WAIT and see how he does before you make a commitment.  And the moment you do that Ridley has all the leverage.    The Colts would have already invested a high draft pick,  that gives him leverage.  If he doesn’t like our offer in a year, he can go elsewhere.  That gives him leverage.   
 

Ballard does NOT want to use the TAG on him or anyone else.   I don’t think he’s done it once.  The TAG is what other teams do.  Ballard does not want to do that.  He wants to pay his own.   He’s willing to let some players test free agency so they know their true value.   He does NOT want to TAG a just traded for guy after one year.  Bad for his business.  

If Ballard is pleased with his performance then he will sign him to an extension.  That shouldn’t be too difficult.  The tag is the last resort of course.  Just because he hasn’t used the tag doesn’t mean he won’t.  He hasn’t needed to so far.  No reason to expect it to change if an acquired player deserves to be extended.  He will extend him.  Ridley really has no leverage here.  He’s a player under contract.  He hasn’t played in a year.  Pretty simple really.  If his circumstances were similar to Buckner sure give him an extension.  But they are not.  Apple’s to oranges.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 minutes ago, richard pallo said:

If Ballard is pleased with his performance then he will sign him to an extension.  That shouldn’t be too difficult.  The tag is the last resort of course.  Just because he hasn’t used the tag doesn’t mean he won’t.  He hasn’t needed to so far.  No reason to expect it to change if an acquired player deserves to be extended.  He will extend him.  Ridley really has no leverage here.  He’s a player under contract.  He hasn’t played in a year.  Pretty simple really.  If his circumstances were similar to Buckner sure give him an extension.  But they are not.  Apple’s to oranges.


The point is this..    if Ridley performs well then we HAVE to meet his contract demands.  
If we’re forced to use the TAG, that alone will put him at a higher price than we want to pay.    I do not believe we want to pay a WR crazy money.  Any wide receiver.   The WR we want to pay the most to is already on our roster — Pittman.   
 

The more we have to pay Ridley, the more we have to pay Pittman.   They’ll be connected. 
 

That’s why the WHO is so important in who we acquire.   Players who WANT to be here and not WR’s chasing a big contract or are forced to be here due to the Tag.   It’s gotta be the right guy. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 hours ago, NewColtsFan said:

Ballard won’t have trouble explaining why we can’t afford to give Adams 6 years and $150 million or more.    Or why we’re not likely to give Robinson 4 years and $65 million, at least.    Irsay understands the salary cap. 
 

Could I be wrong?   Sure.  But I don’t see this happening.    Maybe if you can get a player like Godwin or Gallup cheaper, but only because they’re coming off major knee injuries.    Otherwise, I see us trying to sign someone who is not a sexy name to a modest contract with the goal that he out performs his contract.  

 

To be frank, I'm having to convince myself that it WILL happen. That Cole + 3rd round TE deal sounds way more realistic for us than I liked haha. I don't know if I actually believe or just hope it will happen, I just feel like bringing in a guy that MAY produce vs someone we've seen produce is inexcusable at this point.

 

Hopefully they view it through a "let's get Carson a very much needed weapon so that there is no excuse if he performs poorly" lens. Hopefully.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, BProland85 said:

I want TE Mike Gesicki. He is only 26, is still ascending, and wouldn’t cost a ton. 

 

Me too! I like the guy. He's #1 on my wish list; could be reliable target for us.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 hours ago, NewColtsFan said:

The point is this..    if Ridley performs well then we HAVE to meet his contract demands.  
If we’re forced to use the TAG, that alone will put him at a higher price than we want to pay.    I do not believe we want to pay a WR crazy money.  Any wide receiver.   The WR we want to pay the most to is already on our roster — Pittman.   
 

The more we have to pay Ridley, the more we have to pay Pittman.   They’ll be connected. 
 

That’s why the WHO is so important in who we acquire.   Players who WANT to be here and not WR’s chasing a big contract or are forced to be here due to the Tag.   It’s gotta be the right guy. 

 

Here are my thoughts.

 

Your thought process is based on the fact that you want to align your thoughts based on Ballard's history assuming that he will not change. The OP has his thought process (and some of us) with the hope that recent circumstances may make Ballard re-visit his own past approach to free agency. 

 

Besides, if you are going to pay Pittman fair market value or a tad more to keep him, why not do the same for a FA WR now? A FA has the right to shop around and if the Colts offer him (in Ballard's eyes) a fair market contract, and another team is willing to offer him a little more, doesn't that mean Ballard's fair market value offer is off by a bit. Instead of interpreting it as "that player does not want to be here just because he shopped around and got a little more with the other team", Ballard could re-evaluate his own fair market value and improvise to be flexible a bit more. I think the line in the sand thinking of not changing an offer after an initial one has been made has to be re-evaluated, IMO. It is not personal, it is just business.

 

If Ballard can tell one of his own FAs to go shop and bring him back a fair market value, then why won't he do that with an external FA, re-evaluate his own offer? Or make the Colts the last stop on the tour so that he knows whether he wants to bid in the first place or not? Obviously, the external FA who was NOT DRAFTED by the Colts is not going to be as vested to want to be here as opposed to finding the best deal for him. So the idea of "the player MUST WANT to be here" is a pipe dream at best, w.r.t FAs not drafted by the Colts because they obviously don't have roots in our locker room.

 

I hope I am being clear here in expecting a little more flexibility out of Ballard w.r.t external FAs, which is not too much to ask, IMO, given recent circumstances and the type of talent that other playoff teams are winning with on the skill position front.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

57 minutes ago, chad72 said:

Your thought process is based on the fact that you want to align your thoughts based on Ballard's history assuming that he will not change. The OP has his thought process (and some of us) with the hope that recent circumstances may make Ballard re-visit his own past approach to free agency. 

Great point.  I'm hoping that Irsay's * chewing (as Ballard put it) causes CB to reevaluate how he has approached some things.

 

This may be just my lens seeing it, but when Ballard spoke of Andrew and the team being "not about one guy"  sort of conflicts with his statement after the Jags game about how "sometimes a QB needs to be the reason you win the game".  If you have that QB that can win you one game, well, he's the guy that is going to play the other 16 games too.

 

And Irsay's tweet about needing and offense and QB that can score 30 pts and a defense that can hold an opponent to less than thirty points.

 

Looking at it, it seems like the thinking is heading towards a more dynamic offense than what we have had.  Maybe not so much JT up the middle oriented and a little more big play passing game oriented.

 

That would suggest more activity in FA as it pertains to WR and possibly TE.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, DougDew said:

 

And Irsay's tweet about needing and offense and QB that can score 30 pts and a defense that can hold an opponent to less than thirty points.

 

 

Definitely a far cry from...The Star Wars offense was good for a while...

 

Little did he know, that Star Wars offense is not something you can take for granted and has become a necessity, as an extra gear a team can go to, if needed to win at the highest level. You don't always have to use it but need the parts necessary if you have to take your offense up a notch.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

32 minutes ago, DougDew said:

Great point.  I'm hoping that Irsay's * chewing (as Ballard put it) causes CB to reevaluate how he has approached some things.

 

This may be just my lens seeing it, but when Ballard spoke of Andrew and the team being "not about one guy"  sort of conflicts with his statement after the Jags game about how "sometimes a QB needs to be the reason you win the game".  If you have that QB that can win you one game, well, he's the guy that is going to play the other 16 games too.

 

And Irsay's tweet about needing and offense and QB that can score 30 pts and a defense that can hold an opponent to less than thirty points.

 

Looking at it, it seems like the thinking is heading towards a more dynamic offense than what we have had.  Maybe not so much JT up the middle oriented and a little more big play passing game oriented.

 

That would suggest more activity in FA as it pertains to WR and possibly TE.

 

Yeah, this is my point. I think Irsay is applying a little more pressure than usual. I love that he is ANGRY. It's hard for me to believe we don't bring in a guy that can transform this offense given how * Irsay is. He wants us more dynamic.

 

I also don't think Ballard is THAT stubborn. It's more clear than it's ever been since I've started watching this team that we need an alpha pass catcher. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, 07dleigh said:

 

To be frank, I'm having to convince myself that it WILL happen. That Cole + 3rd round TE deal sounds way more realistic for us than I liked haha. I don't know if I actually believe or just hope it will happen, I just feel like bringing in a guy that MAY produce vs someone we've seen produce is inexcusable at this point.

 

Hopefully they view it through a "let's get Carson a very much needed weapon so that there is no excuse if he performs poorly" lens. Hopefully.


Inexcusable?    You’re telling me what you think we need….    I understand.   I’m simply saying I don’t think we can come close to affording that kind of player.   
 

We have to pay Nelson, that’s $20m per. 
We have to pay a LT, that’s likely $10m+ per. 
We likely have to pay Rock, that’s about $8m per.   There are about 15-20 guys on our roster that are FA, and we’d like to bring back.  
The salary cap math simply isn’t in our favor. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, chad72 said:

 

Here are my thoughts.

 

Your thought process is based on the fact that you want to align your thoughts based on Ballard's history assuming that he will not change. The OP has his thought process (and some of us) with the hope that recent circumstances may make Ballard re-visit his own past approach to free agency. 

 

Besides, if you are going to pay Pittman fair market value or a tad more to keep him, why not do the same for a FA WR now? A FA has the right to shop around and if the Colts offer him (in Ballard's eyes) a fair market contract, and another team is willing to offer him a little more, doesn't that mean Ballard's fair market value offer is off by a bit. Instead of interpreting it as "that player does not want to be here just because he shopped around and got a little more with the other team", Ballard could re-evaluate his own fair market value and improvise to be flexible a bit more. I think the line in the sand thinking of not changing an offer after an initial one has been made has to be re-evaluated, IMO. It is not personal, it is just business.

 

If Ballard can tell one of his own FAs to go shop and bring him back a fair market value, then why won't he do that with an external FA, re-evaluate his own offer? Or make the Colts the last stop on the tour so that he knows whether he wants to bid in the first place or not? Obviously, the external FA who was NOT DRAFTED by the Colts is not going to be as vested to want to be here as opposed to finding the best deal for him. So the idea of "the player MUST WANT to be here" is a pipe dream at best, w.r.t FAs not drafted by the Colts because they obviously don't have roots in our locker room.

 

I hope I am being clear here in expecting a little more flexibility out of Ballard w.r.t external FAs, which is not too much to ask, IMO, given recent circumstances and the type of talent that other playoff teams are winning with on the skill position front.


What happens in this scenario?

 

We trade for Ridley.    Don’t do a long-term deal right away as we did with Buckner.   We offer $12-13 mill per over 4 years.   Ridley’s agent says they have an offer from another team for 5/75m.   $15m per.   Ridley will have all the leverage.   We will have traded a DayTwo pick for a either a one year rental, or be forced to give in to his demands.  We would have no leverage.   Ridley would have all of the leverage. 
 

Besides,   where are we getting this money from with all our other needs?   We have to pay W, and a LT, and maybe, likely an extension for Rock as well.  Not to mention all the other free agents that we want to bring back.  Those names may not be sexy, but we do want them back.   I don’t see the salary cap math working in our favor…. 
 

I simply don’t see Ballard doing this for all the above reasons. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, NewColtsFan said:


What happens in this scenario?

 

We trade for Ridley.    Don’t do a long-term deal right away as we did with Buckner.   We offer $12-13 mill per over 4 years.   Ridley’s agent says they have an offer from another team for 5/75m.   $15m per.   Ridley will have all the leverage.   We will have traded a DayTwo pick for a either a one year rental, or be forced to give in to his demands.  We would have no leverage.   Ridley would have all of the leverage. 
 

Besides,   where are we getting this money from with all our other needs?   We have to pay W, and a LT, and maybe, likely an extension for Rock as well.  Not to mention all the other free agents that we want to bring back.  Those names may not be sexy, but we do want them back.   I don’t see the salary cap math working in our favor…. 
 

I simply don’t see Ballard doing this for all the above reasons. 

 

I wasn't talking just Ridley. We can get one in FA without ponying up for one with a high draft pick for that reason. While I responded to your post referencing Ridley, my preference wasn't exactly him and I would prefer to go with an experienced WR like ARob. We would have to restructure a few contracts to make room for it but if TY and Doyle retire / leave, it would give us some buffer in that regard. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

25 minutes ago, chad72 said:

 

I wasn't talking just Ridley. We can get one in FA without ponying up for one with a high draft pick for that reason. While I responded to your post referencing Ridley, my preference wasn't exactly him and I would prefer to go with an experienced WR like ARob. We would have to restructure a few contracts to make room for it but if TY and Doyle retire / leave, it would give us some buffer in that regard. 


I hope you’re right.  I do.  I’d always rather be wrong when it means good things for the Colts.    I don’t like being right if it means not as many good things.   So I hope I’m wrong. 
 

But I fear I’m right….     :giveup:

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

30 minutes ago, chad72 said:

 

I wasn't talking just Ridley. We can get one in FA without ponying up for one with a high draft pick for that reason. While I responded to your post referencing Ridley, my preference wasn't exactly him and I would prefer to go with an experienced WR like ARob. We would have to restructure a few contracts to make room for it but if TY and Doyle retire / leave, it would give us some buffer in that regard. 

I like Robinson too but that means a new big contract.  Hard for me to see Ballard doing that.  Ridley would buy him a year and cost a high pick.  Decisions Decisions.  

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guys, I hate to disagree with other Colts fans, but

I just dont think they will spend big for a FA WR.... not this year..... we dont have the cash

 

I see people touting 5-6 big name players to get in FA......  

 

Looking at our roster and with who we need to resign......AFTERWARDS 

there will probably be LESS than 25M available in total to sign FAs

 

As I see it....We have a few desperate needs for next year......  DE, LT, TE, and WR, top this list IMHO

 

You HAVE to fill these needs where you can, or go with what you have

 

In the draft, in the middle of round 2, you can actually get a nice WR that can start and contribute year 1

 

WanDale.......  c'mon down!

 

Immediate contributing LT and DEs that are blue chip are almost NEVER available in the middle of round 2

 

Might happen, but probably not

 

I think we need ONE splash move in FA........ And that is DE..... they HAVE to be at a high level....... another depth guy isnt going to cut the desperate need for pass rush DAY ONE

 

We may have enough $$$ to also get someone like Will Fuller AND a DE..... but not four or five FAs

 

It will be an interesting off season

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

ESPN's Jeremy Fowler said Allen Robinson would be "a good fit" for the Colts. 

Robinson, 29, coming off a terribly disappointing 2021 with the Bears, is unlikely to re-sign with Chicago and could make a sensible addition to a Colts offense without a true No. 2 receiver behind Michael Pittman. An AFC coach told Fowler that Robinson still has some appeal as a reliable pass catcher, though he lacks top-end separation ability. "He is great at contested catches, but there's a reason why he has to make [them]. He has some trouble separating," the anonymous coach said. 

Related:

Indianapolis Colts

Source: ESPN.com

Jan 28, 2022, 12:15 PM ET

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Indyfan4life said:

ESPN's Jeremy Fowler said Allen Robinson would be "a good fit" for the Colts. 

Robinson, 29, coming off a terribly disappointing 2021 with the Bears, is unlikely to re-sign with Chicago and could make a sensible addition to a Colts offense without a true No. 2 receiver behind Michael Pittman. An AFC coach told Fowler that Robinson still has some appeal as a reliable pass catcher, though he lacks top-end separation ability. "He is great at contested catches, but there's a reason why he has to make [them]. He has some trouble separating," the anonymous coach said. 

Related:

Indianapolis Colts

Source: ESPN.com

Jan 28, 2022, 12:15 PM ET

 

I saw the article, and unless he is HUGELY cheap...... we are full up on possession, contested catch type WRs

 

We have 3 of them

 

We need a guy that can get some actual separation

 

A FAST guy who can take the top off of the defense

 

 

 

 

 

 

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, MikeCurtis said:

 

I saw the article, and unless he is HUGELY cheap...... we are full up on possession, contested catch type WRs

 

We have 3 of them

 

We need a guy that can get some actual separation

 

A FAST guy who can take the top off of the defense

 

 

 

Let us get Christian Kirk then for the speedy slot and get an outside WR from the draft along with a TE from the draft as well. :) 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...