Jump to content
Indianapolis Colts
Indianapolis Colts Fan Forum

What we are hearing__on Twitter, Reddit, Podcasts, from fans, on sports radio, etc.

NFLfan

By NFLfan
in Colts Football

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 4.6k
  • Created
  • Last Reply
philba101 Hall of Famer

philba101

Posted
Posted
17 hours ago, TaylorTheStudMuffin said:

I just get tired of hearing about potential then players don’t play. Can we get someone that can actually start and make a immediate impact. 6th and 7th round WR aren’t going to cut it. If they had potential they would be playing.

Agreed. At the end of the day this league is not about potential, it is about production. Ballard has failed to add WR production to our team via FA and just Pittman so far via the draft. That is not a lot of progress for 6 offseasons of work. Maybe Campbell could produce if he could stay on the field?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
richard pallo Ring of Honor

richard pallo

Posted
Posted
5 minutes ago, TaylorTheStudMuffin said:

I actually wouldn’t mind him as a backup to Ryan. Just good insurance.

 

 

Me too.  I don’t like the idea of Sam as the backup.  I would much rather have an experienced quarterback.  We should be co favorites for the South.  Don’t want to mess up our chances with a basically rookie quarterback if Ryan goes down.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Fisticuffs111 Team Captain

Fisticuffs111

Posted
Posted

Foles would be cool to have as backup but I wouldn’t even wanna give a 6th or 7th for him. 
 

People joke about those picks but we’ve found guys like Will Fries, Patmon, and Strachan who are all decent depth with some potential, and Glasgow who’s been a solid ST guy.
 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Restinpeacesweetchloe Ring of Honor

Restinpeacesweetchloe

Posted
Posted
7 minutes ago, Fisticuffs111 said:

Foles would be cool to have as backup but I wouldn’t even wanna give a 6th or 7th for him. 
 

People joke about those picks but we’ve found guys like Will Fries, Patmon, and Strachan who are all decent depth with some potential, and Glasgow who’s been a solid ST guy.
 

 

Let’s not forget Rodgers who it’s looking like he may end up starting at CB.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
philba101 Hall of Famer

philba101

Posted
Posted

According to Over The Cap, the Colts are sitting with $21.8 million in salary-cap space following the Ryan restructure. That’s good for the eighth-most in the NFL. The restructure brings Ryan’s cap hit in 2022 down from $24.7 million to $18.7 million. Conversely, it will raise his cap hit in 2023 from $28.7 million to $35.7 million.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Fisticuffs111 Team Captain

Fisticuffs111

Posted
Posted
12 minutes ago, TaylorTheStudMuffin said:

Let’s not forget Rodgers who it’s looking like he may end up starting at CB.


Oh, I totally forgot he was that late a rounder. Thought he was a 4th or 5th.

 

Yeah, I’ve been big on Rodgers. Dude knows how to play the ball. And a good kick returner too.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
philba101 Hall of Famer

philba101

Posted
Posted
18 minutes ago, TaylorTheStudMuffin said:

Let’s not forget Rodgers who it’s looking like he may end up starting at CB.

The Bears may not keep three QB's again so maybe Foles gets released. In that case I would like him as a backup but think he is worth a future 7th-rounder. The past relationship with Reich could make that a smooth transition and possibility if he becomes available.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
csmopar Ring of Honor

csmopar

Posted
Posted
48 minutes ago, philba101 said:

According to Over The Cap, the Colts are sitting with $21.8 million in salary-cap space following the Ryan restructure. That’s good for the eighth-most in the NFL. The restructure brings Ryan’s cap hit in 2022 down from $24.7 million to $18.7 million. Conversely, it will raise his cap hit in 2023 from $28.7 million to $35.7 million.

Thanks

Link to comment
Share on other sites
cdgacoltsfan Ring of Honor

cdgacoltsfan

Posted
Posted
18 hours ago, TaylorTheStudMuffin said:

Nobody wants him to go crazy. But is it go much to ask we sign one or two players. Colts still need like 30 players to get to 90 it’s so weird to me we haven’t signed more then we have

If you have time, can someone please update me with all the recent free agents  Ballard has signed to help our Colts  stay competitive in the AFC.

Thanks

Link to comment
Share on other sites
cjwhiskers Team Captain

cjwhiskers

Posted
Posted
3 minutes ago, TaylorTheStudMuffin said:

It’s not happening. Miami just gave up almost their entire draft class for Hill.

 

Don't they still have picks from everything they required from the Texans for Tunsil? I don't think they are for this year but for next year they have two firsts I think. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
chad72 Ring of Honor

chad72

Posted
Posted
15 minutes ago, TaylorTheStudMuffin said:

It’s not happening. Miami just gave up almost their entire draft class for Hill.

 

Why would Tom Brady go to the loaded AFC when everything is shaping up well for his swan song in the NFC? They have replaced, position wise, everything they lost in free agency and retained pretty much everyone. Only the Rams are in their way. He wants to retire winning a SB like Peyton did, that would be the perfect way to go out for him. If he wins a SB, he is definitely retiring on top and not coming back.

 

 

2 minutes ago, philba101 said:

Very affordable by this offseason's standards; the only concern is injury issues.

 

Depends on whether the Dolphins are a) wanting to trade him and b) what they want for him since his contract is cheap which trumps giving him away for a 5th or 6th rounder, they may insist on a 4th rounder and might cause a hold up.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
richard pallo Ring of Honor

richard pallo

Posted
Posted
29 minutes ago, TaylorTheStudMuffin said:

This would be so cheap.

 

 

A trade for Parker makes so much sense for the Colts.  Even if you have injury concerns his contract and cost are well worth the investment.  Almost all of the FA’s left have injury concerns.  Landry might not but he’s going to cost more than Parker’s contract.  Parker and draft a rookie seems like a good solution. Ryan needs another veteran.  I would take him over TY. JMO.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Old Man and the COLTS Active Roster

Old Man and the COLTS

Posted
Posted
1 hour ago, Fisticuffs111 said:

Foles would be cool to have as backup but I wouldn’t even wanna give a 6th or 7th for him. 
 

People joke about those picks but we’ve found guys like Will Fries, Patmon, and Strachan who are all decent depth with some potential, and Glasgow who’s been a solid ST guy.
 

 

With all due respect - you as the GM have a choice a third or fourth string player or a guy who is 1 play away from being your QB  so in our case Sam and depth or Foles as the back up 

 

what’s more important ?
 

 

 

 

away from being your QB 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
esmort Practice Squad

esmort

Posted
Posted
2 hours ago, Scott Pennock said:

Cherry picking data is a horrible way of making your point fit the narrative. 

 

For example, let's just say for the sake of argument that MVS had identical offers from the Chiefs and the Eagles.....what factors other than money would help sway his decision?

 

Then go back and read what I posted and try to be objective....

 

 

 

I don't know how this is cherry picking data as there really wasn't any data in the post I responded to or my response. 

 

In the post a responded to you suggested that the primary reason the Colts could not land big splash FAs was location ('Naptown"). You listed other potential reasons, but the reason you most emphasized was that the location was not desirable. 

 

I disagreed with your premise that the reason you didn't see splash signings/big name FAs in Indy was due to location. I offered the list of other cities that are no more desirable than Indy yet they sign big name/Splash free agents.

 

My point was that sure LA, NY, Miami, etc are probably more desirable locations to most free agents, but that was not the primary reason you don't see tons of big FA signings by the Colts. I suggested that money offered was the biggest driver of where most FAs choose to go (not location, especially as it might apply to just a city being less exciting). Again this isn't cherry picking data, this addressing the main argument of your post. 

 

Your MVS scenario is not an accurate representation of the what you were arguing in the post I responded to.  If the the point of your post was if the Colts offered the exact same contract as another team, but the other team had a better situation(roster, coaches, etc...), better odds of a SB, etc... than the player would choose the other team, I would agree. But that would apply to every team not just the Colts and that's not the what you said in your post. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Scott Pennock Ring of Honor

Scott Pennock

Posted
Posted
19 minutes ago, esmort said:

 

I don't know how this is cherry picking data as there really wasn't any data in the post I responded to or my response. 

 

In the post a responded to you suggested that the primary reason the Colts could not land big splash FAs was location ('Naptown"). You listed other potential reasons, but the reason you most emphasized was that the location was not desirable. 

 

I disagreed with your premise that the reason you didn't see splash signings/big name FAs in Indy was due to location. I offered the list of other cities that are no more desirable than Indy yet they sign big name/Splash free agents.

 

My point was that sure LA, NY, Miami, etc are probably more desirable locations to most free agents, but that was not the primary reason you don't see tons of big FA signings by the Colts. I suggested that money offered was the biggest driver of where most FAs choose to go (not location, especially as it might apply to just a city being less exciting). Again this isn't cherry picking data, this addressing the main argument of your post. 

 

Your MVS scenario is not an accurate representation of the what you were arguing in the post I responded to.  If the the point of your post was if the Colts offered the exact same contract as another team, but the other team had a better situation(roster, coaches, etc...), better odds of a SB, etc... than the player would choose the other team, I would agree. But that would apply to every team not just the Colts and that's not the what you said in your post. 

Fair enough. You responded to the first thought as destination and I get that as I went back and read my own post wondering if that was how it came off. I'm too lazy to go back and edit it, however, the destination was supposed to be part of the intangibles not the emphasis - so I apologize for that 'argument'!

 

But you also answered the rest in that a player will take the other intangibles in favor of more or similar money at times. I used the Chiefs and Eagles because of the QB situation being the intangible between Mahomes and that one guy in Philly. Ha! 

 

The most important thing that you said was that it happens to all teams, not just us. Which again, is lost on many on this message board.

 

Thank you for a well thought out response as that seems to be lost among a lot of folks these days!

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Fisticuffs111 Team Captain

Fisticuffs111

Posted
Posted
56 minutes ago, Old Man and the COLTS said:

With all due respect - you as the GM have a choice a third or fourth string player or a guy who is 1 play away from being your QB  so in our case Sam and depth or Foles as the back up 

 

what’s more important ?
 

 

 

 

away from being your QB 


I’d be fine with signing him if he’s cut, but I’d be kind of surprised if trading for Foles is on Ballard’s list of desires.

 

I think it’s more likely we roll with Sam and some FA to compete for backup. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
philba101 Hall of Famer

philba101

Posted
Posted
2 minutes ago, TaylorTheStudMuffin said:

As much as I think Parker would help this team trading for a guy that can’t stay healthy seems like a disaster when we already have one who can’t stay healthy.

I think I would take my chances with Beasley or Fuller (injury-plagued as well) and target a burner in the draft.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Go to topic listing

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

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