Jump to content
Indianapolis Colts
Indianapolis Colts Fan Forum

Ballard Presser at 4


Restinpeacesweetchloe

Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, TaylorTheStudMuffin said:

 

 

I think if TY were really interested in playing the 2022 season - the Colts would have already signed him.

 

I agree with Ballard - Ehlinger deserved a spot on the roster - and - he would have been claimed.  If Mason Rudolph has trade value - imagine how quick Ehlinger would get snapped up.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Shive said:

They definitely can, but throwing inexperienced OL to the wolves is a recipe for disaster. If one of our starting OL go down, we have a pretty steep drop-off in talent/experience with the depth we have at the moment. Hopefully we can get a healthy Dennis Kelly back to shore up our T depth and maybe bring Haeg back to Indy as well.

I understand that but some of y'all act like this will be the starting o-line week 1 lol these guys are here for rotation.....they already claimed one tackle off waivers....I'm just saying it will be ok.....more moves are coming

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, TaylorTheStudMuffin said:

How many games did our backups play last year. It was a ton. We had a lot of oline injuries and Covid with the starters.

Ok that was last year....it's a new season....plus all that experience we had with the backups last season they gave up some pressure too so it wasn't easy all the time

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, NewColtsFan said:


Maybe.   But for right now, I think he sounds more like Foles’ replacement before he’s in the discussion to be Ryan’s replacement. 

I won’t be surprised if that is exactly how it goes. Question is will they let Foles go next year or after his contract is up. Making Sam the backup in 24 then maybe starter in 25.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, NewColtsFan said:


“Wont be close to 80 percent until later in the season”.  
 

Where did you get that?    I didn’t hear Ballard say that.     Is this your view?  


I guess my main point was it’s probably going to take awhile for Leonard to be fully healthy. I hope it’s something that gets better as the season goes on. Also that his teammates help step up around him during the first month of the season. Enough slow starts!!!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, JediXMan said:


I guess my main point was it’s probably going to take awhile for Leonard to be fully healthy. I hope it’s something that gets better as the season goes on. Also that his teammates help step up around him during the first month of the season. Enough slow starts!!!

He is fully healthy. He just has to get back in practice shape.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, TaylorTheStudMuffin said:

He is fully healthy. He just has to get back in practice shape.

I hope so but I’m definitely wary until we see how he looks. He played basically on one ankle last season so if he gets his full speed back that’ll be huge.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

27 minutes ago, TaylorTheStudMuffin said:

No it probably had to do with protecting a young guy from that first round of waivers. Just procedure. It happened around the league a lot today.

Right, but don't they have to tear up his old contract and sign him to a new one? Is there an agreement that he'll still get the same money? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, cbear said:

Right, but don't they have to tear up his old contract and sign him to a new one? Is there an agreement that he'll still get the same money? 

I am  there is a agreement. I don’t think it had anything to do with salary. He isn’t making much anyway.

9 minutes ago, JediXMan said:

I hope so but I’m definitely wary until we see how he looks. He played basically on one ankle last season so if he gets his full speed back that’ll be huge.

How does this look for his first day back lol.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, cbear said:

So basically, they went through that whole exercise to pay him less money? 


I don’t think so, but I could be wrong.   I think we did it to protect a player (rookie safety) we thought would be claimed and gambled (correctly) that Kelly wouldn’t be claimed because of his injury.   The player has now been moved to IR, and we re-signed Kelly. 
 

I believe he was set to make 1.7m +/-     So hopefully in about a week to 10 days we will see if those numbers hold.  
 

So, if that holds up, call it roster gymnastics rather than budget savings.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, NewColtsFan said:


I don’t think so, but I could be wrong.   I think we did it to protect a player (rookie safety) we thought would be claimed and gambled (correctly) that Kelly wouldn’t be claimed because of his injury.   The player has now been moved to IR, and we re-signed Kelly. 
 

I believe he was set to make 1.7m +/-     So hopefully in about a week to 19 days we will see if those numbers hold.  
 

So, if that holds up, call it roster gymnastics rather than budget savings.  

Ncf, I figured it was the scenario you described to protect another player, but I was interested in the mechanics of it and if the GM and agent/player are communicating that he'll get the same amount when we re-sign him, so don't worry when we release him. That type of thing. I would think so. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, NewColtsFan said:


I don’t think so, but I could be wrong.   I think we did it to protect a player (rookie safety) we thought would be claimed and gambled (correctly) that Kelly wouldn’t be claimed because of his injury.   The player has now been moved to IR, and we re-signed Kelly. 
 

I believe he was set to make 1.7m +/-     So hopefully in about a week to 10 days we will see if those numbers hold.  
 

So, if that holds up, call it roster gymnastics rather than budget savings.  

Kelly never had to go through waivers.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, TaylorTheStudMuffin said:

Kelly never had to go through waivers.


Ok….  But I don’t think that changes my post.  We cut Kelly.   He was exposed to be signed by another team.  We could’ve lost him if he was signed by another team.   So our gamble worked. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 minutes ago, cbear said:

Ncf, I figured it was the scenario you described to protect another player, but I was interested in the mechanics of it and if the GM and agent/player are communicating that he'll get the same amount when we re-sign him, so don't worry when we release him. That type of thing. I would think so. 


I would think so.   We talk to the agent and explain our intentions.   The player knows this is just an administrative move to help the team and we’re not messing with his money or job security.   That’s my hunch. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, NewColtsFan said:


Ok….  But I don’t think that changes my post.  We cut Kelly.   He was exposed to be signed by another team.  We could’ve lost him if he was signed by another team.   So our gamble worked. 

I am sure before they cut him they agreed on a procedural thing where he was going to sign right back. I am sure there was no chance of that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, TaylorTheStudMuffin said:

I am sure before they cut him they agreed on a procedural thing where he was going to sign right back. I am sure there was no chance of that.


Look at my other posts in this thread.  I’ve said the exact same thing.   I wouldn’t say no chance, but I’d say highly unlikely.  I try not to deal in 100 percent absolutes.   Otherwise, I think we’re on the same page.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

30 minutes ago, TaylorTheStudMuffin said:

I am sure before they cut him they agreed on a procedural thing where he was going to sign right back. I am sure there was no chance of that.

The way Ballard spoke it sounded like Dennis Kelly may still be hurt? Do you know what Kelly's injury is? If he's going to be out a while, Is it possible they now send him to IR?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, 1959Colts said:

The way Ballard spoke it sounded like Dennis Kelly may still be hurt? Do you know what Kelly's injury is? If he's going to be out a while, Is it possible they now send him to IR?


He’s had a knee issue for roughly the last two-plus weeks.   It doesn’t sound major, and I think he’s expected to be back and playing soon.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, cbear said:

So basically, they went through that whole exercise to pay him less money? 

 

1 hour ago, NewColtsFan said:


I don’t think so, but I could be wrong.   I think we did it to protect a player (rookie safety) we thought would be claimed and gambled (correctly) that Kelly wouldn’t be claimed because of his injury.   The player has now been moved to IR, and we re-signed Kelly. 
 

I believe he was set to make 1.7m +/-     So hopefully in about a week to 10 days we will see if those numbers hold.  
 

So, if that holds up, call it roster gymnastics rather than budget savings.  

My personal opinion, means nothing, but I think it went down to contract guarantees for the vet.

 

If Kelly made final 53 the whole season would of been guaranteed. It is not on the re-sign.

 

I could be wrong there, but that was how I perceived it.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 hours ago, w87r said:

 

My personal opinion, means nothing, but I think it went down to contract guarantees for the vet.

 

If Kelly made final 53 the whole season would of been guaranteed. It is not on the re-sign.

 

I could be wrong there, but that was how I perceived it.

 


Im not sure if the contract guarantee is on the Final 53, or if on the 53 the actual week of the week one game?    
 

In years past some teams cut a veteran player for the week one game and then brought him back for week two.   That saved the team the guarantee, and they could cut the player at any time without the cost of the guarantee.  
 

So the gray area for me is when does the guarantee go into full effect?   At the announced 53?   Or at the week one 53 next week?    I’m honestly not sure? 
 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, NewColtsFan said:


Im not sure if the contract guarantee is on the Final 53, or if on the 53 the actual week if the week one game?    
 

In years past some teams cut a veteran player for the week one game and then brought him back for week two.   That saved the team the guarantee, and they could cut the player at any time without the cost of the guarantee.  
 

So the gray area for me is when does the guarantee go into full effect?   At the announced 53?   Or at the week one 53 next week?    I’m honestly not sure? 
 

The way he resigned so fast makes me think he didn’t lose any guarantees.  Jmo

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

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

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

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