2023 Colts and NFL free agency news, rumors, discussions

[Defjamz26]

19 minutes ago, stitches said:

@TomDiggs @VikingsFanInChennai good posts, I will only talk about one part of it though - the misses in the draft. This is counter intuitive but some studies suggest that over the long term all GMs(with some outliers) have about the same success rate with picks in the draft and short term sways one way or the other are mainly due to chance. In other words, you can expect every GM to have similar success in the draft over the long haul. They will all have hits and they will all have misses and when you draw the line the rates will be similar. So what becomes important is other things like - what positions do they value? Do they get good value in trades? Do they trade back enough(this is something Ballard has done well with) because it's better to have 2 picks in the 40s than 1 pick in the 20s? Do they enter the draft with no major needs so they can freely draft according to their board, etc.? 

 

I still think the biggest thing that is hindering Ballard is his team building philosophy and what he values and what he thinks wins in this league. 

When you miss, no one remembers if you bounce back quickly. The Eagles traded up for Wentz and passed over Justin Jefferson for Jaelen Reagor. No one talks about thought because they fixed both mistakes within 2-3 years. I’ve always loved the Eagles FO because of that. The fact they ended up with Hurts and Brown trumps the mistakes.

 

The issue with Ballard is that doesn’t happen because he drafts the same type of players that failed before and doesn’t really make big signings and trades for better players.

[Dingus McGirt]

5 hours ago, 2006Coltsbestever said:

Easy question to answer. The 20 or so posters that are ok with an aging Vet being our starting QB and a lot of the same people that are ok with Ballard being frugal in free agency. People that would be ok with not drafting a QB and want nothing to do with Lamar. Just read all the posts and you will know who these people are.

I see your point.  But, I don't believe you actually believe folks are OK with mediocre play and results.   You may want Lamar, some don't.  You may want Ballard and Irsay to spend on Free Agents, some don't.  You may want a specific QB drafted this year, some don't.  I'm don't believe anyone on the forum is OK with the performance of the "aging vets" (except for Rivers).  

 

Not everyone agrees with Ballard's methodology and results.  Some do, given the nature of the Colt's market and ownership.  Still doesn't mean mediocrity is OK with forum followers.

 

You know this.  :^)

[throwing BBZ]

1 hour ago, Defjamz26 said:

When you miss, no one remembers if you bounce back quickly. The Eagles traded up for Wentz and passed over Justin Jefferson for Jaelen Reagor. No one talks about thought because they fixed both mistakes within 2-3 years. I’ve always loved the Eagles FO because of that. The fact they ended up with Hurts and Brown trumps the mistakes.

 

The issue with Ballard is that doesn’t happen because he drafts the same type of players that failed before and doesn’t really make big signings and trades for better players.

 

 Thanks for these two interesting, thoughtful posts.

 Ballard's failures in the second round have been killers. He sets the criteria for the athletes that fit his D and he gets it wrong over and over.

 Kwity, Obeydayo? and Cross, Pierce, Woods and Raimann all need to become VG and show that he is on a wiser path. IMO Ballard today looks easily replaceable.

[2006Coltsbestever]

1 hour ago, Dingus McGirt said:

I see your point.  But, I don't believe you actually believe folks are OK with mediocre play and results.   You may want Lamar, some don't.  You may want Ballard and Irsay to spend on Free Agents, some don't.  You may want a specific QB drafted this year, some don't.  I'm don't believe anyone on the forum is OK with the performance of the "aging vets" (except for Rivers).  

 

Not everyone agrees with Ballard's methodology and results.  Some do, given the nature of the Colt's market and ownership.  Still doesn't mean mediocrity is OK with forum followers.

 

You know this.  :^)

That is why I said around 20 posters. We have roughly 100 different people that post in here daily or every other day. I would say 80% of the posters aren't ok with being mediocre but around 20% seem ok with it when people like me and others mention different ways to improve the team and it gets poo'd on or gets a sad face. What should I think when some say they are ok with Ballard being frugal in free agency, they are ok with Minshew starting all year, we shouldn't touch Lamar with a 10 foot pole, we shouldn't draft a QB and just wait until next year. We haven't drafted a QB in the 1st round since we drafted Luck in 2012. I think it is about time we do something. Since Ballard has took over in 2017, we have no division Titles and 1 playoff win. Let me make this clear, I have defended Ballard for years, even said Luck retiring screwed him and the team up but after a while the winning needs to start. In order to win, your GM has to be aggressive at some point and make bold moves that may improve the team. 

 

What I have posted here is in no way bashing Ballard or the team. I am just saying what 80% of the people in here are thinking. Then you have your 20% that are just ok with everything. I mean I just go by what people post to gather my opinions.

[Dingus McGirt]

27 minutes ago, 2006Coltsbestever said:

That is why I said around 20 posters. We have roughly 100 different people that post in here daily or every other day. I would say 80% of the posters aren't ok with being mediocre but around 20% seem ok with it when people like me and others mention different ways to improve the team and it gets poo'd on or gets a sad face. What should I think when some say they are ok with Ballard being frugal in free agency, they are ok with Minshew starting all year, we shouldn't touch Lamar with a 10 foot pole, we shouldn't draft a QB and just wait until next year. We haven't drafted a QB in the 1st round since we drafted Luck in 2012. I think it is about time we do something. Since Ballard has took over in 2017, we have no division Titles and 1 playoff win. Let me make this clear, I have defended Ballard for years, even said Luck retiring screwed him and the team up but after a while the winning needs to start. In order to win, your GM has to be aggressive at some point and make bold moves that may improve the team. 

 

What I have posted here is in no way bashing Ballard or the team. I am just saying what 80% of the people in here are thinking. Then you have your 20% that are just ok with everything. I mean I just go by what people post to gather my opinions.

Ok.  At least we can agree there at least two members no OK with mediocrity.  :^)

[2006Coltsbestever]

11 minutes ago, Dingus McGirt said:

Ok.  At least we can agree there at least two members no OK with mediocrity.  :^)

I would say around 20  . I don't call people out but off the top of my head I can name 15-20 that seem they are just happy with management, or hope we don't draft a QB, and hope we don't go near Lamar. 80 out of 100 is good though because most people want to see winning. Let me add this, I agree with Ballard not being overly aggressive in free agency, that could back fire on you but I would love to see him at least get 1 or 2 big names that are in their prime that will help us improve. We need a WR and another O.lineman that will be impactful.

[richard pallo]

I know I’m in the minority but I wouldn’t mind resigning Pryor to being a backup swing guard if he would even resign with us.  Last years experiment moving him to tackle failed.  Smith could do it Pryor couldn’t.  But he is a good guard.  Needs to put the weight back on of course.  He is only 26 and I’m sure his contract would be very reasonable.  I could see him leaving us and having a nice long career like Austin Blyth and Denzele Goode did.   I’m hoping we resign him and put him back at guard.  JMO.

[2006Coltsbestever]

7 minutes ago, richard pallo said:

I know I’m in the minority but I wouldn’t mind resigning Pryor to being a backup swing guard if he would even resign with us.  Last years experiment moving him to tackle failed.  Smith could do it Pryor couldn’t.  But he is a good guard.  Needs to put the weight back on of course.  He is only 26 and I’m sure his contract would be very reasonable.  I could see him leaving us and having a nice long career like Austin Blyth and Denzele Goode did.   I’m hoping we resign him and put him back at guard.  JMO.

I respect your opinions because you are always trying to find ways to improve the team. I am not a big fan of Pryor but we need depth on the Line.

[jvan1973]

22 hours ago, Jared Cisneros said:

Anyone who knows who to build a team knows you draft a QB and don't take other teams retreads. They are generally retreads for a reason and up for trade for a reason. Rarely does it ever work out. Oh, and the funny thing to this is, Ballard signed Rivers instead of Brady, Brady won a SB that year. Ballard traded for Wentz instead of Stafford, Stafford won a SB that year. Literally anyone who Ballard doesn't sign ends up winning big. Is that because Ballard has bad jidgment, or because no one can succeed here because of how he runs this team as the GM?

Stafford,  Brady?

[throwing BBZ]

1 hour ago, 2006Coltsbestever said:

That is why I said around 20 posters. We have roughly 100 different people that post in here daily or every other day. I would say 80% of the posters aren't ok with being mediocre but around 20% seem ok with it when people like me and others mention different ways to improve the team and it gets poo'd on or gets a sad face. What should I think when some say they are ok with Ballard being frugal in free agency, they are ok with Minshew starting all year, we shouldn't touch Lamar with a 10 foot pole, we shouldn't draft a QB and just wait until next year. We haven't drafted a QB in the 1st round since we drafted Luck in 2012. I think it is about time we do something. Since Ballard has took over in 2017, we have no division Titles and 1 playoff win. Let me make this clear, I have defended Ballard for years, even said Luck retiring screwed him and the team up but after a while the winning needs to start. In order to win, your GM has to be aggressive at some point and make bold moves that may improve the team. 

 

What I have posted here is in no way bashing Ballard or the team. I am just saying what 80% of the people in here are thinking. Then you have your 20% that are just ok with everything. I mean I just go by what people post to gather my opinions.

 

 2006 you have as much passion as anyone here, usually much wiser than our two 20 post a day out there natterers.

 If you forget about your outlandish desire for certain mediocrity with Lamar, and admit that others QB ideas come with just as much or a more reasonable context as your ideas, you might find more peace.

 You are 100% off target that anyone is satisfied with mediocrity. Sometimes we have to accept where we are at in the moment. And over time we can criticize Ballard and his crew for their draft failures and FA misses.

 IMO we should be in a total reset, planning to match a young, properly balanced roster that is ready to bloom with our highly regarded Rookie QB.

 It's conceivable that our braintrust doesn't see him at 4.

 And we are in a very good position to quickly adapt if not.

But why worry about it? 

 It should be very clear the challenge is humongous to build a team able to get through the AFC Gauntlet to a SB. 

 Maybe we trade out of the first rd for a bunch of picks and then do the Lamar deal. That would be a gasser! Guarantee him $200M for 4 years and maybe make the playoffs once or twice in the years he stays healthy, but getting our butts kicked in the 1st rd. That is what i would expect.

[2006Coltsbestever]

2 minutes ago, throwing BBZ said:

 

 2006 you have as much passion as anyone here, usually much wiser than our two 20 post a day out there natterers.

 If you forget about your outlandish desire for certain mediocrity with Lamar, and admit that others QB ideas come with just as much or a more reasonable context as your ideas, you might find more peace.

 You are 100% off target that anyone is satisfied with mediocrity. Sometimes we have to accept where we are at in the moment. And over time we can criticize Ballard and his crew for their draft failures and FA misses.

 IMO we should be in a total reset, planning to match a young, properly balanced roster that is ready to bloom with our highly regarded Rookie QB.

 It's conceivable that our braintrust doesn't see him at 4.

 And we are in a very good position to quickly adapt if not.

But why worry about it? 

 It should be very clear the challenge is humungous to build a team able to get through the AFC Gauntlet to a SB. 

 Maybe we trade out of the first rd for a bunch of picks and then do the Lamar deal. That would be a gasser! Guarantee him $200M for 4 years and maybe make the playoffs once or twice in the years he stays healthy, but getting our butts kicked in the 1st rd. That is what i would expect.

Fair enough, you are one of the posters I truly respect. I just want what is best for the team. I am not even sure what it would take to get Lamar? I do think he wants out of Baltimore, seems that way anyway.

[2006Coltsbestever]

I just don't want to accept losing. I remember going through it from 1984-1986 and were the laughing stock of the league. 1991 was a nightmare too and at that time it looked real bad. I have seen real bad but as I get older I try not to let it bother me but it still does when we have a season like last year.

[throwing BBZ]

10 minutes ago, 2006Coltsbestever said:

I just don't want to accept losing. I remember going through it from 1984-1986 and were the laughing stock of the league. 1991 was a nightmare too and at that time it looked real bad. I have seen real bad but as I get older I try not to let it bother me but it still does when we have a season like last year.

 

 Sadly, i think we need one more year of drafting at the top to load up with a number of really good prospects, and unfortunately we will need to work past the Leonard and Q Contracts ASAP.

 This based on projecting they won't be able to earn their contracts. But it is yet to be determined of course.

[2006Coltsbestever]

4 minutes ago, throwing BBZ said:

 

 Sadly, i think we need one more year of drafting at the top to load up with a number of really good prospects, and unfortunately we will need to work past the Leonard and Q Contracts ASAP.

 This based on projecting they won't be able to earn their contracts. But it is yet to be determined of course.

I just have to trust Ballard and Irsay and see how they play this out. I have no choice. I have no idea what they are thinking either. Ballard may not even take a QB at #4.

[chad72]

32 minutes ago, throwing BBZ said:

 

Maybe we trade out of the first rd for a bunch of picks and then do the Lamar deal. That would be a gasser! Guarantee him $200M for 4 years and maybe make the playoffs once or twice in the years he stays healthy, but getting our butts kicked in the 1st rd. That is what i would expect.

 

That is how I would do it if I were the Colts, trading to the middle or back of Round 1 for a future 1st and then do the Lamar deal. That way, the loss is minimal. Also, let us not forget our darling Peyton Manning went 1-and-done in the playoffs of the 1999, 2000, 2001, 2005, 2007, 2008, and 2010 seasons, a WHOPPING 7 times with the Colts and another 2 times with the Broncos in 2012 and 2014. Lamar has done it 2 times, with a 1-3 record in the playoffs with 2 one-and-dones and a 1-1 record in 2020. Just like you would make excuses for Peyton by looking closer into those games, try doing the same for Lamar.

[2006Coltsbestever]

1 minute ago, chad72 said:

 

That is how I would do it if I were the Colts, trading to the middle or back of Round 1 for a future 1st and then do the Lamar deal. That way, the loss is minimal. Also, let us not forget our darling Peyton Manning went 1-and-done in the playoffs of the 1999, 2000, 2001, 2005, 2007, 2008, and 2010 seasons, a WHOPPING 7 times. 

Glaring Peyton stat but without Peyton and it is my opinion we don't make the playoffs at all with just an average QB in those years. With a good QB that isn't Peyton's level we may have made the playoffs once or twice but would have 0 SB wins.

[chad72]

2 minutes ago, 2006Coltsbestever said:

Glaring Peyton stat but without Peyton and it is my opinion we don't make the playoffs at all with just an average QB in those years. With a good QB that isn't Peyton's level we may have made the playoffs once or twice but would have 0 SB wins.

 

Yep. The same could be said for the Ravens too, in that tough AFC North and loaded AFC. Peyton's divisions weren't nearly as daunting as the AFC North is right now. Lamar gives them the edge and would have beaten the Bengals in that playoff game considering how well the Ravens' D played vs the Bengals.

 

Ballard's team construction is weaker at the top but strong in the middle and bottom compared to Polian. So, we are good enough for purgatory level records but need that QB to win the division.

[2006Coltsbestever]

Just now, chad72 said:

 

Yep. The same could be said for the Ravens too, in that tough AFC North and loaded AFC. Peyton's divisions weren't nearly as daunting as the AFC North is right now. Lamar gives them the edge and would have beaten the Bengals in that playoff game considering how well the Ravens' D played vs the Bengals.

I think Lamar gives us an edge in our division. That is why I keep bringing him up, although Lawrence is getting better. Lawrence is good but not great.

[Restinpeacesweetchloe]

Keefer new article talks about how he already sees a new approach from Ballard. Not going for quick fixes anymore.

[Restinpeacesweetchloe]

The moves also speak to a much-needed organizational shift in thinking. The days of chasing a few pricey veteran free agents seem to be over. The Colts, instead, are prioritizing long-term stability over short-term gains, mindful that a young quarterback is all but assuredly on his way. Irsay, for one, wants to “grow his own” at that position.

 

[Restinpeacesweetchloe]

This might make sense for Vikings.

 

 

[chad72]

16 minutes ago, Restinpeacesweetchloe said:

This might make sense for Vikings.

 

 

I was one of the first ones who brought up Hooker to the Vikings because cousins has just one more year to go. @NFLfan didn’t think it was feasible.

 

That’s the thing – teams like the Bucs or the Vikings have a tad more time to let a QB like Hooker develop behind a starter. They’re my most likely candidates.

[stitches]

22 minutes ago, Restinpeacesweetchloe said:

The moves also speak to a much-needed organizational shift in thinking. The days of chasing a few pricey veteran free agents seem to be over. The Colts, instead, are prioritizing long-term stability over short-term gains, mindful that a young quarterback is all but assuredly on his way. Irsay, for one, wants to “grow his own” at that position.

 

When were those days of chasing pricey veteran free agents? I really don't see much of a change in philosophy in FA. The only difference so far it seems is that we are indeed going for young QB rather than a vet... That's about it. 

[Restinpeacesweetchloe]

20 minutes ago, stitches said:

When were those days of chasing pricey veteran free agents? I really don't see much of a change in philosophy in FA. The only difference so far it seems is that we are indeed going for young QB rather than a vet... That's about it. 

I think he is talking about not going after guys like Gilmore. No more 37 year old QB either.  Ballard even admitted they had to high expectations. They have dialed them back and I think are looking more in the long term now.

[2006Coltsbestever]

2 minutes ago, Restinpeacesweetchloe said:

I think he is talking about not going after guys like Gilmore. No more 37 year old QB either.  Ballard even admitted they had to high expectations. They have dialed them back and I think are looking more in the long term now.

Rivers is thinking about coming out of retirement (sarcasm).

[richard pallo]

24 minutes ago, stitches said:

When were those days of chasing pricey veteran free agents? I really don't see much of a change in philosophy in FA. The only difference so far it seems is that we are indeed going for young QB rather than a vet... That's about it. 

I don’t see that take either.  Pricey FA?  Everybody was complaining about us not going after them.   I can’t believe that take.  Keeping on Ballard’s good side it appears.

[Restinpeacesweetchloe]

I actually understand what’s keefers story is trying to say. I think Ballard got away from his initial team building philosophy when Luck retired. When Luck retired he should of stopped took a breather and figured out how they were going to draft a QB. Instead he tried to bandaid it and thought team was closer then they were. Needs to get back to his vision of how you have long term stability. 

[Restinpeacesweetchloe]

Well

 

[Restinpeacesweetchloe]

Well we have a WR

 

 

[krunk]

3 minutes ago, Restinpeacesweetchloe said:

Well we have a WR

 

 

Somebody here in the forums wanted him. Is he a slot?

[Restinpeacesweetchloe]

1 minute ago, krunk said:

Somebody here in the forums wanted him. Is he a slot?

Yes. I like this move because it doesn’t put pressure on Ballard to have to take a WR high in the draft. If it’s there he can take it but doesn’t have to force it. Plus it relieves pressure of a rookie if they do decide on a WR in the draft.

[KB]

2 minutes ago, krunk said:

Somebody here in the forums wanted him. Is he a slot?

5'8" and 173 lbs says slot to me.  Ran a 4.42 40 at the combine in 2017.

[2006Coltsbestever]

3 minutes ago, krunk said:

Somebody here in the forums wanted him. Is he a slot?

Good move. Ballard did well here. He is good, over 10 yards a catch, over 40 Receptions and did have 4 TD's. Nothing great but good and he is fast.

[NewColtsFan]

2 minutes ago, krunk said:

Somebody here in the forums wanted him. Is he a slot?

That would be me!   Yours truly.    
 

McKenzie is a little guy.   Off the top of my head, perhaps 5’9” and 170.   Quick as a hiccup.    He is very much a slot, and can do some STs as well.  

[krunk]

2 minutes ago, NewColtsFan said:

That would be me!   Yours truly.    
 

McKenzie is a little guy.   Off the top of my head, perhaps 5’9” and 170.   Quick as a hiccup.    He is very much a slot, and can do some STs as well.  

This tells me Coutee wont be back. Or i guess remains a PS player. This smaller type guy is a better fit for the slot honestly. Paris could do it but more built body wise for the boundary.

[Restinpeacesweetchloe]

I think this will also give you a little of what Hines gave us when he played slot. Could be a little bit of a gimmick player that can do several things.

[richard pallo]

4 minutes ago, Restinpeacesweetchloe said:

Yes. I like this move because it doesn’t put pressure on Ballard to have to take a WR high in the draft. If it’s there he can take it but doesn’t have to force it. Plus it relieves pressure of a rookie if they do decide on a WR in the draft.

He had his best year as a pro last year.  A return man as well.  A fan favorite of the Bills.  Great locker room guy.  Should fit in well.

[krunk]

So we get a small break from the Ballard bashing huh? At least for today anyway

 Lol!

[richard pallo]

1 minute ago, richard pallo said:

He had his best year as a pro last year.  A return man as well.  A fan favorite of the Bills.  Great locker room guy.  Should fit in well.

He was definitely a cap casualty cut.  The Bills saved 2m on the cap and avoided paying him a $250,000 bonus.

[2006Coltsbestever]

5 minutes ago, krunk said:

So we get a small break from the Ballard bashing huh? At least for today anyway

 Lol!