Jonathan Taylor comments on his contract/Request trade (Merge)

[NFLfan]

26 minutes ago, GoColts8818 said:

They are getting paid by your standards (and most people’s standards) but not by their peers.  If anyone feels they are significantly being under paid compared to their peers you are going to have issues.

 

I'm not sure how folks do not see that. It is relative.

[GoColts8818]

2 minutes ago, NFLfan said:

 

I'm not sure how folks do not see that. It is relative.

We all live in our own little bubbles and it’s really hard for someone who will probably never make $10 million a year in their lives to understand why someone would be upset about “only” making that much.  

[jvan1973]

1 hour ago, w87r said:

Teams can tag players more than twice(3 times), it's just not a good fiscal move.

 

 

Tag amount goes to QB Tag amount or 144% of 2nd tag. Whichever is greater, which will be the QB tag amount.

 

 

I think you're asking since he didn't sign the tag, did it count?

 

If so, yes, it still counts as soon as it is designated.

 

 

But he didn't sign the tag.  He signed a 1 year deal

[CR91]

1 hour ago, csmopar said:

Not getting paid? Are you serious? They’re making MILLIONS! And the tag is worth 10 million plus. They’re getting paid. 

They’ll tag him if he fits the system. 

 

So if your co-worker was making twice as much as you because they were doing a different job then you even though you're just as much as part of the success of the team, you wouldn't be upset?

[CR91]

2 hours ago, w87r said:

Couldn't get a long term deal at that point.

 

Only thing he could do was get a little more money on a 1yr deal than the Tag amount, which he did, well at least gave himself a chance to.

 

Or sit out, those were the options.

 

I honestly don't get the point of the tag then if teams are gonna use it just to have leverage on players. It's a broken system 

[NewColtsFan]

2 minutes ago, CR91 said:

 

I honestly don't get the point of the tag then if teams are gonna use it just to have leverage on players. It's a broken system 

The point of the Tag was to gave a compromise option so that players weren’t holding out for a better contract and teams weren’t locking players out. 
 

I guess calling the system broken is in the eye of the beholder.   It’s clearly imperfect but perhaps good enough, fair enough to both sides.   

[GoColts8818]

33 minutes ago, CR91 said:

 

I honestly don't get the point of the tag then if teams are gonna use it just to have leverage on players. It's a broken system 

The whole idea of a franchise tag is to favor the Owners because it takes away from free agency.  There is a reason the NBA and MLB, who have stronger unions, doesn’t have one.  So if you look at it on its own of course it’s going to look broken but it’s just one part of a larger agreement in the CBA.  All CBAs have things in them that favor management and others that favor employees or in this case owners and players.  That’s the compromise that goes into which is often if you give us this we will give you that.  The franchise tag was created by the Owners to help ensure they could keep their star players.  It’s key part of why the NFL has parity, mid market and small market teams can tag players if needed to keep them.  

[stitches]

2 hours ago, Restinpeacesweetchloe said:

Was listening to a podcast. They said Ballard could use a couple trump cards.  One he could tell his agent if your so sure you can find a team willing pay him more then us you have permission to go find it. Then come back to us. Chances are he won’t find it. He could also tell the agent we aren’t negotiating with a injure player. Then bring Pittman in and pay him and tell Taylor he has to wait.

 

 

Yeah, I think it was @Superman that mentioned yesterday that by what Ballard said it seems like we probably haven't even offered an extension and we are waiting to see how the new coaching staff uses Taylor. I think it's reasonable for a player coming off an injury that is "serious" enough to keep him on PUP 6 months after surgery. 

[Yoshinator]

58 minutes ago, CR91 said:

 

So if your co-worker was making twice as much as you because they were doing a different job then you even though you're just as much as part of the success of the team, you wouldn't be upset?

The NFL isn't a socialist league where everyone is equal. You get paid based on your worth to the team. That is determined heavily by the position you play. 

 

To your example, a flight attendant wouldn't be worth as much as a pilot, or a nurse wouldn't be worth as much as a doctor. A normal cop wouldn't be worth as much as a sheriff. See where I'm coming from here?

[stitches]

6 hours ago, crazycolt1 said:

No matter what the RBs want they are under the collective bargaining agreement that they and their fellow players negotiated and voted on. 

Something those RBs are not ready for - the NFL market is a zero-sum game. Do they really think every other position will sacrifice their own potential pay in order to artificially raise the money RBs are getting? Some of those proposals they are floating will do exactly that. Other proposals seem incredibly misguided and will actually hurt RBs in the long-term IMO(for example shorter term rookie contracts for RBs... what do they think will happen? This will lower the value of RBs in the draft even more. Teams would just never draft a RB in the first 3 rounds... and then when negotiations for contracts come, they will be less likely to invest in players they haven't spent big draft capital... and MORE IMPORTANT - why would you spend 15M when you will be able to get the best of the new crop of RBs in the 3d-4th round because their rookie contract value has been devalued) 

 

I honestly don't know what the solution is. It sucks for the players that the position is getting devalued and the teams are actually catching up to the value they are giving up by paying top of the market value... but I'm honestly not sure any of the newly proposed "solutions" are actually solutions at all or if they would even be accepted by the rest of the league.  

[CR91]

2 minutes ago, Jared Cisneros said:

The NFL isn't a socialist league where everyone is equal. You get paid based on your worth to the team. That is determined heavily by the position you play. 

 

To your example, a flight attendant wouldn't be worth as much as a pilot, or a nurse wouldn't be worth as much as a doctor. A normal cop wouldn't be worth as much as a sheriff. See where I'm coming from here?

 

We're not talking an entry level employee to a manager. Are you gonna try to say Taylor isn't worth paying more then Pittman?

[Yoshinator]

Just now, CR91 said:

 

We're not talking an entry level employee to a manager. Are you gonna try to say Taylor isn't worth paying more then Pittman?

Yes, I am saying that. WR is worth more than RB. An elite RB is worth as much as an average/above average WR. That's the way it is. One job is more important than the other, and one job is more replaceable than the other. One job also has a shorter shelf life than the other, and that's a big deal when you are drafting these players on a 53 man roster to build the best team possible.

[CR91]

1 minute ago, Jared Cisneros said:

Yes, I am saying that. WR is worth more than RB. An elite RB is worth as much as an average/above average WR. That's the way it is. One job is more important than the other, and one job is more replaceable than the other. One job also has a shorter shelf life than the other, and that's a big deal when you are drafting these players on a 53 man roster to build the best team possible.

 

I'm not talking position. I'm talking the player. Is Taylor better then Pittman?

[Yoshinator]

Just now, CR91 said:

 

I'm not talking position. I'm talking the player. Is Taylor better then Pittman?

Yes, but that's irrelevant. As I said, an elite RB is worth the value of an average/above average WR. Just like Pittman would only be worth the value of an average QB like a Garrapollo if you need me to put it in different terms.

 

It's also about strategically spending money, and an RB isn't the best way to spend money when they are replaceable in the mid-round of every draft or in FA. Look at FA, there are 4-5 solid rbs left at this point still, including a top 20 guy in dalvin cook.

[colts89]

4 minutes ago, CR91 said:

 

I'm not talking position. I'm talking the player. Is Taylor better then Pittman?

I can't imagine how any Colts fan who watched the games could say that Taylor hasn't been better than Pittman. Taylor has been one of the best offensive players in the league these last two years.

[CR91]

1 minute ago, Jared Cisneros said:

Yes, but that's irrelevant. As I said, an elite RB is worth the value of an average/above average WR. Just like Pittman would only be worth the value of an average QB like a Garrapollo if you need me to put it in different terms.

 

It's also about strategically spending money, and an RB isn't the best way to spend money when they are replaceable in the mid-round of every draft or in FA. Look at FA, there are 4-5 solid rbs left at this point still, including a top 20 guy in dalvin cook.

 

It's not irrelevant. Why should Pittman make 20+ mil while Taylor can't even get 14? Pittman hasn't put up remotely close to the numbers Taylor has. Don't get it wrong. I like Pitt, but you don't see how hypocritical this situation is?

1 minute ago, colts89 said:

I can't imagine how any Colts fan who watched the games could say that Taylor hasn't been better than Pittman. Taylor has been one of the best offensive players in the league these last two years.

 

That's my point.

[Yoshinator]

Just now, CR91 said:

 

It's not irrelevant. Why should Pittman make 20+ mil while Taylor can't even get 14? Pittman hasn't put up remotely close to the numbers Taylor has. Don't get it wrong. I like Pitt, but you don't see how hypocritical this situation is?

WR is a premium position and RB is not. WRs are harder to fill, RBs are easier. You are being valued by your position. Your position is a big part of your worth. Not all positions are equal. It's been proven this is a passing league. WRs are part of that. RBs aren't mostly. 

[colts89]

2 minutes ago, Jared Cisneros said:

Yes, but that's irrelevant. As I said, an elite RB is worth the value of an average/above average WR. Just like Pittman would only be worth the value of an average QB like a Garrapollo if you need me to put it in different terms.

 

It's also about strategically spending money, and an RB isn't the best way to spend money when they are replaceable in the mid-round of every draft or in FA. Look at FA, there are 4-5 solid rbs left at this point still, including a top 20 guy in dalvin cook.

The Colts haven't offered Taylor a contract yet to begin with. We don't know if Taylor wouldn't take an above average WR level contract.

 

[NewColtsFan]

17 minutes ago, CR91 said:

 

We're not talking an entry level employee to a manager. Are you gonna try to say Taylor isn't worth paying more then Pittman?

The NFL has spoken loud and clear.   A good wide receiver like Pittman is worth more than a top running back.   
 

As this community talked about a year ago, Pittman’s market is easily in the mid to upper teens, maybe even $20m per.  
 

A year ago, in better times for Taylor, his market was thought to be $14-15m, so less than Pittman.   
 

Now, with the floor for Taylor collapsing, the difference is even sharper.   So yes, Pittman is worth more than Taylor in the broader NFL market.   It may not be right or fair, but that’s what the market is saying.   
 

By the way, I wouldn’t rule out Ballard trying to sign JT to a multi-test deal, I’m just not sure if Irsay will let that happen.  
 

NOTE: a new post now says Irsay admits the Colts have NOT made Taylor an official offer.   That, to me, is disappointing.   

[jvan1973]

7 minutes ago, Jared Cisneros said:

Yes, but that's irrelevant. As I said, an elite RB is worth the value of an average/above average WR. Just like Pittman would only be worth the value of an average QB like a Garrapollo if you need me to put it in different terms.

 

It's also about strategically spending money, and an RB isn't the best way to spend money when they are replaceable in the mid-round of every draft or in FA. Look at FA, there are 4-5 solid rbs left at this point still, including a top 20 guy in dalvin cook.

I'm not sure about the mid rounds.   Of the 2022 top ten running backs.  Only 2 were drafted outside the 2nd round. 

[Yoshinator]

Just now, colts89 said:

The Colts haven't offered Taylor a contract yet to begin with. We don't know if Taylor wouldn't take an above average WR level contract.

 

An above average WR contract would make Taylor the highest-paid RB in the league most likely. He'd take that. I'm not completely convinced we will offer Taylor a new contract. I think Ballard will sign Pittman first at the very least.

[CR91]

4 minutes ago, Jared Cisneros said:

WR is a premium position and RB is not. WRs are harder to fill, RBs are easier. You are being valued by your position. Your position is a big part of your worth. Not all positions are equal. It's been proven this is a passing league. WRs are part of that. RBs aren't mostly. 

 

I don't buy that. We've seen top level QBs making chicken % WRs into stars. Hell Mahomes just won a Superbowl with a broken ankle and I couldn't name you two of his WRs.

[Yoshinator]

1 minute ago, jvan1973 said:

I'm not sure about the mid rounds.   Of the 2022 top ten running backs.  Only 2 were drafted outside the 2nd round. 

Fair enough, generally they are going outside the 1st round more often now though. I still think they have one of the highest hit rates of any position outside the 1st round.

[jvan1973]

3 minutes ago, CR91 said:

 

I don't buy that. We've seen top level QBs making chicken % WRs into stars. Hell Mahomes just won a Superbowl with a broken ankle and I couldn't name you two of his WRs.

The Chiefs don't have high dollar wrs.  They have Kelce

[Yoshinator]

2 minutes ago, CR91 said:

 

I don't buy that. We've seen top level QBs making chicken % WRs into stars. Hell Mahomes just won a Superbowl with a broken ankle and I couldn't name you two of his WRs.

Don't care if you don't buy it, it's the truth. WRs are more valuable because it's a passing league. I say that, Ballard and every other GM says that by the market value, and the draft generally says it as more WRs are consistently being drafted higher than RBs. You can deny it, but it's the truth. An elite WR is more valuable than Taylor 100 out of 100 times.

[NewColtsFan]

4 minutes ago, CR91 said:

 

I don't buy that. We've seen top level QBs making chicken % WRs into stars. Hell Mahomes just won a Superbowl with a broken ankle and I couldn't name you two of his WRs.

Are those WRs making any money?   No.   Whether you buy it or not, the NFL does, and that’s all that matters.  

[jvan1973]

1 minute ago, Jared Cisneros said:

Don't care if you don't buy it, it's the truth. WRs are more valuable because it's a passing league. I say that, Ballard and every other GM says that by the market value, and the draft generally says it as more WRs are consistently being drafted higher than RBs. You can deny it, but it's the truth. An elite WR is more valuable than Taylor 100 out of 100 times.

In the end it comes down to QB.   You either have one or you don't.   A Marshall Faulk type back would set the market for backs today.   He lined up out wide pretty regularly 

[Yoshinator]

Just now, jvan1973 said:

In the end it comes down to QB.   You either have one or you don't.   A Marshall Faulk type back would set the market for backs today.   He lined up out wide pretty regularly 

Yep. As I said, it's a passing league. You need a QB and a couple solid WRs on offense. That's what carries most of the teams to the playoffs that make it every year. McCaffrey is pretty much close to Faulk. If he can stay healthy, he could be the exception to help carry the 49ers as Brock Purdy would be passable IMO.

[jvan1973]

BTW Kelce is woefully under paid for the production he has put up

[CR91]

5 minutes ago, NewColtsFan said:

Are those WRs making any money?   No.   Whether you buy it or not, the NFL does, and that’s all that matters.  

 

Poster said WR is premium for team success. Im just debunking it. Hell even Brady had average WRs most of his career. Peyton made some nobody called Blair White relevant 

[CR91]

7 minutes ago, Jared Cisneros said:

Don't care if you don't buy it, it's the truth. WRs are more valuable because it's a passing league. I say that, Ballard and every other GM says that by the market value, and the draft generally says it as more WRs are consistently being drafted higher than RBs. You can deny it, but it's the truth. An elite WR is more valuable than Taylor 100 out of 100 times.

 

We're not talking elite WRs. WR2 caliber players are making more money then some top RBs.

[Yoshinator]

Just now, CR91 said:

 

Poster said WR is premium for team success. Im just debunking it. Hell even Brady had average WRs most of his career. Peyton made some nobody called Blair White relevant 

So it takes two of the top 3 QBs of all time to do that? There's generally a very short list of QBs who can do that with weak WRs. 

[Yoshinator]

Just now, CR91 said:

 

We're not talking elite WRs. WR2 caliber players are making more money then some top RBs.

As they should. A WR like Tee Higgins or Courtland Sutton or Mike Williams brings more value to the team. Especially if you combine that with saving money on a RB on the other side.

 

What would you rather have on the Colts: Tee Higgins and a rookie RB that can probably start right away on a rookie contract or Jonathan Taylor and a rookie WR that probably needs development on a rookie contract. This is a common situation that most teams run into every year.

[CR91]

1 minute ago, Jared Cisneros said:

As they should. A WR like Tee Higgins or Courtland Sutton or Mike Williams brings more value to the team. Especially if you combine that with saving money on a RB on the other side.

 

What would you rather have on the Colts: Tee Higgins and a rookie RB that can probably start right away on a rookie contract or Jonathan Taylor and a rookie WR that probably needs development on a rookie contract. This is a common situation that most teams run into every year.

 

I would not take Higgins or Sutton for Taylor 

[Yoshinator]

1 minute ago, CR91 said:

 

I would not take Higgins or Sutton for Taylor 

32 GMs would take Higgins over Taylor if they were paid the same. I'm guessing 32 GMs would take Higgins even if he cost more money if it was a straight up swap. Sutton is about what Taylor is worth as a WR. So it'd be close there. 

 

I'm very surprised to hear this stance from you. I can't explain it any better. I'll let someone else do it at this point. You are completely in the wrong though, and you saw what Barkley is paid and what he accepted, and Taylor is going to get around that much per year as well. That's just how the position is valued. Sorry you can't see that and accept it.

 

Have a good night.

[CR91]

36 minutes ago, Jared Cisneros said:

32 GMs would take Higgins over Taylor if they were paid the same. I'm guessing 32 GMs would take Higgins even if he cost more money if it was a straight up swap. Sutton is about what Taylor is worth as a WR. So it'd be close there. 

 

I'm very surprised to hear this stance from you. I can't explain it any better. I'll let someone else do it at this point. You are completely in the wrong though, and you saw what Barkley is paid and what he accepted, and Taylor is going to get around that much per year as well. That's just how the position is valued. Sorry you can't see that and accept it.

 

Have a good night.

 

If they were paid the same? No one thinks Higgins is better then Taylor. That's a joke.

[NewColtsFan]

55 minutes ago, CR91 said:

 

Poster said WR is premium for team success. Im just debunking it. Hell even Brady had average WRs most of his career. Peyton made some nobody called Blair White relevant 

Goodness gracious, do you know how far back you’re going?   Almost nothing current.  

 

And you’re not coming close to debunking anything.   32 Teams and the NFL disagree with you.   
 

You can call it unfair, but that’s a different issue.   

[CR91]

25 minutes ago, NewColtsFan said:

Goodness gracious, do you know how far back you’re going?   Almost nothing current.  

 

And you’re not coming close to debunking anything.   32 Teams and the NFL disagree with you.   
 

You can call it unfair, but that’s a different issue.   

 

I also said Mahomes. His best "WR" was Juju. We're talking WRs. You can call Kelce whatever you want, but we're taking strictly WRs.

[NewColtsFan]

21 minutes ago, CR91 said:

 

I also said Mahomes. His best "WR" was Juju. We're talking WRs. You can call Kelce whatever you want, but we're taking strictly WRs.

The fact that Mahomes can exceed with no name WRs doesn’t prove that the NFL doesn’t value WRs more  than RBs.  
 

You had to go back almost 20 years to talk about Blair White.  And you forgot that Peyton had TWO HoF WRs named Harrison and Wayne plus a top tight end named Clark.  That’s not a good argument.   
 

[2006Coltsbestever]

10 hours ago, Nickster said:

Don’t agree at all necessarily.  He may be a putz I don’t know the dude but he has a specific job to do.

 

Agents are voluntarily paid by athletes to represent said athletes.  Athletes can control how they are represented if they choose to.

 

if you think that JTs agent is being a putz then logically that would point in the direction of JT being a putz since he chooses who and how he’s represented.

 

his agents tweets are essentially JTs tweets when it comes to Colt/JT communiques.  JT. Could with a few thumb movements tweet a denunciation of any of his agents tweets 

 

unless JT is some weak minded door mat that is.  Don’t know him but he doesn’t seem that way on TV.

 

And BTW.  I have no concern or disdain for athletes and their agents fighting for dollars in any manner they see fit.  Same with the org allocating the scarce resources o v the NFL cap.  Business in business.  Not judging Taylor, his agent, or JI and the FO.  Just doing business which can and often does get muddy.

I have already posted that his main job is to get JT the best deal, he is still a putz the way he is going about it. He is causing friction within my team, I say my team because this is the team I have rooted for going on 40 seasons. Negativity and friction are 2 things Homey doesn't play. 👍