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

[csmopar]

19 minutes ago, Larry Horseman said:

 

The $13 mill average tracks for a three year deal, but the guarantees are where it gets sticky. Any three year deal needs to take into account what the franchise tag numbers would look like over that same span. If we use this year's tag (~$10 million) and the franchise tag numbers if the Colts tagged him two more times (~$12 million and ~$17 million), then we are at the $13 mill yearly average. If tagged, all of this salary would be guaranteed. Now, JT is getting more stability with an actual contract, but there's no way the guarantee can drop below $22 mill (first two tag years), and I think it would need to push beyond that to account for some of the guarantees for a hypothetical third tag year. 

Ok so guarantee the first two years, gives an out after that with no cap hit.

[Restinpeacesweetchloe]

 

[stitches]

Ballard said a few words on Taylor in this interview:

 

 

 

[csmopar]

15 minutes ago, Restinpeacesweetchloe said:

 

So basically JT is hurt. Question is: same injury from January or a new one?

[Restinpeacesweetchloe]

1 minute ago, csmopar said:

So basically JT is hurt. Question is: same injury from January or a new one?

Or they are just playing his game to not make things worse.

[jvan1973]

Just now, Restinpeacesweetchloe said:

Or they are just playing his game to not make things worse.

In what way would that help anything?  Maybe waiting until everything comes out before freaking out is the proper approach 

[Restinpeacesweetchloe]

2 minutes ago, jvan1973 said:

In what way would that help anything?  Maybe waiting until everything comes out before freaking out is the proper approach 

He says he is still hurt. So just play along and say ok let’s get you treatment. Instead of pressuring him and saying he is lying keeps thing cooler.

[jvan1973]

Just now, Restinpeacesweetchloe said:

He says he is still hurt. So just play along and say ok let’s get you treatment. Instead of pressuring him and saying he is lying keeps thing cooler.

Well,  how would they know if he is lying?  

 

Also,  how does ending up on IR help JT?

 

Maybe he isn't feeling 100% and is trying to figure out why

[Restinpeacesweetchloe]

Just now, csmopar said:

FYI: Marsh has tinfoil on sale this week. Just saying 

It’s the only thing that makes sense when he has asked to be traded.   No sane person asks for a trade while injured.

[Restinpeacesweetchloe]

Anyone else have any advice why Twitter won’t let me embed. It will from safari but not the app. I have tried everything.

[jvan1973]

27 minutes ago, Restinpeacesweetchloe said:

It’s the only thing that makes sense when he has asked to be traded.   No sane person asks for a trade while injured.

I'm sure there is far more to what is going on than what the public knows.   Speculating is fun for some I guess.   Waiting to see is probably the most intelligent option 

[csmopar]

36 minutes ago, Restinpeacesweetchloe said:

Anyone else have any advice why Twitter won’t let me embed. It will from safari but not the app. I have tried everything.

You’ve hit your limit 

[richard pallo]

1 hour ago, stitches said:

Ballard said a few words on Taylor in this interview:

 

 

 

Sounds like he’s ready to do something with his contract if he passes the physical.  I’m more hopeful after listening to this interview.

[Jackie Daytona]

9 hours ago, VikingsFanInChennai said:

I agree JT's market worth is not very high, but he could easily command closer to 10 million APY, considering his age and only 3 years of NFL experience.

I'll say it again... Taylor may be YOUNGER than Cook, Elliott, etc....  Over the last six years, Taylor has the MOST wear and tear (carries) out of Elliott, Cook, Hunt, Barkley, Jacobs, etc .... And in many cases it ain't even CLOSE....

 

last six years of football....

Cook - 1,282

Elliott - 1,559

Hunt - 895

Barkley - 1,174

Jacobs - 1,238 

TAYLOR - 1,682..... 

 

Taylor being younger means pretty much nothing.

[jvan1973]

2 minutes ago, Jackie Daytona said:

I'll say it again... Taylor may be YOUNGER than Cook, Elliott, etc....  Over the last six years, Taylor has the MOST wear and tear (carries) out of Elliott, Cook, Hunt, Barkley, Jacobs, etc .... And in many cases it ain't even CLOSE....

 

last six years of football....

Cook - 1,282

Elliott - 1,559

Hunt - 895

Barkley - 1,174

Jacobs - 1,238 

TAYLOR - 1,682..... 

 

Taylor being younger means pretty much nothing.

No , it means he is younger.   Having more carries doesn't mean he is more worn down.   His body is still younger.

[1959Colts]

52 minutes ago, richard pallo said:

Sounds like he’s ready to do something with his contract if he passes the physical.  I’m more hopeful after listening to this interview.

After listening to the short video... I didn't get that Ballard sounds ready to do something with the contract?

To me it sounds like he is just saying, Taylor is nearly finished with his rehab, and once he is healthy, he will be back to practice.

I take it as if Ballard expects Taylor to play under his existing contract. Perhaps you are right? and they will do a deal? But who knows?

[Jackie Daytona]

10 minutes ago, jvan1973 said:

No , it means he is younger.   Having more carries doesn't mean he is more worn down.   His body is still younger.

Sure.  Just like a ten year old Jeep with 280,000 miles on it is a much safer bet than a 15 year old Jeep with 100,000 to 180,000 on it.....all maintenance tip top, of course....

[Moosejawcolt]

2 hours ago, coltsfeva said:

The Eagles didn’t have JT……he’s different

Yup but u can win without an elite ba k

[GoColts8818]

36 minutes ago, 1959Colts said:

After listening to the short video... I didn't get that Ballard sounds ready to do something with the contract?

To me it sounds like he is just saying, Taylor is nearly finished with his rehab, and once he is healthy, he will be back to practice.

I take it as if Ballard expects Taylor to play under his existing contract. Perhaps you are right? and they will do a deal? But who knows?

That’s what’s been reported is the Colts position since day one.  I’ve seen nothing that would make them change from that position, if anything I’ve seen things that would make them double down on their position.

[Nate!]

48 minutes ago, Jackie Daytona said:

Sure.  Just like a ten year old Jeep with 280,000 miles on it is a much safer bet than a 15 year old Jeep with 100,000 to 180,000 on it.....all maintenance tip top, of course....

Last I checked Jonathan Taylor is a human, not a car. 
 

Let’s roll out!

 

 

 

[ÅÐØNϧ 1]

Taylor needs To get On The field & prove He Is ready & able to play & Then IMO he will get that extension & quit acting like a baby .

 

 

[Bravo]

2 hours ago, richard pallo said:

Sounds like he’s ready to do something with his contract if he passes the physical.  I’m more hopeful after listening to this interview.

Im actually less optimistic. I’m probably looking wayyyy to deep into this but to me it sounds like he could be traded.

“He’s been a great Colt, a great player for the Colt”

 

”We need to get him 100% healthy before we do anything”.

 

 

Just wild how many different ways you can take an interview. Haha

 

 

 

[Larry Horseman]

4 hours ago, csmopar said:

Ok so guarantee the first two years, gives an out after that with no cap hit.

If healthy, no problem IMO with a 3 year 39 mill contract with 26 mill guaranteed. Could even add in some incentives and guarantees if not injured on top. Not like what I think is appropriate matters!

[csmopar]

2 hours ago, jvan1973 said:

No , it means he is younger.   Having more carries doesn't mean he is more worn down.   His body is still younger.

Of all the posts you and I have had where we’ve disagreed in the past decade plus, this is the first time I find myself shaking my head a post you’ve made. Usually I can see where you’re thinking but this is so terribly false I can’t help but think you didn’t think this one through

[Crunked]

Nothing good comes from JT being injured (make it hard for another team to want a RB with a lingering ankle issue) Makes other teams low ball a trade offer to a team (The colts) who don't want to trade him anyway. The Colts should be operating on the notion that their Dr's and trainers determine a players readiness  and if they are playing along with a JT "Hold in" scenario in hopes of cooling the tensions, they only will for so long because at some point he has to be ready for the season......

[VikingsFanInChennai]

6 hours ago, csmopar said:

for the record, JTs wanting 16-20 million plus. I started following his agent a few weeks back, any posts that say pay the man a minimum of 16/yr, JT’s agent is liking and retweeting. While circumstantial, it kind of confirms the desired range. 
 

I’ve said all along 13 mill average, 2-3 years tops, heavily front loaded and 50 percent guaranteed would be my best offer

I tweet tomorrow tagging JT's agent saying JT should get 22 million and he'd like it too,.. we are grasping straws when we start to discuss what his agent likes on Twitter... He seemed to like a tweet that spoke of Irsay in bad taste too, and I'm not going to form opinion based on that .

 

All said, we agree on your offer and if JT doesn't like it too, it's his loss in vain of searching for better money and organization, which he wouldn't get outside. 

[NFLfan]

5 hours ago, Restinpeacesweetchloe said:

Anyone else have any advice why Twitter won’t let me embed. It will from safari but not the app. I have tried everything.

 

A lot has changed with Twitter. There must be some other way to embed it. There is a lot of information online about changes to Twitter embeds. See if any of the recommendations helps.

 

[VikingsFanInChennai]

8 hours ago, Restinpeacesweetchloe said:

Anyone else have any advice why Twitter won’t let me embed. It will from safari but not the app. I have tried everything.

Embedding works for me..

 

As @csmopar said, actually it's not a joke even if meant to be, Twitter, after becoming X, has started seeing limits for lot of stuff, for non-paying users and in general in many things, even for how tweets can be viewed and so on ..

 

As you embed more on here, there may have been a limit with what you're trying, but not sure... The link, if copied correctly, should embed here, unless the forum experiences some temporary problem..

 

I did this following tweet embed, by clicking on SHARE button from the tweet, and click on COPY LINK.. it works here. 

 

[VikingsFanInChennai]

7 hours ago, richard pallo said:

Sounds like he’s ready to do something with his contract if he passes the physical.  I’m more hopeful after listening to this interview.

To me, it sounds like Ballard is concerned that they need to get JT healthy first, and that's an unknown right now.

 

And usually, whenever an injury lingers without a definite timeline, even with full off-season gone by, it's an unanswerable concern until proven otherwise. 

[John Waylon]

Ballard is right. Taylor had a surgery in January with a 4-6 weeks recovery time. If he’s not healthy by the middle of * August then he absolutely needs to get out there and show someone, anyone, just what they’re paying for. Does he really not think that isn’t a red flag to other owners and GMs?
 

Seriously, who goes to their employer and says “I know you’re not even sure if I can do this job as well as I have in the past anymore, but I need a 1500% raise anyway”? 
 

He wants traded and he can’t even do anything to prop up his own trade value. 

I’m just over the whole ordeal. Taylor has handled this like a petulant child and it’s embarrassing. 

[Chucklez]

7 hours ago, Jackie Daytona said:

I'll say it again... Taylor may be YOUNGER than Cook, Elliott, etc....  Over the last six years, Taylor has the MOST wear and tear (carries) out of Elliott, Cook, Hunt, Barkley, Jacobs, etc .... And in many cases it ain't even CLOSE....

 

last six years of football....

Cook - 1,282

Elliott - 1,559

Hunt - 895

Barkley - 1,174

Jacobs - 1,238 

TAYLOR - 1,682..... 

 

Taylor being younger means pretty much nothing.

This argument about the number of carries has always baffled me.... First of all, not every carry is the same, not every tackle is the same, and not every player reacts to being tackled the same. Some players are bigger and tackles imapct them less, some players are more protective of themselves, some arent.

Just blanket stating that every carry is equal and that therefore equals the "tread" you have as a player, is just ridiculous. Sure it can be an indicator, but if you are going to sit there and tell me it is more important than someone's literal age, then get outa here. Taylor is 4 years younger than Zeke, but because he has just over 100 more carries, he has "more tread".... Nah.

[csmopar]

14 minutes ago, Chucklez said:

This argument about the number of carries has always baffled me.... First of all, not every carry is the same, not every tackle is the same, and not every player reacts to being tackled the same. Some players are bigger and tackles imapct them less, some players are more protective of themselves, some arent.

Just blanket stating that every carry is equal and that therefore equals the "tread" you have as a player, is just ridiculous. Sure it can be an indicator, but if you are going to sit there and tell me it is more important than someone's literal age, then get outa here. Taylor is 4 years younger than Zeke, but because he has just over 100 more carries, he has "more tread".... Nah.

Yes every carry is different, every impact is different. But the human body does break down from repetitive stresses such as impacts and even running. Case in point: the US army spent millions of dollars studying this effect over a ten year period and found that simply running caused soldiers under the age of thirty to have knees, ankles, hips and back degeneration equal to someone twice their age. Does this mean that every single soldier at age 25 has a problem, no.  But it does show that the human body does wear down even if properly conditioned and cared for.

There’s not been a running back in this league that hasn’t worn down over time, resulting in less and less speed. Even the durable and great Frank Gore, as much as i admire him(he’s actually my favorite RB of all time from a personality stand point) wore down. But not every RB  is Frank Gore, just like not every RB is injury prone. 
 

the only thing the number of carries a RB has at any given point proves is that there is the increased likelihood of injury or reduced productivity or both as the number increases. 
 

Of course age plays a factor as well but high number of carries is still a concern long term. 

[Chucklez]

24 minutes ago, csmopar said:

Yes every carry is different, every impact is different. But the human body does break down from repetitive stresses such as impacts and even running. Case in point: the US army spent millions of dollars studying this effect over a ten year period and found that simply running caused soldiers under the age of thirty to have knees, ankles, hips and back degeneration equal to someone twice their age. Does this mean that every single soldier at age 25 has a problem, no.  But it does show that the human body does wear down even if properly conditioned and cared for.

There’s not been a running back in this league that hasn’t worn down over time, resulting in less and less speed. Even the durable and great Frank Gore, as much as i admire him(he’s actually my favorite RB of all time from a personality stand point) wore down. But not every RB  is Frank Gore, just like not every RB is injury prone. 
 

the only thing the number of carries a RB has at any given point proves is that there is the increased likelihood of injury or reduced productivity or both as the number increases. 
 

Of course age plays a factor as well but high number of carries is still a concern long term. 

I still disagree with the logic here and specifically with applying it to JT all of a sudden.

If you asked any Colts fan 5 weeks ago what their opinion of Taylor was and what the expectation for him this coming year are, they would almost universally have been excited for this season and expecting him to be coming out guns blazing. 

Now with the contact sitch coming to light, all of a sudden its all doom and gloom and he probably cant play anymore, or he is breaking down. The timing of all of this doom and gloom on him is just a bit too convenient for the nay sayers now. 

JT is still an elite RB and a game changer.

[Stephen]

10 hours ago, Moosejawcolt said:

Yup but u can win without an elite ba k

If the eagles had jonathan  taylor they win the super  bowl.

[Chucklez]

There is a funny thing going on with RBs right now in the NFL which is contradictory to me.

They are being devalued, because "you can win without an elite RB", right? So the entire RB market has depreciated in terms of their contract values. I get that.

But then people are saying "There is no point in paying a really good running back because you can win without one." But this makes no sense... A really good RB is a really good running back, and because their "value" or contact value has depreciated so much.... you can have a really good RB for not really all that much money. So why the heck wouldnt you sign JT?

 

Let's be real for a moment, JT unquestionably makes the Colts a better team.... right? The difference between him and Deon Jackson is noticable. Same with the difference between a player like Justin Jefferson and Alec Pierce. Justin Jefferson is going to set you back $30m a year, but a really good RB like Dalvin Cook is only going to set you back about $6m - $8m a year... 

Sure it is a passing league, but you cant tell me that those upper echelon RBs dont have an impact on your team. JT has been the engine of our offense - and if you need to pay him $10m a year, that to me is worth it. Yeah he carries an injury risk because hes a RB..... you gonna tell me WRs dont carry an injury risk too?

The NFL Cap is the highest it has ever been.... $10m to heck, even $15m a season (Which aint even gonna happen because they are "devalued") on a RB is not really all that much for someone who has a real impact on your team's chances of winning or not.

[csmopar]

1 hour ago, Chucklez said:

I still disagree with the logic here and specifically with applying it to JT all of a sudden.

If you asked any Colts fan 5 weeks ago what their opinion of Taylor was and what the expectation for him this coming year are, they would almost universally have been excited for this season and expecting him to be coming out guns blazing. 

Now with the contact sitch coming to light, all of a sudden its all doom and gloom and he probably cant play anymore, or he is breaking down. The timing of all of this doom and gloom on him is just a bit too convenient for the nay sayers now. 

JT is still an elite RB and a game changer.

Ehhh no there’s been some posters in here that have expressed concerns over his carry numbers since he was drafted. Not many, just a few and admittedly I was not pounding the drum on it until last season. When he hurt his ankle a second year in a row, I got concerned about the mileage.

 

to your point about him being an elite RB and game changer, absolutely he is. When fully healthy. But he’s not been healthy now I’m 2 years time. Right now, he’s not healthy. If he was, this conversation about him may be entirely different . 
 

it’s not about being a nay sayer. Many on here, myself included are okay with extending him on a prove it type deal. Short term, high guarantees but one that makes sure he can be the game changer he once was. 

[Chucklez]

6 minutes ago, csmopar said:

Ehhh no there’s been some posters in here that have expressed concerns over his carry numbers since he was drafted. Not many, just a few and admittedly I was not pounding the drum on it until last season. When he hurt his ankle a second year in a row, I got concerned about the mileage.

 

to your point about him being an elite RB and game changer, absolutely he is. When fully healthy. But he’s not been healthy now I’m 2 years time. Right now, he’s not healthy. If he was, this conversation about him may be entirely different . 
 

it’s not about being a nay sayer. Many on here, myself included are okay with extending him on a prove it type deal. Short term, high guarantees but one that makes sure he can be the game changer he once was. 

Fair enough, and this would be my approach too.

100% he needs to show that he isnt still injured, how can any player expect an extension if they cant show they are healthy? 

I guess my beef is more with the NFL cognoscenti in general about their attitude towards game changing RBs rather than you or anyone on here specifically. A game changer is a game changer, no matter the position. Especially if they are at a "cheap" position., why would you not want to sign them (assuming they are healthy)?

[throwing BBZ]

5 minutes ago, Chucklez said:

There is a funny thing going on with RBs right now in the NFL which is contradictory to me.

They are being devalued, because "you can win without an elite RB", right? So the entire RB market has depreciated in terms of their contract values. I get that.

But then people are saying "There is no point in paying a really good running back because you can win without one." But this makes no sense... A really good RB is a really good running back, and because their "value" or contact value has depreciated so much.... you can have a really good RB for not really all that much money. So why the heck wouldnt you sign JT?

 

Let's be real for a moment, JT unquestionably makes the Colts a better team.... right? The difference between him and Deon Jackson is noticable. Same with the difference between a player like Justin Jefferson and Alec Pierce. Justin Jefferson is going to set you back $30m a year, but a really good RB like Dalvin Cook is only going to set you back about $6m - $8m a year... 

Sure it is a passing league, but you cant tell me that those upper echelon RBs dont have an impact on your team. JT has been the engine of our offense - and if you need to pay him $10m a year, that to me is worth it. Yeah he carries an injury risk because hes a RB..... you gonna tell me WRs dont carry an injury risk too?

The NFL Cap is the highest it has ever been.... $10m to heck, even $15m a season (Which aint even gonna happen because they are "devalued") on a RB is not really all that much for someone who has a real impact on your team's chances of winning or not.

 

This is for people that care to get the simplicity of the NO.

$2M is top pay for the last 5 SB Winners.

 Because, the $$$ is wisely spent elsewhere.

 For us, Richardson alone Devalues JT. 

  What a blast Richardson having 2 nice drives against Buffaloes D. Without our Te's, Smith, JT, and Steichen not using his push program on 4th down.

Steichen has a much better use for our $$$.

[Bravo]

36 minutes ago, Chucklez said:

There is a funny thing going on with RBs right now in the NFL which is contradictory to me.

They are being devalued, because "you can win without an elite RB", right? So the entire RB market has depreciated in terms of their contract values. I get that.

But then people are saying "There is no point in paying a really good running back because you can win without one." But this makes no sense... A really good RB is a really good running back, and because their "value" or contact value has depreciated so much.... you can have a really good RB for not really all that much money. So why the heck wouldnt you sign JT?

 

Let's be real for a moment, JT unquestionably makes the Colts a better team.... right? The difference between him and Deon Jackson is noticable. Same with the difference between a player like Justin Jefferson and Alec Pierce. Justin Jefferson is going to set you back $30m a year, but a really good RB like Dalvin Cook is only going to set you back about $6m - $8m a year... 

Sure it is a passing league, but you cant tell me that those upper echelon RBs dont have an impact on your team. JT has been the engine of our offense - and if you need to pay him $10m a year, that to me is worth it. Yeah he carries an injury risk because hes a RB..... you gonna tell me WRs dont carry an injury risk too?

The NFL Cap is the highest it has ever been.... $10m to heck, even $15m a season (Which aint even gonna happen because they are "devalued") on a RB is not really all that much for someone who has a real impact on your team's chances of winning or not.

I agree to a certain extent. Now would be the time to pay JT because we have a rookie QB.

 

Although initial reports were saying JT and his agent were looking for the $15-18mil a year range which is high. Especially with the injuries and fumble problems last year.

 

So who’s to say the Colts haven’t offered 10mil and JT hasn’t accepted it because he believes his value should be higher.

 

I believe the Franchise tag would be $10mil next year and $12mil the second year which is fair value but it helps the Colts because they aren’t held into a long term deal.

[Yoshinator]

14 minutes ago, Bravo said:

I agree to a certain extent. Now would be the time to pay JT because we have a rookie QB.

 

Although initial reports were saying JT and his agent were looking for the $15-18mil a year range which is high. Especially with the injuries and fumble problems last year.

 

So who’s to say the Colts haven’t offered 10mil and JT hasn’t accepted it because he believes his value should be higher.

 

I believe the Franchise tag would be $10mil next year and $12mil the second year which is fair value but it helps the Colts because they aren’t held into a long term deal.

The Colts offered Kareem Hunt $1.7 million, so I doubt they offered Taylor $10 million. I don't think they actually made him an offer.