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

[OLD FAN MAN]

ballard has made such a mess of this that it is unlikely that any elite player would sign with the colts while ballard is in charge

[Restinpeacesweetchloe]

2 minutes ago, OLD FAN MAN said:

ballard has made such a mess of this that it is unlikely that any elite player would sign with the colts while ballard is in charge

From what we know Ballard hasn’t done anything wrong.

[rockywoj]

7 minutes ago, OLD FAN MAN said:

ballard has made such a mess of this that it is unlikely that any elite player would sign with the colts while ballard is in charge

Meh.  4th year RB coming off an injury plagued season with up and down performance.  Absolutely no issue with Ballard and the team taking a show me what you have stance in this last year of the contract.  I loathe players that do what JT is apparently now doing.  Ballard and the Colts are being prudent in putting off JT contract negotiation until after JT proves what he’s got in this final year of his contract. Sadly, what JT is showing is, imho, greedy idiocy. 

[danlhart87]

3 minutes ago, OLD FAN MAN said:

ballard has made such a mess of this that it is unlikely that any elite player would sign with the colts while ballard is in charge

Not every issue points to Ballard

 

If Taylor comes back week 5 and for several weeks proves his stats arent a fluke then he will only raise his stock

 

The issue at hand is there no telling if he would even wanna play yet

 

He funny enough is only hurting himself in the process and future

 

 

 

 

[Mikemccoy84]

Colts are already limited on player signings based on location and market size. Ballard didn’t do anything to help or hurt that. Players will go where the money is at. There is

more stories out there of guys he has paid

than ones he hasn’t.

[Restinpeacesweetchloe]

 

[Restinpeacesweetchloe]

Good point what Adam said in that video. Colts are going to take this time while on PUP to see kid the relationship can be saved. If not they will just have to trade him.

[Superman]

1 hour ago, dgambill said:

True…but also why I can see why RBs are so upset. Would you want your entire career to be controlled by a company that you didn’t have a choice to even work for?  A qb like Cousins has a long career and can wait it out and has much smaller chances to suffer a career ending injury.
 

I know it’s in the CBA and that’s just how it is but I can see why running backs with such a small career window want changes. I don’t like the franchise tag personally. I know it benefits my team and me as a fan but I understand it from a human perspective. You sign a 4 year contract…you fullfil it you should then be able to control your destiny to sign anywhere…get the most money you can….players don’t have a choice on the 1 year contact…they have to take it.

 

I wonder…if I’m a top running back…instead of signing the standard contract could they just hold out right off the bat for a one year contact so they could control the most valuable years of their service? I bet not…so to say you signed a contact you should honor it…well it’s not like they really negotiated that contract…they had to sign it..they had no other options.

 

This is a whole different topic, though. The draft and rookie contracts are collectively bargained, and have been reinforced through multiple CBAs over the course of several decades now. The NFL has an effective monopoly, with antitrust exemption.

 

The NFLPA has no will to push for significant changes to this kind of stuff, and that's probably not changing any time soon. After all, why would the majority of the players agree to a protracted standoff with the NFL -- resulting in loss of a lot of money, and prime years of their careers -- for the benefit of a small minority of players? Things like the franchise tag don't move the needle in CBA negotiations because only a handful of players, out of thousands, get tagged every year. 

 

Specific to your question about RBs not signing rookie contracts, I think we can predict how that would go. 

 

I think potential prospects will start to be drawn away from playing RB so they can play more valuable positions in the NFL. I don't know if that works for everyone, but if JT had played linebacker, he'd have a different outlook on his career right now. 

[Hawkeyecolt]

1 hour ago, Restinpeacesweetchloe said:

Listen to all this whining by JMV and Holder lol.

Starts at 134

 

 

https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/the-ride-with-jmv-podcast/id1217975448?i=1000626135329

They were unbearable today.  I shut it off. Holder sounds like he’s just guessing at things. 

[compuls1v3]

1 hour ago, Indianapolis-Colts-Fan said:

it’s hard for me to feel sorry for a player in the NFL. First and foremost, every player plays for the entity that is the NFL. That is their “employer”. The team they play for is a secondary entity. They chose to play in the NFL for millions of dollars. Hardly getting screwed over if you ask me. Even JT talked about putting pen to paper saying he’d play for this team, and now he’s trying to do otherwise. 
 

just because you’re not getting paid as much as other positions isn’t a reason to be ungrateful for making millions. Likewise in any industry, certain positions make certain wages depending on the value of that position. 
 

peyton made millions off the NFL, but he maximized his money by doing deals outside of the NFL, branded himself and made even more money like a smart businessman. 

And I don't see JT getting a deal with Nationwide or Papa Johns anytime soon!

[LJpalmbeacher2]

53 minutes ago, OLD FAN MAN said:

ballard has made such a mess of this that it is unlikely that any elite player would sign with the colts while ballard is in charge

 

I'd add that the owner is a bigger hindrance.

[GoColts8818]

40 minutes ago, Hawkeyecolt said:

They were unbearable today.  I shut it off. Holder sounds like he’s just guessing at things. 

Probably because he is.

[GoColts8818]

1 hour ago, Restinpeacesweetchloe said:

Good point what Adam said in that video. Colts are going to take this time while on PUP to see kid the relationship can be saved. If not they will just have to trade him.

They don’t have too.  It might be smart to do it but it also might not be because you are going to get super low balled.  They can just let him sit on pup until week six and suspend his contract for a year and leave Taylor stuck in Indy.  Taylor won’t like it but if he’s on pup and then moved to IR he will be away from the team and further see his value to the rest of the league plummet.  At some point Taylor would have to play and play well to get out of Indy and have any chance at a second contract.  It all depends on how hard ball the Colts want to play with Taylor and that will probably depend on how much they worry about how other players view them playing hard ball more than how Taylor views it.  Of course they could also off-set that by rewarding Pittman with a new contract after he showed up and put in the work.  

[csmopar]

8 hours ago, dgambill said:

True…but also why I can see why RBs are so upset. Would you want your entire career to be controlled by a company that you didn’t have a choice to even work for?  A qb like Cousins has a long career and can wait it out and has much smaller chances to suffer a career ending injury.
 

I know it’s in the CBA and that’s just how it is but I can see why running backs with such a small career window want changes. I don’t like the franchise tag personally. I know it benefits my team and me as a fan but I understand it from a human perspective. You sign a 4 year contract…you fullfil it you should then be able to control your destiny to sign anywhere…get the most money you can….players don’t have a choice on the 1 year contact…they have to take it.

 

I wonder…if I’m a top running back…instead of signing the standard contract could they just hold out right off the bat for a one year contact so they could control the most valuable years of their service? I bet not…so to say you signed a contact you should honor it…well it’s not like they really negotiated that contract…they had to sign it..they had no other options.

Oh I see it too. HOWEVER. They do have a choice, they don’t have to enter the draft. They don’t have to sign their rookie deals. The team is not their employer. The league ultimately is. 

[csmopar]

7 hours ago, danlhart87 said:

Not every issue points to Ballard

 

If Taylor comes back week 5 and for several weeks proves his stats arent a fluke then he will only raise his stock

 

The issue at hand is there no telling if he would even wanna play yet

 

He funny enough is only hurting himself in the process and future

 

 

 

 

The bigger issue is…. What is actually up with his ankle? It’s entirely plausible that he was trying to get more money before teams found out he can’t play anymore. Never know

[Jackie Daytona]

Holder is on the KB and Andy show now claiming JT was "ready" to play if Indy put him on the 53.. and he would have showed up and played if on the initial 53 man.

 

Also claims the Colts made the PuP decision completely independent of Jonathan Taylor....it was not a joint decision.

 

I really don't know what to think of Holder now.... His reporting quality doesn't seem to fit the level he's employed at any longer, but maybe that's just me.... He seems overall like a small fish now lost in a huge pond.... 

 

Anyway.... Says CB has had "interesting language" lately and a possible "philosophical change" recently.... "We had a bad year last year" "we have to improve from last year" "we have a new system" all in reference to questions about whether they want to pay Taylor....

 

Asked about Miami specifically.....

 

Holder says.... "Any team that was going to trade for Taylor you would have to work out a contract with him". Ya think???

 

Since this was all driven by the agent rather than the team, eg... The team never shopped Taylor, the deal seeking was ALL driven by the agent..... There was nothing of substance really past looking out for the best deal for JT... 

 

Then he goes straight to knocking the roster construction.... Bad everywhere, specifically for receivers lol....and now he is more pessimistic than ever .... Yawn.... Great work Steve.

 

This part is MY conjecture.....as to why Pup list vs 53 man...

 

(No wonder negotiations never went anywhere, it was never more than MilkDud calling the dolphins lol) 

 

So....  CB and Irsay can say, potentially....hey, JT look.  You say you're hurt?  You say you want paid?  Well, here.  We COULD have put you on the 53 and made you play or get fined, but if you're hurt....that would have been unfair of us..... So now we are giving you four weeks of PAID time to go get right, that's e didn't have to....so take that 1 million in your pocket that didn't "have" to be there into account when you are considering everything, will ya?

 

 

 

 

[throwing BBZ]

6 hours ago, GoColts8818 said:

They don’t have too.  It might be smart to do it but it also might not be because you are going to get super low balled.  They can just let him sit on pup until week six and suspend his contract for a year and leave Taylor stuck in Indy.  Taylor won’t like it but if he’s on pup and then moved to IR he will be away from the team and further see his value to the rest of the league plummet.  At some point Taylor would have to play and play well to get out of Indy and have any chance at a second contract.  It all depends on how hard ball the Colts want to play with Taylor and that will probably depend on how much they worry about how other players view them playing hard ball more than how Taylor views it.  Of course they could also off-set that by rewarding Pittman with a new contract after he showed up and put in the work.  

 

 Taylor owed it to the Colts to be a Man and come in for his physical. If his ankle needed more time but was expected to end up being fine all could be well, and the discussion of a new contract "at the right time" may have been on the table.

 Ultimately he and his team tried the no you can't look at my ankle and i want Huge $$ game plan. Put that in your pipe and smoke it!

[Crunked]

Gotta believe that ANY player on an injured or Physically Unable to perform, or any other "I got an owie" list must be there on the determination of the team physicians.......and based on said "boo-boo" there is a recovery/rehab plan......and because there IS a plan, those plans have weigh points where they are re-evaluated/monitored as to their progress. I think the the first 4 PUP that Taylor is under has nothing to do with injury but more so to do with letting Taylor calm down so that they can take time to try and repair the relationship.......I think if he would have been traded he would NOT have been pup'd................just my 2 cents......

[Indianapolis-Colts-Fan]

7 hours ago, compuls1v3 said:

And I don't see JT getting a deal with Nationwide or Papa Johns anytime soon!

there are many doors open to a millionaire on how to make more money.  

[csmopar]

8 hours ago, OLD FAN MAN said:

ballard has made such a mess of this that it is unlikely that any elite player would sign with the colts while ballard is in charge

[w87r]

11 minutes ago, Jackie Daytona said:

Holder is on the KB and Andy show now claiming JT was "ready" to play if Indy put him on the 53.. and he would have showed up and played if on the initial 53 man.

 

Also claims the Colts made the PuP decision completely independent of Jonathan Taylor....it was not a joint decision.

 

I really don't know what to think of Holder now.... His reporting quality doesn't seem to fit the level he's employed at any longer, but maybe that's just me.... He seems overall like a small fish now lost in a huge pond.... 

 

Anyway.... Says CB has had "interesting language" lately and a possible "philosophical change" recently.... "We had a bad year last year" "we have to improve from last year" "we have a new system" all in reference to questions about whether they want to pay Taylor....

 

Asked about Miami specifically.....

 

Holder says.... "Any team that was going to trade for Taylor you would have to work out a contract with him". Ya think???

 

Since this was all driven by the agent rather than the team, eg... The team never shopped Taylor, the deal seeking was ALL driven by the agent..... There was nothing of substance really past looking out for the best deal for JT... 

 

Then he goes straight to knocking the roster construction.... Bad everywhere, specifically for receivers lol....and now he is more pessimistic than ever .... Yawn.... Great work Steve.

 

This part is MY conjecture.....as to why Pup list vs 53 man...

 

(No wonder negotiations never went anywhere, it was never more than MilkDud calling the dolphins lol) 

 

So....  CB and Irsay can say, potentially....hey, JT look.  You say you're hurt?  You say you want paid?  Well, here.  We COULD have put you on the 53 and made you play or get fined, but if you're hurt....that would have been unfair of us..... So now we are giving you four weeks of PAID time to go get right, that's e didn't have to....so take that 1 million in your pocket that didn't "have" to be there into account when you are considering everything, will ya?

 

 

 

 

Holder is horrible and got much worse since doing his ESPN gig.

 

I think you're description of Holder is pretty accurate.

 

Little fish lost in big pond. Trying to draw attention to wack articles, to impress his employer.

 

 

All this just to get more clicks and people riled up.

 

Taylor wasn't reporting for game 1. Easy for him to say that now that he has been called on bluff and looking at some serious ramifications if he doesn't get back on the field.

 

I can't think of anything worse than his contract not rolling. Can you imagine having to play for $4.3m next year too, instead of at worst the franchise tag next year.

 

 

All the "trustworthy" reporters said Taylor would never play for Colts without an extension, just yesterday, but we are supposed to believe now, that he would of been ready to suit up week 1.

 

 

If Taylor never plays another NFL snap, I will be fine with it. 

 

 

All these RB zoom calls, I never thought during that time, that our RB would be the only 1 to not play...

 

 

I'm sure he will be out there week 5 though, he knows he really did himself an injustice.

[csmopar]

10 minutes ago, Crunked said:

Gotta believe that ANY player on an injured or Physically Unable to perform, or any other "I got an owie" list must be there on the determination of the team physicians.......and based on said "boo-boo" there is a recovery/rehab plan......and because there IS a plan, those plans have weigh points where they are re-evaluated/monitored as to their progress. I think the the first 4 PUP that Taylor is under has nothing to do with injury but more so to do with letting Taylor calm down so that they can take time to try and repair the relationship.......I think if he would have been traded he would NOT have been pup'd................just my 2 cents......

See my posts from last night. Those physicals are made by neutral medical licensed doctors agreed too prior to the start of the new league year by the NFLPA.  And there’s a minimum of two per city. And both the team and the player is allowed to seek the opinion of BOTH of them. And to place the player on IR, PUP or any other designated injury list, the team must fax medical paperwork to the league office to have it put in the official player medical file. All this is found in the CBA. 
 

so somewhere along the lines, Taylor got a doctor to fail him on his physical, so there is guaranteed to be a paper trail. 

[philba101]

14 hours ago, Restinpeacesweetchloe said:

Some good stuff in here.

 

 

According to Ian Rapoport and Mike Garafolo, the Colts received multiple offers for JT. However, they wanted at least a late 1st rounder which they did not receive. Therefore, they decided not to trade him. Were the Colts being unrealistic in expecting to get a first-round pick for a player coming off an injury who no longer wants to play for them? The obvious answer is yes. They should have got some picks and a player who could help now, and move on from JT. Instead, Ballard and Irsay are going to ask their rookie QB to go at least the 1st quarter of the season without our top offensive weapon. So we taught JT a lesson. Big deal, that decision hurts this team right now and the drama continues to hang over the team going forward. That is a lose-lose start to the season in my mind.

[philba101]

12 hours ago, w87r said:

Think I was actually just disappointed that, that was something he admitted on the air.

 

 

I actually thought the show was pretty good today.

 

It had on Chappell and Ex GM Mueller. Good interviews.

 

Unfortunately, this is the Colts kicking themselves also for committing to not having their top offensive weapon for awhile.

[TrueBlue4ever]

2 minutes ago, w87r said:

Holder is horrible and got much worse since doing his ESPN gig.

 

I think you're description of Holder is pretty accurate.

 

Little fish lost in big pond. Trying to draw attention to wack articles, to impress his employer.

 

 

All this just to get more clicks and people riled up.

 

Taylor wasn't reporting for game 1. Easy for him to say that now that he has been called on bluff and looking at some serious ramifications if he doesn't get back on the field.

 

I can't think of anything worse than his contract not rolling. Can you imagine having to play for $4.3m next year too, instead of at worst the franchise tag next year.

 

 

All the "trustworthy" reporters said Taylor would never play for Colts without an extension, just yesterday, but we are supposed to believe now, that he would of been ready to suit up week 1.

 

 

If Taylor never plays another NFL snap, I will be fine with it. 

 

 

All these RB zoom calls, I never thought during that time, that our RB would be the only 1 to not play...

 

 

I'm sure he will be out there week 5 though, he knows he really did himself an injustice.

I have been extremely negative of Holder at his job, not as a personal attack. But you have nailed it, small insignificant reporter that is taking his lead from Marcus Spears who is the biggest Hate spewer of our Organization. Who is He anyways?Once again, so proud of how our leaders with backbone have lead thru this monumental fork in the road for the entire NFL. The Irsay Family is setting the PACE! 

[stitches]

42 minutes ago, Jackie Daytona said:

Holder is on the KB and Andy show now claiming JT was "ready" to play if Indy put him on the 53.. and he would have showed up and played if on the initial 53 man.

 

Also claims the Colts made the PuP decision completely independent of Jonathan Taylor....it was not a joint decision.

 

I really don't know what to think of Holder now.... His reporting quality doesn't seem to fit the level he's employed at any longer, but maybe that's just me.... He seems overall like a small fish now lost in a huge pond.... 

 

Anyway.... Says CB has had "interesting language" lately and a possible "philosophical change" recently.... "We had a bad year last year" "we have to improve from last year" "we have a new system" all in reference to questions about whether they want to pay Taylor....

 

Asked about Miami specifically.....

 

Holder says.... "Any team that was going to trade for Taylor you would have to work out a contract with him". Ya think???

 

Since this was all driven by the agent rather than the team, eg... The team never shopped Taylor, the deal seeking was ALL driven by the agent..... There was nothing of substance really past looking out for the best deal for JT... 

 

Then he goes straight to knocking the roster construction.... Bad everywhere, specifically for receivers lol....and now he is more pessimistic than ever .... Yawn.... Great work Steve.

 

This part is MY conjecture.....as to why Pup list vs 53 man...

 

(No wonder negotiations never went anywhere, it was never more than MilkDud calling the dolphins lol) 

 

So....  CB and Irsay can say, potentially....hey, JT look.  You say you're hurt?  You say you want paid?  Well, here.  We COULD have put you on the 53 and made you play or get fined, but if you're hurt....that would have been unfair of us..... So now we are giving you four weeks of PAID time to go get right, that's e didn't have to....so take that 1 million in your pocket that didn't "have" to be there into account when you are considering everything, will ya?

 

For argument sake, lets assume Holder is actually not pulling stuff out of his * and he has actually received that information about Taylor being ready to play if put on the 53(and I think he is not lying about this... someone told him that).

 

Where do you think he got that information? To me it's obvious it has to be either directly Taylor or his representation.

 

When did this information come in? AFTER the Colts decided to leave him on PUP and now seem to be threatening to leave him there for the full year and not let him accrue a season, thus not becoming FA next season. 

 

What has to happen for the Colts to remove Taylor from PUP? He has to either pass his physical or he has to express desire to play sometime during those first 4 weeks. But reportedly(before today), Taylor and his camp have said they have no desire to play for the Colts at all and they want a trade, so... 

 

Taylor and his MMA agent should spare me the "oh but it's Ballard's fault for not asking us to actually play", He has been waiting for you for 2 months to show up and practice and play! You have had the chance to prove(state) you are healthy and ready to play for TWO MONTHS NOW! 

 

I sick of this amateur agent and his martyr holier-than-thou client. 

[Crunked]

Holder thinks highly of his own opinion, its exceedingly rare that he has information beyond his own opinion/based on hearsay and scuttle butt .......he is the dear Abby of Colts football.... What is your problem? Here is what you should do......kinda thing......

[Restinpeacesweetchloe]

 

[Defjamz26]

https://coltswire.usatoday.com/2023/08/29/indianapolis-colts-jonathan-taylor-trade-suspension-consider-hold-in/
 

 

Would get even uglier if it came to this, but there’s talks of him being suspended.

[Breeze]

9 hours ago, OLD FAN MAN said:

ballard has made such a mess of this that it is unlikely that any elite player would sign with the colts while ballard is in charge

I’m interested in your take on how Ballard messed it up and what you would’ve done in his shoes.  Probably won’t get it, but interested nonetheless.  These take are usually bomb drops then scatter, but I’m hoping yours is different.

[philba101]

15 hours ago, TrueBlue4ever said:

We have a roster of Player’s that are ready to play the game of football. They play for a great owner and a great fan base. The Colt’s organization and fans can’t wait to Play the game against Jacksonville! By the way, an owner who has proven he takes care of those that perform. 
I loved JT, but that’s no longer the case. He’s played a bad hand, as in all of our lives, we make choices! He made a wrong one.

I agree with you here, and I am going to be here rooting them on. I am not supporting Taylor in any way here. What I am upset about is that management/ownership has allowed this situation to come to this at the beginning of another season. We are starting another season with this distraction hanging over our heads, and we relegated our rookie QB to playing the first quarter of the season without the team's top offensive weapon. I just wanted the drama over. According to Rapoport and Garafolo the Colts didn't trade Taylor because they didn't get at least a late first round pick. I would have been happy with a 2nd or 3rd and maybe a player like Mostert or J. Wilson Jr.  Move on and play the season like you described without all the distractions.

[BlackTiger]

Double post

[BlackTiger]

There is a middle ground between balling out and having a down year too.  He didnt really ball out last year before he got hurt but he was pretty good. Imo he simply hasnt earned a 16 million$ per year long term deal

 

He is asking for too much money rather than a fair market deal.  I wouldnt be sorry about using the tag on that, thats what its for

 

The team isnt screwing him imo, hes asking for too much

[w87r]

39 minutes ago, philba101 said:

Unfortunately, this is the Colts kicking themselves also for committing to not having their top offensive weapon for awhile.

Colts did nothing wrong.

 

 

They asked him to come in early for a physical to prove he was healthy coming off surgery.

 

 

He declined, said he was still hurt and here we are.

 

He did that, maybe he has an extension? Maybe not, but you can't be traded and get a big extension, 1. If you're hurt, 2. Refuse physical 

[TrueBlue4ever]

Every sports team that I know of of has the same “Mantra”, NEXT MAN UP!”

 So excited to see our Team play ball in 12 short days! 

[Defjamz26]

1 minute ago, philba101 said:

I agree with you here, and I am going to be here rooting them on. I am not supporting Taylor in any way here. What I am upset about is that management/ownership has allowed this situation to come to this at the beginning of another season. We are starting another season with this distraction hanging over our heads, and we relegated our rookie QB to playing the first quarter of the season without the team's top offensive weapon. I just wanted the drama over. According to Rapoport and Garafolo the Colts didn't trade Taylor because they didn't get at least a late first round pick. I would have been happy with a 2nd or 3rd and maybe a player like Mostert or J. Wilson Jr.  Move on and play the season like you described without all the distractions.

Agreed, but I’d add it’s been played bad by both sides. JT and his agent played this horribly. The way his agent was acting on Twitter and JT playing into his “injury” were bad moves. On the Colts side, they should have traded him as soon as contract negotiations broke down in June/July. If he really asked for $16 million like it has been rumored, then you should’ve shut it down there and helped him find a trade partner then.

 

Now the guy you’ve basically said isn’t that valuable is up for trade, and you want a valuable pick in return? Kind of a combination of ignorance and greed there.

[2006Coltsbestever]

3 minutes ago, w87r said:

Colts did nothing wrong.

 

 

They asked him to come in early for a physical to prove he was healthy coming off surgery.

 

 

He declined, said he was still hurt and here we are.

 

He did that, maybe he has an extension? Maybe not, but you can't be traded and get a big extension, 1. If you're hurt, 2. Refuse physical 

Stephen Holder said this morning, he knows who the mystery team is. He said he couldn't say but told Bowen it was an NFC team. I pretty much know who it is, it is Carolina. That hint gave it away. Reich loves JT and like us he has a rookie QB so JT would help that team a lot. We could still trade him even with him on PUP. The Pats traded Gilmore to Carolina when he was on PUP. He just can't play until week 5.

[BlackTiger]

10 hours ago, dgambill said:

After you just balled out for us again we still don’t think you deserve a long term deal. That wouldn’t sit too well..

Imo hes asking for too much, and wants more than anyone would give him.

 

He may be willing to take less and leave indy but I dont feel sorry for him for that.  Its what the tag is for.  A tag and trade could be the route 

 

He did ball out for a year, he also missed time and is missing more time now.  He will have played something like 2-3 seasons at the end of his rookie deal and wants far too much 

[philba101]

19 minutes ago, w87r said:

Colts did nothing wrong.

 

 

They asked him to come in early for a physical to prove he was healthy coming off surgery.

 

 

He declined, said he was still hurt and here we are.

 

He did that, maybe he has an extension? Maybe not, but you can't be traded and get a big extension, 1. If you're hurt, 2. Refuse physical 

Just to clarify, I am not defending Taylor. I wanted him gone. Are you saying that Taylor wasn't tradeable because he hadn't passed a physical? Rapoport and Garafolo both said that the Colts had multiple offers on the table but didn't take them because they wanted a least 1st-round pick which was not offered. Why are teams making offers if Taylor is not tradeable? Not being argumentative because I respect your opinions, but I am truly confused here.

[masterlock]

So, Taylor and his agent had hoped to reset the market for running backs with a hold-in, and instead, now face the possibility of suspension? If Taylor isn't looking for a new agent now, then someone needs to stage an intervention. When delusion meets reality, reality ALWAYS wins. I like Taylor and want him to get paid, but he has to play the hand he was dealt. The market for running backs has been devalued, an the Colts are coming off a 4-13 season, and already have a bunch of money tied up in contract extensions that (in hindsight) were ill-advised. When your best season was 2 years ago, and now you're continuing to miss games, AND you're looking at the possibility of suspension, then there's a danger of fading into irrelevance, and that should be avoided at all costs.