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

[iuswingman]

16 hours ago, LJpalmbeacher2 said:

 

Who really knows, But the leagues owners are against Fully Guaranteed contracts AND RB's getting paid what they deserve. A owner, in  this case Irsay, probably would be going against the league rewarding a RB their true worth.  

 

People's true worth is what others are willing to pay.  

[richard pallo]

2 minutes ago, Solid84 said:

JT isn't going to make a 4 win team into a 9 win team or even a 7 win team. I feel pretty confident in saying Steichen & CO has no intention of going out there to only win 4 games - they want to win and play to win each game. But we're not a playoff team unless everything clicks for AR fast and JT isn't going to change that.

 

We're not in a total rebuild, but it is a soft rebuild. That's why Gilmore wanted out. Could other vets like DeFo end up wanting out too? Maybe, but playing JT won't change that...

I don’t think we’re in a rebuild at all.  We’ve had a young team these last few years.  Our aging quarterbacks who couldn’t perform held us back.  Throw in our OL who had issues of their own and we regressed.  Bringing in a rookie quarterback to start will have its own issues but our roster should be very competitive even with the rookies.  We have a lot of young good talent on the roster from the previous years already.

[Solid84]

3 minutes ago, richard pallo said:

I don’t think we’re in a rebuild at all.  We’ve had a young team these last few years.  Our aging quarterbacks who couldn’t perform held us back.  Throw in our OL who had issues of their own and we regressed.  Bringing in a rookie quarterback to start will have its own issues but our roster should be very competitive even with the rookies.  We have a lot of young good talent on the roster from the previous years already.

I definitely think we're in a soft rebuild or soft reset or whatever you could call it.

 

New HC

New Coaching staff

New offensive scheme

New QB

 

Add we're going to play a lot of new guys at CB and that's a soft reset to me.

[Shive]

12 hours ago, Superman said:

This narrative doesn't hold up.

I think there's a possibility that the Saturday pressuring JT narrative can be true, even with JT's initial comments about wanting to retire here. He's always been a guy that "says the right things", almost to a fault. I see that as the JT we've known since drafting him.

 

It's absolutely possible that he wasn't happy about the events with Saturday, but kept "saying the right things" hoping he would get his extension like he's seen all of the other all-pros get from Ballard. When he was told that wasn't happening, he had had enough and we saw what happened.

 

This is all hearsay and conjecture, so I don't want to present it as fact. In my opinion, this has felt like more than just a dispute over the contract, so that's where I can see this narrative as a possibility.

 

4 hours ago, RollerColt said:

Oh it holds up alright... It holds up the popular notion that the Colts are a terrible organization that treats its players badly. And although it's not true, it doesn't matter to these people because they're going to get clicks and popularity points for dissing on the team. 

 

They're probably the same type of people who just go along with saying "Nickelback sucks" without ever stopping to ask why.

I honestly think the narrative paints Saturday in a poor light and not necessarily the organization as a whole. The local guys that have been talking about this narrative haven't been talking about it in a way that makes the organization look bad. The national media talking have absolutely been doing that though, especially with the "wild" trade asks Ballard made, aka if you make me an offer I can't refuse, we can make a deal.

 

The two guys that have talked about this haven't done it in a way that is clickbaity or trying to get attention. I'm actually a bit shocked at how low key they've been about it. They had a few tweets talking about it and Shaad mentioned it during his usual live stream on YT, but that's about it. They've also both been consistent with backing the Colts on not paying JT this season and why it makes sense for the team.

[OLD FAN MAN]

would jt change his mind if irsay fired ballard???

[Shive]

2 minutes ago, OLD FAN MAN said:

would jt change his mind if irsay fired ballard???

I don't think Ballard is the problem. Irsay staying out of it and letting Ballard and Steichen work things out with JT is the only way things get patched up, in my opinion.

[Jackie Daytona]

16 hours ago, GoColts8818 said:

Yeah all the random just posting stuff from twitter isn’t helping.  Just because someone says they are an insider and says something about the Colts doesn’t make it news or true.  For the record that’s not a shot at anyone.  People have the right to post what they want rather I think it’s not helping or not.

I'm lost.....so do you or don't you think it helps?  Or did you mean whether, not rather?  That could be, I see a lot of folks struggle with rather/whether on this board, not nearly as prevalent as corps/core or the ubiquitous misuse of a simple "of" lol....  

 

End rant..... I'm sure you meant the former and I'm just curious as to whether you do, or do not, think it's helping?

[Jackie Daytona]

3 hours ago, philba101 said:

I get what you are saying. I get the "next man up mentality," but it has to be frustrating to those players to not have their best player suited up for each game. I just know that players on the team and around the league watch management carefully when situations like this take place. I worry if players feel that Ballard/Irsay have their backs and are doing everything in their power to make this team better every week regardless of this year's expectations.

That player is choosing not to suit up.  The players likely know that blaming the guys who sign their paychecks and make decisions aren't the guys keeping JT on the sideline....so why bite the hand that's still feeding you?

[NewColtsFan]

23 minutes ago, OLD FAN MAN said:

would jt change his mind if irsay fired ballard???

Would JT change his mind if Ballard fired Irsay?  
 

Sorry.   I didn’t mean to interrupt your fantasy…..      carry on!     

[Jackie Daytona]

2 hours ago, philba101 said:

I agree with and understand most of what you are saying here. I understand what the Colts are hoping Taylor will do, I am just not convinced that he will do it. I do respectfully disagree that the Colts aren't out much with Taylor on the sidelines, in that case I feel like he is both hurting himself and his team by being selfish. I also get the part about setting a bad precedent with trading a player every time they get disgruntled and request it. On a local radio program the other day, they mentioned that three Colts players have requested trades from the team in the last 12 months. (Hines privately, and Gilmore and Taylor, publicly). This trend bothers me even though I understand there are always going to be a lot of unhappy people anytime a team finishes 4 and 12. I just don't want this to trend to continue if we do something like produce another 4 and 12 season this year.

One of your three clearly wanted to play for a more established team as he's on his last season likely..... The others are a current malcontent,TBD, and a guy who was just voted captain..... So..... Not sure what that all says .

[Jackie Daytona]

1 hour ago, BProland85 said:

Can we all just boycott all this JT talk as I’m sure most of us are tired of talking about it? The team is what it is and I’m not expecting JT to be a part of it for better or for worse. 

Why even try?  You and I both know that is impossible. Lol

[GoColts8818]

2 hours ago, BProland85 said:

Can we all just boycott all this JT talk as I’m sure most of us are tired of talking about it? The team is what it is and I’m not expecting JT to be a part of it for better or for worse. 

No one is making you post in or read this thread.

[Crunked]

I like the optimism of all the "IF's" on this team lining up being espoused here, (and I hope they do)  but we were like bottom 5 offense last year....we let Campbell Walk and have JT issues on the negative side and drafted an inexperienced QB to offset all of that on the positive side.......So if we improve slightly on offense that would be a win...and we would average around 22 points a game.....our defense on average gave up like 23 points a game.....so that would (if the law of averages line up like If's do) between 4-6 wins this season. Besides vets wanting out wonder who we "won't" sign because we won (X) amount of games this year. Just seems odd the guy who selects the talent punishes the talent for not being , well......more talented.....

[Restinpeacesweetchloe]

1 hour ago, Crunked said:

I like the optimism of all the "IF's" on this team lining up being espoused here, (and I hope they do)  but we were like bottom 5 offense last year....we let Campbell Walk and have JT issues on the negative side and drafted an inexperienced QB to offset all of that on the positive side.......So if we improve slightly on offense that would be a win...and we would average around 22 points a game.....our defense on average gave up like 23 points a game.....so that would (if the law of averages line up like If's do) between 4-6 wins this season. Besides vets wanting out wonder who we "won't" sign because we won (X) amount of games this year. Just seems odd the guy who selects the talent punishes the talent for not being , well......more talented.....

I think it’s safe to say we are going to be better at QB with Richardson then Ryan. Ryan was awful. Ballard didn’t mean we wouldn’t sign players because we lost four games. He was talking about evaluating this roster  and seeing where changed need to be made before committing to extensions.

[csmopar]

5 hours ago, philba101 said:

It is a fair point. If he is injured and out of shape he is not very valuable offensive player to us or any other team for that matter. All things being equal, if you asked teams around the league if they wanted to start their season with a healthy JT or a healthy Zack Moss at RB, I am guessing everybody is going to pick Taylor. Don't get me wrong, I am not defending Taylor here. He deserves most/all of the blame for this ongoing drama. I think he is being very selfish, if he is lying about his injury, even worse. I guess my point is, if you are Ballard and Irsay, at what point do you decide it is time to just move on and trade him? Is that after 4 games, or 8 games? I don't know the answer to that question, but I don't like the optics of letting this drag on all season and into another offseason. I don't think that functionally helps this team now or moving forward.

 

Well yea. But the problem is no one knows at this point

[Jason_]

8 hours ago, OLD FAN MAN said:

would jt change his mind if irsay fired ballard???

 

Could you put your ballard hate aside long enough to provide anything that indicates that Taylor's issue is with ballard specifically? 

[Superman]

10 hours ago, Shive said:

I think there's a possibility that the Saturday pressuring JT narrative can be true, even with JT's initial comments about wanting to retire here. He's always been a guy that "says the right things", almost to a fault. I see that as the JT we've known since drafting him.

 

It's absolutely possible that he wasn't happy about the events with Saturday, but kept "saying the right things" hoping he would get his extension like he's seen all of the other all-pros get from Ballard. When he was told that wasn't happening, he had had enough and we saw what happened.

 

This is all hearsay and conjecture, so I don't want to present it as fact. In my opinion, this has felt like more than just a dispute over the contract, so that's where I can see this narrative as a possibility.

 

Meh. It's possible he was playing the good soldier, but that's such a far cry from him being so upset with the Colts that he might never play for them again. And the primary factor there is still the fact that he wanted a new contract, and the Colts wouldn't comply. All it's really about is the contract, and we all know it.

 

10 hours ago, Shive said:

The two guys that have talked about this haven't done it in a way that is clickbaity or trying to get attention. I'm actually a bit shocked at how low key they've been about it. They had a few tweets talking about it and Shaad mentioned it during his usual live stream on YT, but that's about it. They've also both been consistent with backing the Colts on not paying JT this season and why it makes sense for the team.

 

They're acting like this big scoop has been held back all along, and 'if only you all knew what's really upset JT, you'd understand that he never wants to play for the Colts again.' And it just doesn't play that way when you consider the timeline. It's very convenient that, all of a sudden, after JT's ploy to get his way hasn't produced his desired results, there's suddenly this sensational angle about the Colts asking him to play injured in November. 

 

If this was true, and Indy reporters have known it all along, it's very convenient that they're willing to talk about it now, but no one breathed a word of it since November. 

[NewColtsFan]

The idea that Saturday forced Taylor to play hurt doesn’t ring true to me at all.   Not even a little.    
 

Isn’t this the same Saturday that told Shaq to play it safe and shut things down last year?   Wasn’t Shaq speaking glowingly of Saturday for taking good care of him?   Why would Saturday look after Saturday but not after Taylor?   This does not add up to me. 

[VikingsFanInChennai]

12 hours ago, Shive said:

I think there's a possibility that the Saturday pressuring JT narrative can be true, even with JT's initial comments about wanting to retire here. He's always been a guy that "says the right things", almost to a fault. I see that as the JT we've known since drafting him.

 

It's absolutely possible that he wasn't happy about the events with Saturday, but kept "saying the right things" hoping he would get his extension like he's seen all of the other all-pros get from Ballard. When he was told that wasn't happening, he had had enough and we saw what happened.

 

This is all hearsay and conjecture, so I don't want to present it as fact. In my opinion, this has felt like more than just a dispute over the contract, so that's where I can see this narrative as a possibility.

 

I honestly think the narrative paints Saturday in a poor light and not necessarily the organization as a whole. The local guys that have been talking about this narrative haven't been talking about it in a way that makes the organization look bad. The national media talking have absolutely been doing that though, especially with the "wild" trade asks Ballard made, aka if you make me an offer I can't refuse, we can make a deal.

 

The two guys that have talked about this haven't done it in a way that is clickbaity or trying to get attention. I'm actually a bit shocked at how low key they've been about it. They had a few tweets talking about it and Shaad mentioned it during his usual live stream on YT, but that's about it. They've also both been consistent with backing the Colts on not paying JT this season and why it makes sense for the team.

Exactly what I thought happened with JT last year.

 

But, I don't think Saturday necessarily had to pressure JT to play through injury but JT just could've thought it was best for the team and his acts in good faith would be repaid whenever he expected to have an extension in his mind, that is, the following off-season.

 

Then, the injury lingers, and coaching change happens, the team wants to let this season play out for JT. As soon as JT realized this in the off-season, he changed agent and planned this holdout and his agent tried to push his agenda in social media making Colts look bad - it all just went so deviated from each other's plans.

 

Here we are, and that's how it makes complete sense to me. I don't see anyone at fault, Saturday or GM or Irsay or JT.

 

I just think JT could've handled this better and started the season proving he's healthy, and he could've pushed for contract extension through his agent during the season or could've pushed for trade before October deadline if he doesn't like the way the extension talks go. That'd have been the most sensible thing to do! 

 

When the media spins the bits and parts of the known pieces of information, they make it look devilish on some parties. 

[Crunked]

16 hours ago, Restinpeacesweetchloe said:

I think it’s safe to say we are going to be better at QB with Richardson then Ryan. Ryan was awful. Ballard didn’t mean we wouldn’t sign players because we lost four games. He was talking about evaluating this roster  and seeing where changed need to be made before committing to extensions.

I think you might be missing the sarcasm of Ballards dodge in the press conference of "We sign good players" but we are not re-signing JT  "because we won 4 games" ....we all know that is a dodge the question answer, I am just playing that thread all the way out as truth if we only win 4 games again....we lose more than JT next year/end of this season.......just punking on Ballard and his statement..........I am personally giving Ballard into next season to make this team dramatically better after all this is his "do over" run at being GM.......he built the team it didnt work so he is trying again....Irsay got more patience with him than I do.......I want to cheer for a good team not a perpetually rebuilding one.......I will buy a jersey when the ride comes to a complete stop kinda guy........

[bluebombers87]

8 hours ago, Superman said:

 

Meh. It's possible he was playing the good soldier, but that's such a far cry from him being so upset with the Colts that he might never play for them again. And the primary factor there is still the fact that he wanted a new contract, and the Colts wouldn't comply. All it's really about is the contract, and we all know it.

 

 

They're acting like this big scoop has been held back all along, and 'if only you all knew what's really upset JT, you'd understand that he never wants to play for the Colts again.' And it just doesn't play that way when you consider the timeline. It's very convenient that, all of a sudden, after JT's ploy to get his way hasn't produced his desired results, there's suddenly this sensational angle about the Colts asking him to play injured in November. 

 

If this was true, and Indy reporters have known it all along, it's very convenient that they're willing to talk about it now, but no one breathed a word of it since November. 

Agreed. The timeline and the fact that Saturday shut down Leonard to play it safe doesn’t mesh with what’s being reported. Possible, sure, but not likely.

 

Much more likely JT saw the writing on the wall (either that he will have to prove his cost to Shane or that he’s back from injury) and changed his tune when he realized a big contract extension wasn’t gonna happen.
 

Up to this point, I don’t necessarily blame JT for wanting an extension given what happened with Mack. But now that he’s pulled all this, or been complicit with his agent pulling this, I say Irsay and Ballard need to prove a point. Keep JT out of the locker room and make him choose whether or not he wants to play after four games. Then, cut ties at the end of the season.

[Blueblood23]

20 hours ago, iuswingman said:

 

People's true worth is what others are willing to pay.  

That is so true along with a lot of dumb money being paid out to many.

[throwing BBZ]

18 hours ago, Crunked said:

I like the optimism of all the "IF's" on this team lining up being espoused here, (and I hope they do)  but we were like bottom 5 offense last year....we let Campbell Walk and have JT issues on the negative side and drafted an inexperienced QB to offset all of that on the positive side.......So if we improve slightly on offense that would be a win...and we would average around 22 points a game.....our defense on average gave up like 23 points a game.....so that would (if the law of averages line up like If's do) between 4-6 wins this season. Besides vets wanting out wonder who we "won't" sign because we won (X) amount of games this year. Just seems odd the guy who selects the talent punishes the talent for not being , well......more talented.....

 

 Winning x number of games and bringing in a new coaching staff that will be bringing in at minimum half of a new roster within two seasons is what we fans have to be able to comprehend.

 All new staffs do it.

  Funny that anyone believes JT is being punished. A odd take.

And Ballard and his staff, Irsay, Steichen, and our Capolgist parlay together to form our short and long term vision.

 I can't imagine that Leonard is here next year unless he ends the season "healthy", and had played as one of the best at his position. 

[Crunked]

16 minutes ago, throwing BBZ said:

 

 Winning x number of games and bringing in a new coaching staff that will be bringing in at minimum half of a new roster within two seasons is what we fans have to be able to comprehend.

 All new staffs do it.

  Funny that anyone believes JT is being punished. A odd take.

And Ballard and his staff, Irsay, Steichen, and our Capolgist parlay together to form our short and long term vision.

 I can't imagine that Leonard is here next year unless he ends the season "healthy", and had played as one of the best at his position. 

interesting inference your charging me with, incorrect but interesting. If JT is not a "good player" I have to wonder why we traded up to get him.....either he is part of the build or he isn't . If the coaching staff is dictating the build we are in bigger trouble than I thought......This is Ballards build (take 2) , he may bend it to meet different staff's personality but if he is allowing them to dictate what is and isn't talent we have a problem. If a scheme change has de-emphasized the importance of a player or position group then the "man up" thing to do is admit it and get what you can get from the situation. The fight really is over this years wages....as tagging him beyond this year is virtually a rub $$ wise to what his annual salary might be plus or minus a couple mil. So although my belief is the Colts are going to force him to play out this year at 4mil. that makes it harder to re-sign him beyond and forces the tag if they don't let him walk. And if they let him walk they lost whatever compensation they might have got this year.......So they are playing this out in a way where he remains mad, and we have to tag him to keep him, or saying a 3rd rounder or whatever someone offered is not good enough we demand nothing for him and let him walk....seems like a dumb approach..........I dont like how JT handled it.....but we are here now.....I just dont see any advantage to the way the Colts are playing it if they think "he is a good player" ........I dont know I just dont see how being evasive in answering the question is helpful to the Colts.....if it no longer works get what you can get and move on......eat crow and say we have changed directions or I was wrong or whatever.....the drama is needless and not helping the rebuild........

[King Colt]

Never thought I would see the day when linemen make more than running backs.

[NewColtsFan]

7 minutes ago, King Colt said:

Never thought I would see the day when linemen make more than running backs.

I think lineman have been making more than running backs for quite some time.  
 

Offensive tackles are typically among the highest paid positions in football.  Running backs less so.    I don’t think this is new.  

[throwing BBZ]

On 9/1/2023 at 1:26 PM, Solid84 said:

I definitely think we're in a soft rebuild or soft reset or whatever you could call it.

 

New HC

New Coaching staff

New offensive scheme

New QB

 

Add we're going to play a lot of new guys at CB and that's a soft reset to me.

 

 We don't have a good proven TE. Our safeties are 2nd year unproven, Our WR group is as weak as there is, what are you folks thinking?

[throwing BBZ]

1 hour ago, NewColtsFan said:

I think lineman have been making more than running backs for quite some time.  
 

Offensive tackles are typically among the highest paid positions in football.  Running backs less so.    I don’t think this is new.  

 

 2018 Andrew Norwell G.

4 years $65M got some Wows!

[mirobi48]

I mean 31,31 teams wouldn't give up a 1st rounder for him. And he comes back after week 4 and dominates with Richardson the rest of season. Hope so, I know it is wishful thinking but hay you never know  

[csmopar]

4 hours ago, King Colt said:

Never thought I would see the day when linemen make more than running backs.

Well considering that for the last 35 years or better, the LT position has historically been the second highest paid player position after QB on MOST teams, you obviously haven’t been paying attention much

[1959Colts]

2 hours ago, throwing BBZ said:

 

 2018 Andrew Norwell G.

4 years $65M got some Wows!

...and his performance went straight downhill shortly thereafter

[VikingsFanInChennai]

 

[Yoshinator]

I don't think Taylor plays most of the year. IMO, he'll either play just long enough to get the accrued year on his contract to become a FA and the Colts will have to decide whether to tag him or not, or he'll just sit out all year and not participate in any games. I think Taylor is at a point where he doesn't care about playing for the Colts anymore. IMO, he would play if he was traded, but I think the relationship is ruined, and one of the two things I said will happen. He's hurt the Colts, and possibly his career with how he acted recently.

[Yoshinator]

20 hours ago, NewColtsFan said:

The idea that Saturday forced Taylor to play hurt doesn’t ring true to me at all.   Not even a little.    
 

Isn’t this the same Saturday that told Shaq to play it safe and shut things down last year?   Wasn’t Shaq speaking glowingly of Saturday for taking good care of him?   Why would Saturday look after Saturday but not after Taylor?   This does not add up to me. 

I actually disagree with this for a few reasons. 1.) Saturday was auditioning for a job as the HC of the Colts. He needed every edge he could get as the team was struggling. Taylor was our main offensive piece, Matt Ryan was terrible, and we were using Sam Elingher. 2.) Jeff Saturday probably figured with Taylors personality that he wouldn't say anything. He could play him while he wasn't 100% and it was one of those "be a man" old school type deals. 3.) To go along with no2, Jeff Saturday is an old school guy. He strikes me as a type of guy who plays through pain, so he holds the same standard for Taylor. He may have not known the severity of the injury at that time either.

 

I can't speak for Shaq, but Zaire Franklin and Okereke were doing fine at LBer, so we could replace Leonard, and there was no replacement for Taylor besides Moss and Jackson.

[compuls1v3]

Relationships ARE repairable..... IF both sides care enough.  Time will tell.

[OLD FAN MAN]

40 minutes ago, compuls1v3 said:

Relationships ARE repairable..... IF both sides care enough.  Time will tell.

ballard needs to clean up this mess

[colts89]

6 hours ago, mirobi48 said:

I mean 31,31 teams wouldn't give up a 1st rounder for him. And he comes back after week 4 and dominates with Richardson the rest of season. Hope so, I know it is wishful thinking but hay you never know  

I'll say this much, a lot of people were saying the Lamar Jackson relationship with the Ravens was over for a few weeks this off-season. And frankly if JT wants to get payed at all this year and Ballard doesn't want to trade him, he's gonna have to play.

[smittywerb]

If anything, he has to be a professional and the best thing for him to do is go out there prove his worth.  Not playing is doing nothing but hurting him. 

[NewColtsFan]

5 hours ago, Jared Cisneros said:

I actually disagree with this for a few reasons. 1.) Saturday was auditioning for a job as the HC of the Colts. He needed every edge he could get as the team was struggling. Taylor was our main offensive piece, Matt Ryan was terrible, and we were using Sam Elingher. 2.) Jeff Saturday probably figured with Taylors personality that he wouldn't say anything. He could play him while he wasn't 100% and it was one of those "be a man" old school type deals. 3.) To go along with no2, Jeff Saturday is an old school guy. He strikes me as a type of guy who plays through pain, so he holds the same standard for Taylor. He may have not known the severity of the injury at that time either.

 

I can't speak for Shaq, but Zaire Franklin and Okereke were doing fine at LBer, so we could replace Leonard, and there was no replacement for Taylor besides Moss and Jackson.

If I’m not mistaken, you’re in your mid-30’s.   I think that’s a very cynical viewpoint to have for someone so young.  

 

Jeff Saturday may not be a Hall of Fame player, but by all accounts he’s a Hall of Fame human being.   So I don’t see him doing any of the cold calculated things you think he might have done.    He’s a players coach.   He looked after his players first, last, always.  

I don’t think he’d risk the career of the most important player on the offense for some personal gain.   That’s a pretty stunning perspective to hold. 
 

Im genuinely sorry you’d think those things of Saturday. 

[Zoltan]

19 hours ago, Crunked said:

I dont know I just dont see how being evasive in answering the question is helpful to the Colts.

That’s interesting you thought Ballard was being evasive during the presser, I thought he was straight forward and even blunt at some points watching it.