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

[GoColts8818]

7 hours ago, GoColts8818 said:

Taylor traveled with the team to Baltimore, signs continue to point to his return with the Colts.

Disregard this is Richardson 

 

 

That’s what I get for going with some random guy on twitter.  Sorry if I got anyone excited.

[Restinpeacesweetchloe]

Dolphins don’t need JT. AJ Dillion is playing great for packers. I don’t think there is any trade market for JT and he is hound yo have yo play for colts and probably is where he will get the best contract.

[DougDew]

Welp, that sucked.  MIA put up a 70 burger.  They'll probably figure out that they have other RBs who can run fast through a hole.

 

Has JT been traded for two 4th rounders yet?

[chad72]

14 minutes ago, DougDew said:

Welp, that sucked.  MIA put up a 70 burger.  They'll probably figure out that they have other RBs who can run fast through a hole.

 

Has JT been traded for two 4th rounders yet?

 

I told folks, no one is giving up a 2nd rounder for JT

[DougDew]

15 minutes ago, chad72 said:

 

I told folks, no one is giving up a 2nd rounder for JT

I've been estimating two 4ths since about page 10.  LOL.

[rockywoj]

Hmmm, people seem disappointed that prospective trade partners seem not to be in need of a running back, anymore.

 

Me, I kind of like it!  Best case scenario in my mind is that JT and his agent realize there is virtually no realistic trade market options for JT, concluding that the RB market indeed ‘is what it is’, so JT can come back to the Colts, attitude adjusted, ball out for the remainder of the season, realize the Colts are building something special, and then reap the rewards of a decent 3-4 year contract moving forward after the season.

 

 

[Superman]

12 hours ago, Restinpeacesweetchloe said:

AJ Dillion is playing great for packers.

 

AJ Dillon has been awful. He's averaging 36 yards/game, and 2.7 yards/attempt. The Packers might actually still be interested.

[stitches]

1 minute ago, Superman said:

 

AJ Dillon has been awful. He's averaging 36 yards/game, and 2.7 yards/attempt. The Packers might actually still be interested.

No idea if they would be interested(and if they can accommodate his pay demands) but JT actually makes a bit of sense for ... the Ravens. 

[chad72]

7 minutes ago, Superman said:

 

AJ Dillon has been awful. He's averaging 36 yards/game, and 2.7 yards/attempt. The Packers might actually still be interested.

 

Yeah, Jordan Love's quick chemistry with their wideouts has been remarkable to watch. If they had both Aaron Jones and Watson playing, they would be a force to reckon with.

 

Dillon has been the weak link in their running game.

[compuls1v3]

4 minutes ago, stitches said:

No idea if they would be interested(and if they can accommodate his pay demands) but JT actually makes a bit of sense for ... the Ravens. 

Why the Ravens?  Isnt their back averaging like 5yds a carry?

[chad72]

Just now, compuls1v3 said:

Why the Ravens?  Isnt their back averaging like 5yds a carry?

 

I know what you did there. But at some point in time, with Lamar not finishing their past few seasons, they will have to invest in an RB that teams have to respect. That is what Mark Ingram brought to the table during Lamar's MVP year.

[Superman]

2 minutes ago, stitches said:

No idea if they would be interested(and if they can accommodate his pay demands) but JT actually makes a bit of sense for ... the Ravens. 

 

If the Ravens can get value out of JT with Lamar at QB, why can't we get value out of JT with Richardson at RB? I would think they'd value the RB position the same way everyone else does.

 

Zach Moss had a strong game yesterday, and never once looked like a dynamic athlete. He even made that great catch on the TD throw, and he's never been considered a big time receiving threat. Alexander Mattison looked bad the first two weeks, and had a nice day yesterday (Chargers might have a terrible defense though). Rookie RBs and journeyman vets are having huge games. Early returns this season seem to be reinforcing the idea that it's not good business to pay big money for RBs.

[compuls1v3]

3 minutes ago, chad72 said:

 

I know what you did there. But at some point in time, with Lamar not finishing their past few seasons, they will have to invest in an RB that teams have to respect. That is what Mark Ingram brought to the table during Lamar's MVP year.

Gus Edwards is averaging 5 yds per carry.  I'm not counting Lamar.

[stitches]

8 minutes ago, Superman said:

 

If the Ravens can get value out of JT with Lamar at QB, why can't we get value out of JT with Richardson at RB? I would think they'd value the RB position the same way everyone else does.

If the idea is to use him just for this year - then yes, we can use him the same way with Richardson. If we want to not lose value on him leaving for nothing, then we probably need to trade him. The Ravens are probably closer to contention than us so that was my thinking. 

 

8 minutes ago, Superman said:

Zach Moss had a strong game yesterday, and never once looked like a dynamic athlete. He even made that great catch on the TD throw, and he's never been considered a big time receiving threat. Alexander Mattison looked bad the first two weeks, and had a nice day yesterday (Chargers might have a terrible defense though). Rookie RBs and journeyman vets are having huge games. Early returns this season seem to be reinforcing the idea that it's not good business to pay big money for RBs.

Agreed. Moss showed exactly why you don't need to pay 15M a year for a super dynamic RB. Because even mediocre options give you a close approximation of the production/impact of what the superstar RB gives you. It's much better to use that money on positions where the difference between a 15M player and a league minimum player is MUCH MUCH bigger. 

[richard pallo]

I think it’s looking more likely JT plays for us this year.  Ballard is a stubborn GM and won’t give him away.  Taylor doesn’t want to lose an accrued year and he can now see he has a good OL here to run behind.  It doesn’t hurt the team is looking good with a new coach and promising quarterback either.   A lot could change between now and the end of October.  A team might still meet Ballards price if they think he is their missing piece .  Especially if Taylor plays and looks good.  That said I think it’s more likely he’s going to play the year for us which makes more sense all the way around.

[richard pallo]

1 minute ago, stitches said:

If the idea is to use him just for this year - then yes, we can use him the same way with Richardson. If we want to not lose value on him leaving for nothing, then we probably need to trade him. The Ravens are probably closer to contention than us so that was my thinking. 

 

Agreed. Moss showed exactly why you don't need to pay 15M a year for a super dynamic RB. Because even mediocre options give you a close approximation of the production/impact of what the superstar RB gives you. It's much better to use that money on positions where the difference between a 15M player and a league minimum player is MUCH MUCH bigger. 

Think 13m.  That’s what I think we pay him if we extend him at the end of the year.  That’s a big win for us and a reasonable contract for everyone involved.

[Jonmal7]

44 minutes ago, richard pallo said:

Think 13m.  That’s what I think we pay him if we extend him at the end of the year.  That’s a big win for us and a reasonable contract for everyone involved.

Especially with us having a rookie QB, we can afford a 3 year deal for around 13, with 24ish guarenteed and incentive laden.

[Patrick Miller]

I wonder if the bears or broncos would be interested in Taylor? 😉 

[DougDew]

42 minutes ago, Patrick Miller said:

I wonder if the bears or broncos would be interested in Taylor? 😉 

Yes, but in about 7 months.

[DougDew]

1 hour ago, richard pallo said:

I think it’s looking more likely JT plays for us this year.  Ballard is a stubborn GM and won’t give him away.  Taylor doesn’t want to lose an accrued year and he can now see he has a good OL here to run behind.  It doesn’t hurt the team is looking good with a new coach and promising quarterback either.   A lot could change between now and the end of October.  A team might still meet Ballards price if they think he is their missing piece .  Especially if Taylor plays and looks good.  That said I think it’s more likely he’s going to play the year for us which makes more sense all the way around.

The table has always been set for an amicable return, if I followed this soap opera well.   While JT has asked to be traded, I thought it appeared driven by the lack of an extension moreso then any real deterioration in the relationship.  The chatter has been more angry, but the words said by both sides have been generally business like and cordial.  And both agreed that he was injured, although most believe he was exaggerating the ankle.  

 

I'm saying that underneath all of this chatter by people, if you look at the actually words said by the Colts and JT, there is really no position either has taken that puts them into an unchangeable corner.  I think both sides have left plenty of room to come together.

[Patrick Miller]

So is Taylor set to be activated after the Rams game?

[GoColts8818]

33 minutes ago, Patrick Miller said:

So is Taylor set to be activated after the Rams game?

He would eligible but the Colts and Taylor have not said one way or another.  The closest we’ve gotten is Shane saying he’s back week five.

[GoColts8818]

41 minutes ago, Patrick Miller said:

So is Taylor set to be activated after the Rams game?

here is your latest update.

[Restinpeacesweetchloe]

42 minutes ago, Patrick Miller said:

So is Taylor set to be activated after the Rams game?

Next Monday. 
 

Someone on here said he can’t play until week 7 though. At least that is what I understand from what they posted. 

[richard pallo]

4 minutes ago, Restinpeacesweetchloe said:

Next Monday. 
 

Someone on here said he can’t play until week 7 though. At least that is what I understand from what they posted. 

Sounds like he comes off the pup next Monday but we have 21 days to activate him.  It could happen any time after he comes off.  Immediately if we want.  Makes no sense to me that he has to wait until week 7.  If he’s ready to play he plays. That’s how I see it.

[GoColts8818]

4 minutes ago, richard pallo said:

Sounds like he comes off the pup next Monday but we have 21 days to activate him.  It could happen any time after he comes off.  Immediately if we want.  Makes no sense to me that he has to wait until week 7.  If he’s ready to play he plays. That’s how I see it.

Yeah the guy who posted that said later he made a mistake.  In theory Taylor could be activated and played vs the Titans.  We’ll see if that happens.  Shane said he will be coming off PUP soon and he will talk about it then.

[1959Colts]

https://www.espn.com/video/clip/_/id/38490068

 

58 second clip from Schefter

 

Schefter on McAfee: The best place for Jonathan Taylor is Indianapolis

Adam Schefter discusses what Jonathan Taylor's future could look like after his return from IR.

 

[Restinpeacesweetchloe]

Taylor is eligible to start practicing Monday. It’s up to the team when to actually activate him to the roster. So he could go through a week or two of practice before activating him. My guess he will be practicing next Wed.

[jvan1973]

On 8/28/2023 at 8:34 PM, BeanDiasucci said:

The Colts signed kicker Matt Gay for more than Taylor makes, too.

Makes sense now doesn't it

[hoosierhawk]

Just now, jvan1973 said:

Makes sense now doesn't it

Not really, I think Taylor contributed to winning games for the Colts in the past. Both dare good players at their respective positions. I think this is a rather foolish issue.  

[2006Coltsbestever]

When Taylor signs a new long contract here in about 2 weeks, to the people in here that don't want him can be butthurt. I will say I told you so, what else is new. 

[jvan1973]

9 minutes ago, hoosierhawk said:

Not really, I think Taylor contributed to winning games for the Colts in the past. Both dare good players at their respective positions. I think this is a rather foolish issue.  

Name another kicker that did what Gay did today

[hoosierhawk]

18 minutes ago, jvan1973 said:

Name another kicker that did what Gay did today

What does that have to do with JT. One is a RB and the other is a kicker. It's apples and oranges.

[1959Colts]

https://www.nbcsports.com/nfl/profootballtalk/rumor-mill/news/raheem-mostert-plans-to-ignore-any-jonathan-taylor-talk

Raheem Mostert plans to ignore any Jonathan Taylor talk

By Mike Florio

 

Last month, the Dolphins flirted with the idea of trading for Colts running back Jonathan Taylor. Now that Taylor’s four weeks on the reserve/PUP list are coming to an end, will the Dolphins do it again?

Given the way Raheem Mostert and De’Von Achane are performing, why would they? Whatever the Colts want, why give it up for a position where there’s really no need?

 

 

[pkbrux]

22 minutes ago, hoosierhawk said:

What does that have to do with JT. One is a RB and the other is a kicker. It's apples and oranges.

 

Very true, they are different roles, but its debatable which is actually more important. In this day in age, give me an elite kicker/below average running back pairing over an elite running back/below average kicker pairing.

[ADnum1]

So if you sign Taylor to an extension then you need to sign Pittman too.

 

It makes no sense to reward Taylor for holding out and faking injury and then to leave Pittman out in the cold.

 

Pittman has suited up every game and deserves a contract first before Taylor does.

 

I would sign Pittman before Taylor 

[compuls1v3]

4 minutes ago, pkbrux said:

 

Very true, they are different roles, but its debatable which is actually more important. In this day in age, give me an elite kicker/below average running back pairing over an elite running back/below average kicker pairing.

Are you saying Moss is below average??

[pkbrux]

Just now, compuls1v3 said:

Are you saying Moss is below average??

 

No, wasn't talking about any players specifically. Just that I'd rather have an elite kicker than an elite RB.

 

Moss is probably right at average, which I am very satisfied with. Would much rather have him making next to nothing than JT making $8m.

[holeymoley99]

18 minutes ago, 1959Colts said:

https://www.nbcsports.com/nfl/profootballtalk/rumor-mill/news/raheem-mostert-plans-to-ignore-any-jonathan-taylor-talk

Raheem Mostert plans to ignore any Jonathan Taylor talk

By Mike Florio

 

Last month, the Dolphins flirted with the idea of trading for Colts running back Jonathan Taylor. Now that Taylor’s four weeks on the reserve/PUP list are coming to an end, will the Dolphins do it again?

Given the way Raheem Mostert and De’Von Achane are performing, why would they? Whatever the Colts want, why give it up for a position where there’s really no need?

 

 

I drafted him in Fantasy and reaping the rewards, he played hs ball up the street from me at new Smyrna beach and my hs classmate Lance Jenkins was his head coach so rooting for the kid.

[GoColts8818]

1 hour ago, hoosierhawk said:

Not really, I think Taylor contributed to winning games for the Colts in the past. Both dare good players at their respective positions. I think this is a rather foolish issue.  

I also think it’s important to recognize one is a rookie contract and one isn’t.  What ever second deal Taylor gets will be well above what Gay got this year, also Gay’s rookie contract was much smaller than Taylor’s.  The person who originally posted this was really comparing apples to oranges.