What do you like and dislike about what our colts have done so far this offseason?

[ColtJ82]

My favorite thing about this offseason relates to Jim Irsay and the hiring of Ryan Grigson. Irsay and Grigs developed a plan, committed to a path, and from what I can tell have stayed true to that path. Very difficult decisions were made. They stepped up and made these decisions for the long-term health of the franchise. We were very fortunate as fans to go from one HOF QB to another who has the potential to be very good for a long time. Hopefully, we will not have to suffer the long term losing that many franchises have had to endure.

Obviously, Peyton's departure was the low spot. All in all though, my biggest dislike had to be the release of Curtis Painter. Having to suffer through 3.5 years of him at PU and then having the Colts draft him embedded a sense of misery within me. Without Curtis, I have nothing else in life to be miserable about. It is like part of me is missing.

[Creekside]

Liked the release of Manning (I personally believe his career is basically over) and the drafting of Luck and the two tight ends. Dislike the release of Addai and the premature conversion to a 3-4.

[deedub75]

I hate that we got rid of Jim Bob Cooter. He had the best name in the NFL.

[Gavin]

My favorite thing about this offseason relates to Jim Irsay and the hiring of Ryan Grigson. Irsay and Grigs developed a plan, committed to a path, and from what I can tell have stayed true to that path. Very difficult decisions were made. They stepped up and made these decisions for the long-term health of the franchise. We were very fortunate as fans to go from one HOF QB to another who has the potential to be very good for a long time. Hopefully, we will not have to suffer the long term losing that many franchises have had to endure.

Obviously, Peyton's departure was the low spot. All in all though, my biggest dislike had to be the release of Curtis Painter. Having to suffer through 3.5 years of him at PU and then having the Colts draft him embedded a sense of misery within me. Without Curtis, I have nothing else in life to be miserable about. It is like part of me is missing.

http://www.sports-re...-painter-1.html

http://www.sports-re...-manning-1.html strangely enough the difference in Mannings college numbers and Painters were not a huge margin

[ColtJ82]

http://www.sports-re...-painter-1.html

http://www.sports-re...-manning-1.html strangely enough the difference in Mannings college numbers and Painters were not a huge margin

That is interesting information. One could even argue that Curtis did it with "lesser" talent.

[Gavin]

That is interesting information. One could even argue that Curtis did it with "lesser" talent.

I dont know if Painter has or had the talent to be a decent NFL Quarterback, I would say no, But anyone can look at last year and say he didnt but I do know the coaching staff failed in utilizing his skills last year which didnt help him any. combine that with a busted up offensive line the majority of the year and he had no shot from the opening snap, what I did notice in Peytons rookie year through 8 games he threw for 11 touchdown passes and Painter threw for 6, now last year wasnt Curtises rookie year but as far as number of games played it was his rookie year, I am looking to see how many interceptions Manning threw for his first 8 games of his rookie year

[Superman]

Think of it this way would you rather pay him this year where the Colts aren't concerned about having cap space since they are just starting the rebuilding process and find out he doesn't work or lock him into a contract extension and have to cut him if he doesn't work out and eat the money in years where they could use it to get other free agents in years where they expect to be competing or worse yet be stuck with his contract and not have him producing?

I left out the trade option because I don't think the Colts were all that interested in doing that unless a team just offered them a crazy deal.

Also there is the chance he's going to work out. If so and the Colts lock him into an extension after the season people will have loved this move by Grigson.

The extension idea doesn't work out that well unless it's done before the season starts.

[Gavin]

I dont know if Painter has or had the talent to be a decent NFL Quarterback, I would say no, But anyone can look at last year and say he didnt but I do know the coaching staff failed in utilizing his skills last year which didnt help him any. combine that with a busted up offensive line the majority of the year and he had no shot from the opening snap, what I did notice in Peytons rookie year through 8 games he threw for 11 touchdown passes and Painter threw for 6, now last year wasnt Curtises rookie year but as far as number of games played it was his rookie year, I am looking to see how many interceptions Manning threw for his first 8 games of his rookie year, Manning threw 16 interceptions through his first 8 games of his rookie year to 11 touchdown passes, Now I am trying to find out how many time he threw the ball down field as opposed to our coaching staff allowing Painter to throw downfield I bet Mannings was alot more through 8 games

I was just adding onto my last post as a follow up

[FireJimCaldwell]

Painter's/Manning's collegiate #'s aren't exactly "that close".

Gavin,

You won't find the information you are looking for on Manning's rookie year. The data isn't available.

[Gavin]

http://www.sports-re...-manning-1.html if those #'s are correct then they are very available, also its the internet, of course its available

[jvan1973]

http://www.sports-re...-painter-1.html

http://www.sports-re...-manning-1.html strangely enough the difference in Mannings college numbers and Painters were not a huge margin

There is a reason Curtis was a 6th round pick and not first overall

[FireJimCaldwell]

http://www.sports-re...-manning-1.html if those #'s are correct then they are very available, also its the internet, of course its available

Then by all means provide the link.

I'm just trying to save you some time. It's not out there.

http://espn.go.com/nfl/player/splits/_/id/1428/year/1998/peyton-manning

http://espn.go.com/nfl/player/splits/_/id/1428/year/2002/peyton-manning

2002 was the first year the "length of pass" information is out there.

[Gavin]

http://www.nfl.com/player/peytonmanning/2501863/situationalstats?season=1998 if I am reading that right he had 42 attempts of 20 plus yards but thats through a 16 game season, I dont know how many he had through 8 games and yes because I couldnt find it

[FireJimCaldwell]

http://www.nfl.com/p...ats?season=1998 if I am reading that right he had 42 attempts of 20 plus yards but thats through a 16 game season, I dont know how many he had through 8 games and yes because I couldnt find it

He had 42 passes that gained 20 yards. Not 42 attempts over 20 yards.

A screen pass to Faulk that he gains 25 yards would count as one of those.

That particular stat has no bearing of how far/short the ball was thrown.

You would have to have access to each game and chart that information that you are looking for.

If you look at the 2nd link i provided above and go to the 2nd to last grouping you'll see what he did in 2002 based on the length of pass.

[Gavin]

He had 42 passes that gained 20 yards. Not 42 attempts over 20 yards.

A screen pass to Faulk that he gains 25 yards would count as one of those.

That particular stat has no bearing of how far/short the ball was thrown.

You would have to have access to each game and chart that information that you are looking for.

If you look at the 2nd link i provided above and go to the 2nd to last grouping you'll see what he did in 2002 based on the length of pass.

Ok I understand it now

[GoColts8818]

The extension idea doesn't work out that well unless it's done before the season starts.

That's my point. I don't think it's wise to just give him an extension right now till we know for sure if he can work in the new defense or not.

It makes more sense to me to let him play out this year with the big pay day and see if he can work or not in a year when frankly the Colts aren't all that concerned about his cap number than giving him extension now just to lower that cap number for this season when frankly at this point they aren't going to do much if anything with that money. If he works out then you work on a new contract. If talks don't go well you put the franchise tag on him. Frankly other than McAfee he's probably going to be our only Free Agent this off-season that might warrant it (tagging a guy like Powers is over paying Powers we made that mistake once with Hayden.) Either way Freeney is going to make the Colts pay him so doing it now isn't going to save them much IMO over the life of the contracts. If we wait to do the deal and he works out Freeney is going to say see I am still a good player pay me. if we do it now Freeney is going to say I am coming off a season where I was pro-bowl player and I am still one of the only players on this defense teams fear pay me. If he doesn't work out this season and we don't extend him then we just let him walk rather than being locked into a contract.

At this point I just don't think there is a strong case to be made to rush into a contract extension with Freeney till we see if he can play in the 3-4 or not.

[Superman]

That's my point. I don't think it's wise to just give him an extension right now till we know for sure if he can work in the new defense or not.

It makes more sense to me to let him play out this year with the big pay day and see if he can work or not in a year when frankly the Colts aren't all that concerned about his cap number than giving him extension now just to lower that cap number for this season when frankly at this point they aren't going to do much if anything with that money. If he works out then you work on a new contract. If talks don't go well you put the franchise tag on him. Frankly other than McAfee he's probably going to be our only Free Agent this off-season that might warrant it (tagging a guy like Powers is over paying Powers we made that mistake once with Hayden.) Either way Freeney is going to make the Colts pay him so doing it now isn't going to save them much IMO over the life of the contracts. If we wait to do the deal and he works out Freeney is going to say see I am still a good player pay me. if we do it now Freeney is going to say I am coming off a season where I was pro-bowl player and I am still one of the only players on this defense teams fear pay me. If he doesn't work out this season and we don't extend him then we just let him walk rather than being locked into a contract.

At this point I just don't think there is a strong case to be made to rush into a contract extension with Freeney till we see if he can play in the 3-4 or not.

I wasn't very clear. From my understanding, once Week 1 begins, Freeney's contract becomes guaranteed. The Colts' bargaining power gets severely diminished at that point. Before that point, the Colts can offer him an extension with a nice signing bonus, and Freeney will have to acknowledge the fact that he can be cut or traded and potentially not see that $14 million base salary this season. He could decide to take his chances there, but it makes sense to offer him a long-term deal now, because it would save the team money now on the cap and in the future in terms of a new signing bonus. And you can do all that while avoiding the franchise tag next season.

I'd like to see whether he fits or not, but doing an extension now doesn't mean we're committed to big dollars in the future. If he doesn't fit, we could cut or trade him without paying him anything else, and just deal with a prorated bonus hit that could be amortized over this season and next. Not a big deal, not if it means potentially saving $15 million in real money.

[GoColts8818]

I wasn't very clear. From my understanding, once Week 1 begins, Freeney's contract becomes guaranteed. The Colts' bargaining power gets severely diminished at that point. Before that point, the Colts can offer him an extension with a nice signing bonus, and Freeney will have to acknowledge the fact that he can be cut or traded and potentially not see that $14 million base salary this season. He could decide to take his chances there, but it makes sense to offer him a long-term deal now, because it would save the team money now on the cap and in the future in terms of a new signing bonus. And you can do all that while avoiding the franchise tag next season.

I'd like to see whether he fits or not, but doing an extension now doesn't mean we're committed to big dollars in the future. If he doesn't fit, we could cut or trade him without paying him anything else, and just deal with a prorated bonus hit that could be amortized over this season and next. Not a big deal, not if it means potentially saving $15 million in real money.

I can talk more about this later but in a hurry now. If we do some kind of contract extension now it will result in some kind of cap hit down the road if we have to release him. I have no idea what that number would be as clearly that contract is not in place to know. All I am saying is why maybe set yourself up to take any kind of cap hit if you can avoid it? If there was some big name free agent to go get that we would use the money Saved by redoing freeneys contract right now I'd be more willing to be for it but there isn't so I just do t think it's a big deal other than people going wow is Freeney being way over paid for this season.

[Creekside]

I know this thread was not intended to be about Freeney, but during this off season, besides Manning and Luck, he has been the most discussed player on this board. Grigson and Pagano have been adament from the beginning that they want Freeney on the team this year and beyond. Freeney stated publicly a few weeks ago that he was told by the Colts that the trade rumors were false. He also stated that he wants to retire a Colt. I see no reason not to believe both sides. I believe that Wayne, Mathis, and Freeney want to prove that it wasn't all Peyton Manning. That's why they are staying, or want to stay.

[Superman]

I can talk more about this later but in a hurry now. If we do some kind of contract extension now it will result in some kind of cap hit down the road if we have to release him. I have no idea what that number would be as clearly that contract is not in place to know. All I am saying is why maybe set yourself up to take any kind of cap hit if you can avoid it? If there was some big name free agent to go get that we would use the money Saved by redoing freeneys contract right now I'd be more willing to be for it but there isn't so I just do t think it's a big deal other than people going wow is Freeney being way over paid for this season.

Let's take my idea for a Freeney extension: four years, $42 million, $16 million signing bonus (whether the total value is low or not isn't relevant for the issue of the prorated bonus, so let's assume he'd agree to this; however, my original offer was $55 million)

2012: Base salary of $1 million + prorated bonus of $4 million + dead cap hit from old bonus of $5 million =

cap hit of $10 million

(total compensation in 2012 = $16 million signing bonus + $1 million base salary = $17 million)

2013: June 1 roster bonus of $2 million + base salary of $7.5 million + prorated bonus of $4 million =

cap hit of $13.5 million

2014: June 1 roster bonus of $2 million + base salary of $7.5 million + prorated bonus of $4 million =

cap hit of $13.5 million

2015: Base salary of $6 million + prorated bonus of $4 million =

cap hit of $10 million

If we agreed to that deal, we'd pay Freeney a total of $17 million in 2012, as opposed to the $14 million we're set to pay him. However, assuming he pans out and we keep him past this season, we wouldn't be paying him a $14 million base salary in 2012 + a signing bonus in 2013. It would save the team real money overall, and $9 million of cap space now, which can be rolled over to next year's cap if nothing else.

If, however, Freeney didn't work out for us and we had to cut him after this season, his contract would have $12 million of prorated bonus still to be amortized. Depending on the cut date, we can either take that prorated cap hit all in the 2012 league year, all in the 2013 league year, or split it evenly between 2012-13 or 2013-14. Let's say we split it evenly between 2012 and 2013 ($6 million in both years), we'd be giving back all but $3 million of the 2012 cap space added from the extension, and we'd be adding an additional $6 million in dead cap hit to the 2013 cap. Not the end of the world.

As a matter of fact, depending on where our cap numbers wind up this season, we might be able to do a March 1 release and put the entire $12 million prorated bonus money on the 2012 cap.

(By the way, cap gurus, correct me if I'm wrong.)

The reason this would make sense, in my mind, is because we're going to pay him $14 million base salary this season, and then we'll either let him walk or pay him another signing bonus next season. The only reason we'd be letting him walk, assuming he's healthy, would be because he doesn't fit the defense, in which case it would make no sense to pay him $14 million. If we were to trade him during the season it would lessen the pain, but that depends on a) what week he's traded in, and b) what we get back for him. However, if we extend him, we don't pay a bloated $14 million base salary and a signing bonus. Plus, we add cap space. And assuming he pans out for us -- which I think he will -- we keep all of that added cap space in the next two seasons.

I think the preseason extension is the most prudent move, both in terms of cap space and real money. That's whether he fits or not.

[GoColts8818]

Let's take my idea for a Freeney extension: four years, $42 million, $16 million signing bonus (whether the total value is low or not isn't relevant for the issue of the prorated bonus, so let's assume he'd agree to this; however, my original offer was $55 million)

2012: Base salary of $1 million + prorated bonus of $4 million + dead cap hit from old bonus of $5 million =

cap hit of $10 million

(total compensation in 2012 = $16 million signing bonus + $1 million base salary = $17 million)

2013: June 1 roster bonus of $2 million + base salary of $7.5 million + prorated bonus of $4 million =

cap hit of $13.5 million

2014: June 1 roster bonus of $2 million + base salary of $7.5 million + prorated bonus of $4 million =

cap hit of $13.5 million

2015: Base salary of $6 million + prorated bonus of $4 million =

cap hit of $10 million

If we agreed to that deal, we'd pay Freeney a total of $17 million in 2012, as opposed to the $14 million we're set to pay him. However, assuming he pans out and we keep him past this season, we wouldn't be paying him a $14 million base salary in 2012 + a signing bonus in 2013. It would save the team real money overall, and $9 million of cap space now, which can be rolled over to next year's cap if nothing else.

If, however, Freeney didn't work out for us and we had to cut him after this season, his contract would have $12 million of prorated bonus still to be amortized. Depending on the cut date, we can either take that prorated cap hit all in the 2012 league year, all in the 2013 league year, or split it evenly between 2012-13 or 2013-14. Let's say we split it evenly between 2012 and 2013 ($6 million in both years), we'd be giving back all but $3 million of the 2012 cap space added from the extension, and we'd be adding an additional $6 million in dead cap hit to the 2013 cap. Not the end of the world.

As a matter of fact, depending on where our cap numbers wind up this season, we might be able to do a March 1 release and put the entire $12 million prorated bonus money on the 2012 cap.

(By the way, cap gurus, correct me if I'm wrong.)

The reason this would make sense, in my mind, is because we're going to pay him $14 million base salary this season, and then we'll either let him walk or pay him another signing bonus next season. The only reason we'd be letting him walk, assuming he's healthy, would be because he doesn't fit the defense, in which case it would make no sense to pay him $14 million. If we were to trade him during the season it would lessen the pain, but that depends on a) what week he's traded in, and b) what we get back for him. However, if we extend him, we don't pay a bloated $14 million base salary and a signing bonus. Plus, we add cap space. And assuming he pans out for us -- which I think he will -- we keep all of that added cap space in the next two seasons.

I think the preseason extension is the most prudent move, both in terms of cap space and real money. That's whether he fits or not.

As we saw with Garcon's contract when he got way more than we ever thought he would on the open market guessing contracts can be a dangerous game. That's why I don't like to do it.

Even if you redo Freeney's deal now and we have to cut him they are going to take some kinda contract hit for cutting him that they wouldn't need to take if they just let him go when his contract is up at the end of the season. I know it might not be a huge number but it's still taking a risk on taking a hit you don't have to take.

Frankly if we keep him I think his contract is going to be about the same rather we do the deal now or we wait and do it. I don't think we are going to save money in the long run by doing that contract right now before we know if he can play in a 3-4 or not. So I don't feel the rush to sign him right now when we can wait and see if he works or not. If he works great you franchise tag him and work out a deal from that point if you have too. If he doesn't then you just let him walk and don't have to take any kind of cap hit from releasing him.

About he only perk to doing the deal now besides having him locked up is that it'll free up some cap space we can roll into next year. I don't think that's a big worry to the Colts because right now they are supposed to have the most cap space of any team in the NFL next year. So I think to them they view it as smarter to just let Freeney play out this year get his huge pay day and see how he does. If he does well enough you want to bring him back I think the Colts can make that happen. If he struggles I think they just let him walk and move on.

Yes Freeney is being extremely over paid for this season but Grigson didn't give him that contract either. I think Grigson is just cleaning up from Polian and this is part of it and before he commits to Freeney for the future I think he wants to make sure Freeney is going to work in this system. I also don't think he wants one of his first major moves to be extending Freeney's contract and maybe having to cut him after the season. If we were in dire need of the cap space I could see the argument for it but frankly at this point the only thing that will truly be helped is the cap space next season because, in all likely hood the Colts wont use the cap space freed up from it this off-season, and the Colts are already in great shape for the cap next year with Freeney's contract the way it is.

[Superman]

As we saw with Garcon's contract when he got way more than we ever thought he would on the open market guessing contracts can be a dangerous game. That's why I don't like to do it.

Even if you redo Freeney's deal now and we have to cut him they are going to take some kinda contract hit for cutting him that they wouldn't need to take if they just let him go when his contract is up at the end of the season. I know it might not be a huge number but it's still taking a risk on taking a hit you don't have to take.

Frankly if we keep him I think his contract is going to be about the same rather we do the deal now or we wait and do it. I don't think we are going to save money in the long run by doing that contract right now before we know if he can play in a 3-4 or not. So I don't feel the rush to sign him right now when we can wait and see if he works or not. If he works great you franchise tag him and work out a deal from that point if you have too. If he doesn't then you just let him walk and don't have to take any kind of cap hit from releasing him.

About he only perk to doing the deal now besides having him locked up is that it'll free up some cap space we can roll into next year. I don't think that's a big worry to the Colts because right now they are supposed to have the most cap space of any team in the NFL next year. So I think to them they view it as smarter to just let Freeney play out this year get his huge pay day and see how he does. If he does well enough you want to bring him back I think the Colts can make that happen. If he struggles I think they just let him walk and move on.

Yes Freeney is being extremely over paid for this season but Grigson didn't give him that contract either. I think Grigson is just cleaning up from Polian and this is part of it and before he commits to Freeney for the future I think he wants to make sure Freeney is going to work in this system. I also don't think he wants one of his first major moves to be extending Freeney's contract and maybe having to cut him after the season. If we were in dire need of the cap space I could see the argument for it but frankly at this point the only thing that will truly be helped is the cap space next season because, in all likely hood the Colts wont use the cap space freed up from it this off-season, and the Colts are already in great shape for the cap next year with Freeney's contract the way it is.

I feel like you didn't make any effort to understand what I'm saying.

1) Garcon's contract, though more per year than I expected, wasn't that out of bounds in terms of the signing bonus and so-called guaranteed money. That being the case, even if we're low on Freeney's contract, we can still anticipate about what his signing bonus would be. And the numbers I'm using are just a for instance, so that we can actually discuss the issue in real terms, rather than working from dynamic and undetermined numbers.

2) To the bolded portion, that's not accurate, and that's why I don't think you understand my point. If we pay Freeney an admittedly high $14 million this season, and then turn around and resign him next year, it's like giving him two signing bonuses in a row. It is an insane waste of money, considering there are other options. It's about as wasteful as the Saints tagging Drew Brees in consecutive years, giving him an average per year of about $20 million, which is pretty much what he and his agent are asking for anyways. It becomes even more wasteful to tag him next season at $23 million, because even though we'll have the cap space, allocating that much toward one player -- a non-quarterback at that -- hinders the team's ability to sign other players. And we'll have several free agents of our own on the market after this season.

3) The basic impact of keeping him at his current $19 million cap hit, instead of extending him now, is that we waste cap space, which can either be used this season or rolled into next year's cap space. Your primary argument against resigning him and then releasing him is that it might be a waste of cap space. This seems contradictory to me. At least my way, there's a chance that we can use some of that cap space to the benefit of the team, rather than using it all on Freeney.

4) I don't think Grigson cares (or should care) whether an extension for Freeney winds up looking bad. A) Keeping Freeney at $19 million looks bad; B) anyone who takes the time to consider the circumstances would recognize that extending him at reasonable terms provides the team with greater flexibility and has the potential to save cap space and real dollars.

I don't know what we're going to do with Freeney's contract. To my mind, it makes no sense to keep him on his current deal. Even if it costs us more than anticipated to keep him, that provides us with greater flexibility with the cap, and it saves real money that can be used on signing bonuses for other players. I don't agree with the idea that Freeney's contract is hurting us (although keeping him at a higher cap hit than necessary could potentially be detrimental to the team), but I do think it's prudent to address his contract before this season starts.

[GoColts8818]

I feel like you didn't make any effort to understand what I'm saying.

1) Garcon's contract, though more per year than I expected, wasn't that out of bounds in terms of the signing bonus and so-called guaranteed money. That being the case, even if we're low on Freeney's contract, we can still anticipate about what his signing bonus would be. And the numbers I'm using are just a for instance, so that we can actually discuss the issue in real terms, rather than working from dynamic and undetermined numbers.

2) To the bolded portion, that's not accurate, and that's why I don't think you understand my point. If we pay Freeney an admittedly high $14 million this season, and then turn around and resign him next year, it's like giving him two signing bonuses in a row. It is an insane waste of money, considering there are other options. It's about as wasteful as the Saints tagging Drew Brees in consecutive years, giving him an average per year of about $20 million, which is pretty much what he and his agent are asking for anyways. It becomes even more wasteful to tag him next season at $23 million, because even though we'll have the cap space, allocating that much toward one player -- a non-quarterback at that -- hinders the team's ability to sign other players. And we'll have several free agents of our own on the market after this season.

3) The basic impact of keeping him at his current $19 million cap hit, instead of extending him now, is that we waste cap space, which can either be used this season or rolled into next year's cap space. Your primary argument against resigning him and then releasing him is that it might be a waste of cap space. This seems contradictory to me. At least my way, there's a chance that we can use some of that cap space to the benefit of the team, rather than using it all on Freeney.

4) I don't think Grigson cares (or should care) whether an extension for Freeney winds up looking bad. A) Keeping Freeney at $19 million looks bad; B) anyone who takes the time to consider the circumstances would recognize that extending him at reasonable terms provides the team with greater flexibility and has the potential to save cap space and real dollars.

I don't know what we're going to do with Freeney's contract. To my mind, it makes no sense to keep him on his current deal. Even if it costs us more than anticipated to keep him, that provides us with greater flexibility with the cap, and it saves real money that can be used on signing bonuses for other players. I don't agree with the idea that Freeney's contract is hurting us (although keeping him at a higher cap hit than necessary could potentially be detrimental to the team), but I do think it's prudent to address his contract before this season starts.

I made an effort I just don't agree with it. I think we've reached the point of it's time to agree to disagree because we are just going round and round.

[Superman]

I made an effort I just don't agree with it. I think we've reached the point of it's time to agree to disagree because we are just going round and round.

;)

Not trying to get all wild-eyed about it. I just think that, compared to keeping him at $19 million in 2012, it's a zero-risk proposition to extend him now. To me, it's the smart thing to do. I'm not a capologist, but what rudimentary understanding I do have suggests that we can shield ourselves from long-term cap effects and save money by extending him, but we have to do it before Week 1.

[GoColts8818]

;)

Not trying to get all wild-eyed about it. I just think that, compared to keeping him at $19 million in 2012, it's a zero-risk proposition to extend him now. To me, it's the smart thing to do. I'm not a capologist, but what rudimentary understanding I do have suggests that we can shield ourselves from long-term cap effects and save money by extending him, but we have to do it before Week 1.

and that's where we disagree I think it's taking a bit of a risk you don't have to take because if you have to cut him even it's a small cap hit it's still a cap hit you didn't have to take. I think both are fair options it just comes down to which side Grigson falls on the issue.

[Superman]

and that's where we disagree I think it's taking a bit of a risk you don't have to take because if you have to cut him even it's a small cap hit it's still a cap hit you didn't have to take. I think both are fair options it just comes down to which side Grigson falls on the issue.

Okay, last thing I'll say:

Your way, we take a cap hit in 2012, and we have another player go to free agency next year. My way, maybe we take a cap hit that can be either be absorbed in 2012, or spread out over 2012 and 2013, but we lock up the rights to a good player and give ourselves flexibility.

That's it in a nutshell. I acknowledge that it's undesirable to consider taking another dead cap hit for Freeney, but keeping him at $19 million is equally undesirable. Not because "he's overpaid," but because I think we have better options.

Okay, I'm done. I hear you. We'll see what Grigson and Irsay do.