ColtFreaks.com - Indianapolis Colts Fan Forum - Ballard and Steichen are safe

ColtFreaks.com - Indianapolis Colts Fan Forum (http://www.coltfreaks.com/forum/index.php)

- Indianapolis Colts Discussion (http://www.coltfreaks.com/forum/forumdisplay.php?f=7)

- - Ballard and Steichen are safe (http://www.coltfreaks.com/forum/showthread.php?t=206795)

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kray007 (Post 341245)

Okay, this post isn’t intended to defend Steichen or Ballard or anyone or anything about the organization.

It’s a simple question sparked by the inability of the team to win against Seattle. The Seahawks get the ball with 42 seconds left and 31 seconds later, kick a winning FG.

For most the hundred year history of the league, that would have been inexplicable, considered an epic fail, a two or three time in a season occurrence.

But, has the ground shifted under our feet? Are we living in a new age, crafted by the dynamic kickoff and the league’s incessant drive to extract every last ounce of excitement from the game? How does that combine with the new rules for kicking balls that seem to be driving an explosion of what seems possible on FG attempts?

A few years ago, you would have seen teams blast a kickoff into the end zone. The result, 1st and 10 at the 20. 60 yard field goals were unheard of, anything from 50 out was a prayer. So, you had to move 50 yards in your 40 seconds.

Nowadays, teams are getting starting field position at the 35 or 40. In order to put yourself in position for a 60 plus yard FG, you might have to only move the ball 10 or 15 yards.

In those circumstances, 42 seconds is an eternity.

We saw this play out as early as week 2, when the Giants played Dallas. The Giants take the lead with 19 seconds left, Dallas moves 18 yards and Aubrey kicks a 64 yarder to send it into OT.

I think that it’s changing the way coaches use timeouts at the end of halves. We’ve gone from trying to bleed the clock on D to calling timeouts, trying to conserve every last second. Teams are getting a couple of extra plays, an extra half minute of time to score all because coaches are trying to jockey themselves into a position where they get the ball back with 30 or 40 seconds left.

I think that the result is that the importance of special teams play has just escalated. You need a kick return game that gets you to the 40. You need to stop runners from crossing the 25. You need a kicker who’s money from 60.

I completely agree, the new rules clearly foster the ability to score at the end of games. I can't remember the exact stat, but I heard it earlier this week, something like 73% of the games this year were one score games. Yes, it is all part of the Roger Goodell plan to manufacture more intrigue- I hate the man for living but he is a master marketing machine.

All that said, we lost that game against Seattle because Lou played like a scared little whimp allowing them to just gobble up yards with zero resistance in the most critical point in our season to that point, which is of course why I fucking pray some idiot GM hires him (they won't because they aren't stupid).

Quote:

Originally Posted by IndyNorm (Post 341250)

Where do you think the cap space to sign a top DE is going to come from? We currently have $34M in cap space, so will probably need to restructure/cut some guys just to bring back Jones, Pierce, Cross, and anyone else we want to keep.

Spotrac has the number at $52 Million, which is substantially more than Over The Cap’s 34. Part of that is the fact that Spotrac is counting only the top 41 players. Another part is that they peg the cap in 2026 at a higher number. Another curiosity is that, just a day ago, Over The Cap was saying the Colts had $45 Million in cap space. I’m not sure what changed in 24 hours.

My guess is that the number will end up just a bit over $40 Million, and you’re right that we need to carve out a chunk of cap space.

So, how to do it?

Right now, there are four players on the roster…Buckner, Nelson, Pittman, and Taylor…who count a combined $95 Million against the cap. Inking them to new contracts, each with first year cap hits of $12 Million, would free up $47 Million and give you a certain amount of roster certainty.

There are another three players…Zaire Franklin, Grover Stewart, and Kenny Moore….who count $35 Million. Arguably, they are each past their prime, and cutting them would open up another $29 Million. A less harsh option would be to request that they sign new deals for less money.

If Charvarius Ward retires, we get $25 Million in cap relief if we want to take him to arbitration and wrench back the prorated $13 Million of his signing bonus. Personally, I think that that would send a bad message to the locker room, that if you suffer a catastrophic injury, the team will try to extort money from you.

Alternatively, there are a dozen players on the roster who earn a combined $144 Million in salary and bonuses. If you convert that money to bonuses and extend it over the maximum 5 years allowed by the CBA, you can free up well over $100 Million.

Quote:

Originally Posted by IndyNorm (Post 341261)

I'm no Sherck, but I do know enough to be dangerous. I'm assuming it would take at least a similar type of contract as the one the Texans signed Hunter to which included a $36.8M signing bonus spread over 5 years w/ a year 1 cap hit of $20M.

I'm sure we'll have to pay Jones more than what we paid him this year ($15M cap hit), Pierce will likely get at least MPJ money ($18M cap hit in year 1), and Cross will be looking to get paid as well.

Obviously there's ways to create cap space and lower the initial cap hit from a signing, but I don't see us being able to re-sign our own and bring in a top flight DE without making some really tough cuts.

Pierce will get upwards of 20 million per year. If not here, then somewhere else.

Personally, I’d be fine with letting Pittman go and making Pierce our number one receiver.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Hoopsdoc (Post 341280)

Pierce will get upwards of 20 million per year. If not here, then somewhere else.

Personally, I’d be fine with letting Pittman go and making Pierce our number one receiver.

I still think Pierce will leave unless we overpay him. He'd thrive with a team like the Patriots and Drake Maye. Or any contender with a real franchise QB. Other than developing under Reggie Wayne, he's just wasting his time here. Just my opinion.

We have $$$. Restructure some contracts. Cut some dudes (Zaire) and we're in business. At this point though, it looks like weak FA class.

I don't know if there is a way to get a transcript of today's show, but on 1025 The Game, in Nashville, they were discussing which WC team should be the model for the Titans to follow. One said Jax and another said NE. When it was Derrick Mason's turn, he said he would not look to one of them, but to Indianapolis. I guess a former NFL WR turned radio host is clueless, too.
Here is a link to the show. https://www.twitch.tv/videos/2665590155
They were talking about it around the 2:30 mark, if my memory is right.

Quote:

Interesting. Not sure why Spotrac would only include the top 41, but obviously including the top 51 is going to more accurate with the additional 10 players probably counting ~$10M towards the cap. Also, the total cap liabilities on OTC is $7M more than the top 51, which probably covers things like the rookie pool, etc. Maybe that wasn't being accounted for when you looked earlier on.

Quote:

My guess is that the number will end up just a bit over $40 Million, and you’re right that we need to carve out a chunk of cap space.

So, how to do it?

Right now, there are four players on the roster…Buckner, Nelson, Pittman, and Taylor…who count a combined $95 Million against the cap. Inking them to new contracts, each with first year cap hits of $12 Million, would free up $47 Million and give you a certain amount of roster certainty.

There are another three players…Zaire Franklin, Grover Stewart, and Kenny Moore….who count $35 Million. Arguably, they are each past their prime, and cutting them would open up another $29 Million. A less harsh option would be to request that they sign new deals for less money.

If Charvarius Ward retires, we get $25 Million in cap relief if we want to take him to arbitration and wrench back the prorated $13 Million of his signing bonus. Personally, I think that that would send a bad message to the locker room, that if you suffer a catastrophic injury, the team will try to extort money from you.

Alternatively, there are a dozen players on the roster who earn a combined $144 Million in salary and bonuses. If you convert that money to bonuses and extend it over the maximum 5 years allowed by the CBA, you can free up well over $100 Million.

Good analysis other than the suggestion to go after the prorated portion of Ward's signing bonus. Although most of the players we would look to extend are 30+, so not sure what the appetite is to extend them. Also, pushing cap hits into the future is something Ballard has avoided doing in the past, so he'll have to step out of his comfort zone there.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Racehorse (Post 341332)

Hmm. Considering we've won a whopping 1 playoff game in the past 10 years one would think that he would have found a much more successful franchise to model the Tits after.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Racehorse (Post 341332)

Did he explain why he would model it after the Colts? Exactly what would he do that the Colts have done and why, since we are not a playoff team.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Oldcolt (Post 341371)

Did he explain why he would model it after the Colts? Exactly what would he do that the Colts have done and why, since we are not a playoff team.

He did. I do not remember the exact details, but he mentioned the team was mostly home-grown (drafted) talent, with really good talent in a lot of areas (OL, WR, JT, etc) with some of them elite, or almost elite at their position. He said the roster is only missing a solid QB, and when DJ was performing well, we had it, and were a dominating team. I will listen to it again to see if I misrepresented him.