I'm sure that is how they looked at it, time will tell, but at this point it looks like a lousy deal for us! Google Gemini (AI) says it was one of the worst trades in NFL history!

Right now AI is correct. I hope the kid returns to what garnered two first rounders. The Colts are snake bitten though for whatever reason.

It also doesn't help that AD Mitchell is doing very well with the Jets, he had 102 yards and a TD last week. I agree though, it's still too early to say for certain we got skinned!

That was a couple of weeks ago vs. ATL. Last week he had a decent game though - 6 for 58 yards and a TD in a blowout loss at the Jagoffs. The week before he only had 1 catch for 24 yards vs. MIA. He had 6 targets that game so guessing he had some drops and/or biz decisions.

You draft a freak athlete with big holes in his game, he shows you those holes and you give up on him. Some guys we seem to hold on forever (I'm looking at you Banogu) for no apparent reason, others not so much. If AD continues to improve it is not a good look for the Colt managements ability to evaluate what they have.

Joe Burrow has a contrac signed through 2029.

In 2026, he has a dead cap of $56.250m but a cap hit of $48m making it an additional $12m cap hit for the Bengals to trade him.

In addition to losing the talents of a top flight NFL QB on a poorly run team, the team wanting him would have to make a huge effort to convince the Bengals to trade him away.

Without our next two 1st round draft picks, I cannot see the Colts having the horsepower (heh!) needed to make this kind of trade unless we package some of our superstar players like JT and Pierce.

So, if we here coming to the end of his contract and wanted out and we just had to sign him? Sure, I think we could figure that out.

As a trade? There is no way in heck that the Colts could be conpetitive in that kind of situation.

Hopeless dreaming.

It wasn't even the worst trade the Colts made in the past 5 years.

I don't really care how AD performs. Pundits say that since it worked out for the team, somehow it was a bad trade for the other team. There is no way to know how the player would have performed on his previous team if he was not traded. Sometimes a player only improves by having a new situation, either because the situation is better for him, or because he only learned to improve by the first team giving up on him. In the case of Mitchell, he was a luxury as a WR4, and we needed a CB a lot worse, so it was a good trade, at the time. Hindsight is always 50/50, but GMs do not have crustal balls to know how it will work out, but they swing for the fences anyway. Ballard haters will always play the hindsight game. But they only play it when it turns out bad, and not when he gets a player like DeForest Buckner.

I actually agree with this and under normal circumstances would think it is good criticism. I think however that the amount of leeway you give a player when you know when you draft him he has huge holes in his game but still gamble a second round draft pick on the man is greater than this. I agree you never know but if you are going to spend a second round draft pick on a dude you damn well should know before you give up on him. It isn't something you fire people over but when you decide to keep Banogu for years but give up on AD (assuming he turns it around) I do believe it says something about your player evaluation.

o


More significantly, we're not going to know how good or bad that trade was for at least a couple of years.

o