‘Terrible for everybody': ESPN’s Adam Schefter discusses Jonathan Taylor contract dra

[JAFF]

‘Terrible for everybody': ESPN’s Adam Schefter discusses Jonathan Taylor contract drama
Scott Horner
Indianapolis Star


Adam Schefter believes he knows who's at fault in the contract drama between the Indianapolis Colts and running back Jonathan Taylor that has gone "off the rails."

Everybody.

The ESPN NFL insider also believes he knows who can solve the issues.

Those same people, maybe with a little help from Pat McAfee.

Schefter joined McAfee's show on Thursday and said Taylor, agent Malki Kawa, Colts owner Jim Irsay and general manager Chris Ballard could hammer out an agreement that satisfies all sides without much difficulty. And, if necessary, McAfee could mediate. (McAfee didn't volunteer for that assignment.)


Latest move:Taylor has excused absence from training camp

"Sit down and be responsible, mature, professional individuals and figure out what is going to make both sides happy," Schefter said. "You know what that is? That's a fair deal that makes both sides happy."

He couldn't identify any single point at which the situation devolved − whether it's Taylor changing agents, Irsay tweeting about running back salaries, Taylor taking part in a call with other NFL running backs, etc. − but somewhere along the way it went "off the rails."


Taylor, in the final year of his rookie deal, is set to count $5.1 million toward the Colts' salary cap, according to Spotrac. He wants a long-term deal that reflects leading the NFL in rushing in 2021. However, running backs are having a tough time getting paid this offseason.

Schefter and McAfee discussed the possibility of trading Taylor, but Schefter said it would be difficult to work out a deal in which the Colts are satisfied with the return, and the acquiring team is willing to meet Taylor's contract request.


"They could, but it's not easy," he said.

Meanwhile, Colts coach Shane Steichen is trying to implement an offense that features a two-headed attack led by Taylor and rookie quarterback Anthony Richardson − without one of those heads.

"Can you imagine what that's like for a coach?” Schefter said. "You got your best player, in his hoodie, scowling, leaving camp, coming back, leaving. That's terrible for everybody. It's not good for the coach. It's not good for the player. It's not good for the owner. It's not good for the agent."

The best solution? "They need to let the situation calm down. … I think both sides need to give a little bit."

[Ironshaft]

The best solution is for JT to honor his contract and then ask for more money, as the CBA and system allows, when he can under the contract he choose to lay under.

No one held a gun to his head and forced him to sign his rookie deal. He was eager to do so because it was going to make him a millionaire. Now that he is disatified with being a millionaire because he is not as big of a millionaire as some of his peers does not negate that he signed a deal that he needs to honor.

Giving him more money now just because he asked for it, was told no and now is going to throw a tantrum about it is terrible business for any NFL team.

[Oldcolt]

The Colts give extensions to players already under contract all the time. And who the hell knows what JT wants, he isn't saying anything. I don't disagree that he should honor his contract, this is a mess. Luckily it isn't JT's team anymore. He is a sidekick now, a valuable piece to the puzzle but he does not stir the drink anymore (thankfully). We will rise or fall with AR.

[JAFF]

Originally Posted by Oldcolt

The Colts give extensions to players already under contract all the time. And who the hell knows what JT wants, he isn't saying anything. I don't disagree that he should honor his contract, this is a mess. Luckily it isn't JT's team anymore. He is a sidekick now, a valuable piece to the puzzle but he does not stir the drink anymore (thankfully). We will rise or fall with AR.

Best way to get more leverage; get back on the field, stay healthy and make a difference on the field.

[Brylok]

Wave him. Let him find out his true value via the waiver wire. If every other team only offers RB average pay, and that isn't considered enough, he can retire.

Problem solved. Sign another RB. They're available out there.

[Chromeburn]

Here is the actual clip.

https://x.com/patmcafeeshow/status/1...L8ardaxv32vrGQ

[Chromeburn]

Originally Posted by Brylok

Wave him. Let him find out his true value via the waiver wire. If every other team only offers RB average pay, and that isn't considered enough, he can retire.

Problem solved. Sign another RB. They're available out there.

We get nothing out of that path though.

[Brylok]

Originally Posted by Chromeburn

We get nothing out of that path though.

Nothing financial, true, but we avoid a pissed off malcontent poisoning the locker room all season long and the huge distraction. It's worth it to me, but I understand opposing opinions.

[Chromeburn]

Originally Posted by Brylok

Nothing financial, true, but we avoid a pissed off malcontent poisoning the locker room all season long and the huge distraction. It's worth it to me, but I understand opposing opinions.

I would just tell him to leave then and place him on NFI. That’s the nuclear option and no one wants that. But I’m not letting him go and just not getting anything in return because he throws a tantrum and has a bad attitude. Colts didn’t create the RB situation. Can’t expect them to just ignore the trend and sign him to a record breaking contract. At a certain point you have to face reality.

[Brylok]

Originally Posted by Chromeburn

I would just tell him to leave then and place him on NFI. That’s the nuclear option and no one wants that. But I’m not letting him go and just not getting anything in return because he throws a tantrum and has a bad attitude. Colts didn’t create the RB situation. Can’t expect them to just ignore the trend and sign him to a record breaking contract. At a certain point you have to face reality.

That was my first thought about it yesterday. But being on NFI doesn't prevent him from being able to be inside Colts facilities. He could just say "no" and hang around the team being a disruption. It just kicks the can down the road and makes him angrier. You can't waive a player if they have 4 years of NFL service. He only has 3, so he can still be waived. That's why I chose that option over NFI. I agree 100% with you. But if it's completely toxic and beyond saving, I'd waive him and just eat the loss. Better that than potentially destroy the locker room. It's a mess any way we look at it.