#181
|
||||
|
||||
Quote:
This isn't to say that no players over 30 should be signed - that's way too simplistic. It's just that the stats show that once a player hits a certain age, their performance declines. That age is different for different positions. Yet they tend to get paid well for a few years later based upon reputation and name recognition. Add to that the inherent uncertainty in a player switching teams/systems, and it just doesn't seem like a good bet to me. For example, setting aside his personal issues, Le'veon Bell is past his "best by" date so I was against signing him to a multi-year contract. Houston is the same. Those guys undoubtedly have value, but I thought they were both overpaid. I much preferred signings like Matt Slauson, who was an older player with value but signed at a reasonable price. He didn't work out so well, I guess, but I like the strategy better. Further, this analysis is primarily confined to outside free agents. I am not as concerned about signing older in-house free agents because (1) we know them and their condition so well, (2) they are not switching systems, and (3) it creates continuity and a team identity. As far as the minimum spending requirements, it doesn’t concern me too much. There are ways to meet that minimum that don't require us to spend tons on outside free agents immediately. As you mentioned in your later post, you can resign players like Ryan Kelly or Costanzo and give them large up front signing bonuses. Or perhaps you could convert some of Luck’s salary into a signing bonus, and perhaps add a year or two to his contract while you're doing it. My guess is that the NFLPA would be perfectly fine with that since they are looking out for all players, not just those who are free agents. As far as possible changes to the CBA, you make a fair point but it’s anyone’s guess how that will play out. Negotiations will be ongoing long before the current CBA expires, so I have to think that the owners/GMs will have a good idea of the likelihood of any changes before then. I’ll concede this to those complaining about us carrying so much open cap space: if Ballard lets the Colts get fined or penalized for not using the cap minimum, then I’ll agree that your criticisms are valid. I just don’t think that’s what will happen though. |
#182
|
||||
|
||||
Quote:
|
#183
|
||||
|
||||
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Ok by me. And yes, I like Ballard a lot, but he's not above criticism. His management of team resources appeals to me, as I've set forth in countless prior posts, long before the success we had last year. |
#184
|
|||
|
|||
Bottom line for me is Ballard/Reich are doing a better job in rebuilding this team than I could have hoped for. Perfect? Obviously nobody is, but this is the best combination of gm/coach that this team has ever had. That's a lot to say after one year but right now I'll stick to it.
|
The Following User Says Thank You to Oldcolt For This Useful Post: | ||
Racehorse (06-09-2019) |
#185
|
||||
|
||||
Quote:
Also since you brought up overpaying, I'm surprised you're so on board with the Funchess signing. His production has been below average at best, and in a contract year he led the league in drop rate and was benched. Seems like we could have gotten him much closer to a min contract rather than the $10M we paid him. |
The Following User Says Thank You to IndyNorm For This Useful Post: | ||
Chromeburn (06-09-2019) |
#186
|
|||
|
|||
My only thing: if this team is going to have boatloads of cap space and not sign new FAs, at least use it to advance cap hits on current players or front your extensions.
|
The Following User Says Thank You to GoBigBlue88 For This Useful Post: | ||
Colt Classic (06-09-2019) |
#187
|
|||
|
|||
I’m not at all concerned about them getting fined or penalized for that. I’m concerned that they will consistently make the “smart” business decision over the “best” football decision. As a fan I only care about the salary cap and players salaries to the degree it affects the teams ability to win. Certainly being irresponsible with contracts can have that effect, but so can going to far the other way. IMO Ballard is at least flirting with being to far that way. And you are well past that point.
|
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to rm1369 For This Useful Post: | ||
Chromeburn (06-09-2019), Colt Classic (06-09-2019) |
#188
|
||||
|
||||
Quote:
Umm what, I just told you where to find it? It's not my job to educate you. Fine, he's the most perfect FA WR signing since Ryan Grant. You nailed it. Quote:
Quote:
And here I just thought it was because of his dick lodged into your anal cavity. Last edited by Chromeburn; 06-09-2019 at 12:31 PM. |
#189
|
||||
|
||||
Quote:
On Funchess, I like the strategy of signing guys heading into their prime, and if the team’s talent evaluators think this guy has a chance to break out I’m onboard with the risk at $7-$10 million for one year. Reminds me a little of the Ebron signing - another guy who came in with a bad hands rep, and who's signing was widely panned at the time. The one year deal tells me that the team isn’t quite so confident Funchess will perform well. That's fine, but I don’t like that our upside on the deal is limited to this year. Again, the ideal solution would have been an option year or two. |
#190
|
||||
|
||||
I wholeheartedly agree with this, but what's the rush?
|
|
|