ColtFreaks.com - Indianapolis Colts Fan Forum   ColtFreaks.com Home Page

Go Back   ColtFreaks.com - Indianapolis Colts Fan Forum > Indianapolis Colts Fan Forum > Indianapolis Colts Discussion
Register FAQ Community Calendar

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #111  
Old 03-12-2019, 07:24 PM
Dam8610 Dam8610 is offline
Post whore
 
Join Date: Jan 2017
Posts: 6,051
Thanks: 102
Thanked 1,639 Times in 948 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by NoLuck4Chuck View Post
True he wasnt a top 50 anywhere I saw.

I remain hopeful
Nfl.com had him at 44.
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by omahacolt View Post
i was wrong.
Reply With Quote
  #112  
Old 03-12-2019, 07:27 PM
Luck4Reich's Avatar
Luck4Reich Luck4Reich is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2017
Location: Destin FL
Posts: 4,558
Thanks: 1,988
Thanked 3,108 Times in 1,639 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dam8610 View Post
Nfl.com had him at 44.
I missed that one
Reply With Quote
  #113  
Old 03-12-2019, 09:24 PM
VeveJones007 VeveJones007 is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2017
Posts: 3,111
Thanks: 1,209
Thanked 1,114 Times in 612 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by omahacolt View Post
Fuck that

Let’s make predictions and discuss it now. Not next year
50 catches, 750 yards, 8 TDs
Reply With Quote
  #114  
Old 03-12-2019, 09:30 PM
Luck4Reich's Avatar
Luck4Reich Luck4Reich is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2017
Location: Destin FL
Posts: 4,558
Thanks: 1,988
Thanked 3,108 Times in 1,639 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by VeveJones007 View Post
50 catches, 750 yards, 8 TDs
2 things...


1. 10 mil doesn't buy much in the NFL
2. I sure hope those numbers dont get him the other 3 mil in incentives.
Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to Luck4Reich For This Useful Post:
Coltsfever (09-01-2019)
  #115  
Old 03-12-2019, 09:33 PM
Colt Classic Colt Classic is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2017
Posts: 1,681
Thanks: 200
Thanked 448 Times in 282 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by VeveJones007 View Post
50 catches, 750 yards, 8 TDs
35 catches, 334 yards, 1 TD

...oh sorry, that's Ryan Grant from last year...make it 4 TD's then.

although 42/715/5 is John Brown from last season at 5 mil...Bills got him.

Last edited by Colt Classic; 03-12-2019 at 09:35 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #116  
Old 03-12-2019, 09:35 PM
Luck4Reich's Avatar
Luck4Reich Luck4Reich is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2017
Location: Destin FL
Posts: 4,558
Thanks: 1,988
Thanked 3,108 Times in 1,639 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Colt Classic View Post
35 catches, 334 yards, 1 TD

...oh sorry, that's Ryan Grant from last year...make it 4 TD's then.
If that's all he does someone needs to rip Funchess arms off and beat Ballard to death with them!
Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to Luck4Reich For This Useful Post:
Coltsfever (09-01-2019)
  #117  
Old 03-12-2019, 11:43 PM
Chaka's Avatar
Chaka Chaka is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2017
Posts: 859
Thanks: 337
Thanked 667 Times in 286 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Chromeburn View Post
He's slow, got iffy hands (iffy is a compliment), has trouble separating from CB's in his routes, and his best year was his rookie year. His old team didn't want him, they even deactivated him for their last game despite being healthy. As free agents go, he wasn't rated near the top of any list I can find. Not even in the WR rankings. Did we really need to sign him day one? If you have leverage, you don't sign one year deals. If you have teams competing for your services, you don't sign one year deals. He hasn't lived up to his draft pick. At least Ebron was a top ten pick and has excellent athleticism for his size and position.

If we believed in him why sign him for one year? He is a stop gap.

And he is 24.
Thanks, I know he’s currently 24, but he’ll be 25 when the season arrives, which is the most useful way to look at it in my opinion. As far as the rest of your post, my point was that you have no idea what leverage he had. The circumstances suggest he had a decent amount of leverage given the amount they paid for him - unless you believe that Ballard suddenly became a pushover. And you sign a one year deal even if you have other teams in the mix if you get paid enough to do so.
Reply With Quote
  #118  
Old 03-13-2019, 09:52 AM
Chaka's Avatar
Chaka Chaka is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2017
Posts: 859
Thanks: 337
Thanked 667 Times in 286 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by rm1369 View Post
If they want to evaluate the fit that’s fine, but they should have required a 2nd year team option. Yes, I get that Funchess may not want that, but if he wouldn’t agree to a 2nd year at $13m that tells me he’s looking to get paid. That’s fine, but it doesn’t bode well for him being retained long term. Yes I admit it’s possible. However seeing the money being thrown around by teams how confident are you that if Ebron was on a one year deal that he would be retained after the season he had? After the things he went thru in Detroit he seems to be appreciate what he has here, but would he turn down being the highest paid TE in the league. It’s certainly possible he’d get that kind of offer. If not highest paid, then certainly top 3. Would Ballard be willing to commit that kind of money to Ebron after one year? I doubt it. The 2nd year on Ebron’s contract is huge right now.

Ballard should have required a 2nd year team option. If they are that high on him then they should have bought the 2nd year with more money this year or a partial gaurentee next year. This is a great deal for Funchess, but is very very likely a one year rental for the Colts.
Yep, agreed on the option - I'm surprised there weren't option years attached. That would have made a lot more sense to me. So, while I'm hopeful about this signing, I can't deny that it's puzzling.

As far as your Ebron comparison, I don't think it's really fair. Ballard hasn't really been faced with losing a star player (and yes I'll call Ebron a star - he's high profile, productive and likeable) during his Colts tenure, so we don't know how he'll treat the situation. He's emphasized that he wants to "keep our own" players, and certainly there are less unknowns when you sign one of your own players to an extension rather than bringing in an outside free agent on a big deal. So I think there's reason to think he'd do his best to keep such players around if they are a good fit.

I suppose you could point to Desir, but we don't know what kind of money he was asking for - if it's another Rashaan Melvin situation, it would be hard to fault Ballard in my view.
Reply With Quote
  #119  
Old 03-13-2019, 10:49 AM
VeveJones007 VeveJones007 is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2017
Posts: 3,111
Thanks: 1,209
Thanked 1,114 Times in 612 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Chaka View Post
Yep, agreed on the option - I'm surprised there weren't option years attached. That would have made a lot more sense to me. So, while I'm hopeful about this signing, I can't deny that it's puzzling.

As far as your Ebron comparison, I don't think it's really fair. Ballard hasn't really been faced with losing a star player (and yes I'll call Ebron a star - he's high profile, productive and likeable) during his Colts tenure, so we don't know how he'll treat the situation. He's emphasized that he wants to "keep our own" players, and certainly there are less unknowns when you sign one of your own players to an extension rather than bringing in an outside free agent on a big deal. So I think there's reason to think he'd do his best to keep such players around if they are a good fit.

I suppose you could point to Desir, but we don't know what kind of money he was asking for - if it's another Rashaan Melvin situation, it would be hard to fault Ballard in my view.
Holder said that Funchess had a 2 year deal on the table from another team, but wanted a chance to do well in year 1 and hit the market again after next season. Funchess wasn't going to sign a deal with an option in it.
Reply With Quote
  #120  
Old 03-13-2019, 11:17 AM
rm1369 rm1369 is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2017
Posts: 1,103
Thanks: 297
Thanked 738 Times in 411 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by VeveJones007 View Post
Holder said that Funchess had a 2 year deal on the table from another team, but wanted a chance to do well in year 1 and hit the market again after next season. Funchess wasn't going to sign a deal with an option in it.
That tells me Funchess is trying to max out his value. Are you confident if he blows up and Washington, Buffalo, Oakland, etc start throwing money at him that Ballard will pay the necessary premium to keep him after only one year of that production?
Reply With Quote
Reply


Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 01:17 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.9
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
ColtFreaks.com is in no way affiliated with the Indianapolis Colts, the NFL, or any of their subsidiaries.