[rm1369]

Originally Posted by Chaka

Understood, those are some reasonable points, and I’ll admit that I don’t feel I completely understand this signing. On the one hand, I don’t see it as a “placeholder” type signing as you described it, because (1) Funchess was signed on the first negotiating day, so we obviously targeted him, (2) the dollar amount of the contract is high, and (3) he fills a specific position of need (big bodied outside receiver)

On the other hand, it’s also curious because we haven’t committed to him long term, and we didn’t get any option years, so those items support your argument. The lack of option years is notable in particular and unusual for Ballard except, as I’m sure you’ll point out, for Grant last year (and Slauson if I recall). However, neither of those deals was nearly as high profile as this signing, and both of those players were signed deep in the free agent period when the Colts had much more leverage. This might also be the only one-year deal announced yesterday, so it's unusual in that sense as well.

So I can’t quite figure it out. My best guess is that the Colts are suspicious of free agent wide receivers, having been burned by several over the last few years (Grant, Andre Johnson, Kamar Aiken, etc) and thus feel that it would be better to bring someone in for one year to see if they fit before making a long term commitment. If they do, it will end up costing them a bit more, but if it doesn’t work out they don’t get stuck in a large, long term, unproductive contract. However, this one year strategy wouldn’t be appealing to the uppermost tier of free agents who have the leverage to secure a long term guaranteed deal, but might be attractive to a slightly lesser free agent like Funchess who could have the hope of getting a big time deal next year with a productive 2019.

So, while all of this is just a guess of course, it really doesn’t feel like a placeholder-type signing to me. And I’ll admit that it is a little perplexing. Regardless, I’m still excited about this signing following the relative success of last year’s free agent crop. Funchess is a big-bodied 25 year old receiver who is heading into (rather than out of) his prime years, and Ballard has proven to be a strong talent evaluator – both in the draft and free agency. So I think there’s reasonable grounds to expect Funchess to play well and prove to be an asset to our team.

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.