Quote:
Originally Posted by Chromeburn
That was sarcasm, of course it was a joke, who would think that was literally what they said and did. And I admit I am wrong all the time.
But the question was whether Funchess had leverage. If the 2-year contract was superior in money from an equal or superior team, why not take it? You gain leverage from interest and offers. Tyrell Williams has three team interested in him, all pretty good from what I read yesterday and it should result in a decent contract. This doesn't look like Funchess had many options to me and we were the best one. I don't think he had much if any leverage. The 10 million isn't great from our end, but we have so much cap space it really doesn't matter because we aren't going to try and use it this year.
The one thing I did think about was perhaps he gave the 13 with incentives as a gesture of good will. Saying if he does well the Colts will be willing to talk a multi-year deal. But that is pure conjecture.
|
Fair enough. Apologies on not picking up the sarcasm.
I'm still not sure what you're trying to prove with your leverage argument. As long as there are (or at least there is a perception) of multiple bids, a player has leverage. Are you just trying to say that you wish the Colts had gotten a player that more teams were interested in signing?
03-13-2019, 04:30 PM
Threaded Mode