Quote:
Originally Posted by VeveJones007
Fair enough. Apologies on not picking up the sarcasm.
|
No big deal, I was actually going to delete the post since it really didn't add anything, but whatever.
Quote:
Originally Posted by VeveJones007
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?
|
I'm not really trying to prove some greater point. If he had leverage doesn't really change what the deal is or who he is. FatDT raised the question of the strategy behind the deal and whether Funcheese had any leverage since the contract seemed high for a one year. I don't think guys that sign one year deals have a lot of ground to stand on. Another offer just in of itself doesn't give someone leverage. It depends who it is from, an offer from the Saints is very different than an offer from the Cardinals. If it was a better offer for 2 years and more money, why didn't he take it?
As for the deal and him, I'm indifferent about it. I'll see how he does, maybe it works out which would be great. But I think Ebron had a little more going for him. Funchess has a lower catch percentage than Ebron and is not a great athlete for the position like Ebron. I remember Michigan fans complaining about him saying he has no hands or heart. He has done little to aleviate those criticisms. Is Funchess a better signing than Tyrell Williams who is faster at the same height? Who also has familiarity with our system and offensive coaches?
Finally, it is a one year deal. Does this really fix the WR 2 position? Is it a stop gap or a prove it deal? Is it a real attempt to shore up the WR core? Why no second year option if we are serious about him? It kind of feels half-hearted to me. It feels like when the jags signed Moncrief last year. We will have to see how the rest of FA and the draft goes.