Colts first UFA WR Devin Funchess

[VeveJones007]

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?

[VeveJones007]

Originally Posted by Racehorse

I am a subscriber to the concept of a methodical approach. However, it is not hero worship. It is watching how the teams who sustain success in this era have done it. Look at NE and PITT, who have represented the AFC the most this past decade. SEA, PHI and LA Rams have used a slightly different approach, albeit with a QB on a rookie contract. Maybe NO should have made another splash move to get into the SB as Brees' career comes to a close, but there were no FA referees available. They are all signed by the Pats and franchise tagged when their contracts expire.

The key for me is acknowledging that there are many different approaches to team building and each can lead to success. Ballard has been very clear about what he wants to do: draft and development. If they do those two things well, they'll be successful. Nothing that happened this week deterred from that reality.

If I were running the show, I would have been more aggressive in free agency. But I'm not freaking out about it because I understand that Ballard's approach can work. It just puts more pressure on hitting in the draft.

[rm1369]

Originally Posted by VeveJones007

But a one year deal doesn't negate either direction. I'm arguing for a middle ground--Funchess could be a one year placeholder before a better long-term option is ready in 2020 (e.g. Cain or 2019 draft pick or UFA signing), or he could really thrive and the Colts could re-sign him with their truckload of cap space, or he could be bad and the Colts aren't on the hook past 2019, or he could thrive and the Colts could let him walk for compensation.

You keep arguing for the negative without acknowledging the positives. There's nothing about this deal that prevents a long-term solution at WR2. It just isn't written in stone yet.

I’ve acknowledged he could be re-signed. I just see it as very unlikely. And I don’t believe Ebron would be a Colt this coming season if he had signed a one year deal. Although the fact he signed a two year deal to begin with makes me see it as more possible. Funchess rejecting a 2nd year makes it even less likely in my opinion. The deal makes a lot of sense for Funchess. It makes little sense for the Colts. Signing him to a 2 year $26m contract w/ the second year being a team option makes a lot more since to me than his current one year contract. Does he deserve it? Absolutely not, but it’s essentially two one year contracts just a little higher than he’s making now. For Funchess he gets the $3m incentives to give the team the option for next year. He’s done nothing that should make him think he’s worth more than $13m a year. And for the Colts they gaurentee that if he performs they retain him. If he doesn’t perform than it costs you an extra $3m this year that you aren’t going to spend anyway. If Funchess would say no to that then there is very little chance the Colts will be able to retain him anyway. He wants to get paid. The current contract says to me one of the two parties doesn’t see the other working out. But we’ll see.

[VeveJones007]

Originally Posted by rm1369

I’ve acknowledged he could be re-signed. I just see it as very unlikely. And I don’t believe Ebron would be a Colt this coming season if he had signed a one year deal. Although the fact he signed a two year deal to begin with makes me see it as more possible. Funchess rejecting a 2nd year makes it even less likely in my opinion. The deal makes a lot of sense for Funchess. It makes little sense for the Colts. Signing him to a 2 year $26m contract w/ the second year being a team option makes a lot more since to me than his current one year contract. Does he deserve it? Absolutely not, but it’s essentially two one year contracts just a little higher than he’s making now. For Funchess he gets the $3m incentives to give the team the option for next year. He’s done nothing that should make him think he’s worth more than $13m a year. And for the Colts they gaurentee that if he performs they retain him. If he doesn’t perform than it costs you an extra $3m this year that you aren’t going to spend anyway. If Funchess would say no to that then there is very little chance the Colts will be able to retain him anyway. He wants to get paid. The current contract says to me one of the two parties doesn’t see the other working out. But we’ll see.

I just think you're getting too hung up on it. Franchise tag for WRs is $16MM, so he's looking at 2/$26-29MM if the Colts decide to go that route. This route gives both parties flexibility to make those decisions next year depending on how 2019 goes.

[Chromeburn]

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.

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.

[JAFF]

Originally Posted by Chromeburn

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.

It's a stop gap, unless he shows something else. It puts a hot flame under Cains butt to get on the field and play well. If Ballards right, he's a genius. If he's wrong, it's beer nuts and they go fishing next FA session.

[VeveJones007]

Originally Posted by Chromeburn

No big deal, I was actually going to delete the post since it really didn't add anything, but whatever.



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.

Yes. Tyrell Williams is just a deep threat who happens to be 6'4". He doesn't offer the Colts what Funchess does: a target who can beat the jam on RPOs and regular slants, as well as back shoulder passes vs man coverage. In short, Tyrell Williams is redundant to Hilton, whereas Funchess gives them something they didn't have.

[VeveJones007]

Originally Posted by JAFF

It's a stop gap, unless he shows something else. It puts a hot flame under Cains butt to get on the field and play well. If Ballards right, he's a genius. If he's wrong, it's beer nuts and they go fishing next FA session.

Or Ballard could be wrong and Deon Cain wins the job and provides great value at WR2. Or the same thing occurs with a rookie next year.

[Racehorse]

Originally Posted by rm1369

NE takes a conservative approach? I don’t see that at all. NE takes risks all the time.

Not on top dollar FA players.

Originally Posted by rm1369

Why didn’t you mention Thompson’s Packers? They followed the conservative approach and have had an elite QB.

I mentioned the teams who made the SB most recently

[Puck]

Originally Posted by VeveJones007

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.

Where did you read that from Holder? I cant find it