2 hours ago, joemas6 said:

Waiting for Ham to say Barnett for Queen or Taylor. 

Toss in a 7th,see anybody can do this

16 hours ago, joemas6 said:

Because he used the committee for 2 decades and won.  That's the style he prefers...similar to your boy in KC.

You look at KC, New England and the Eagles....and the success they had.  Why would you want a bell cow RB instead.....especially when looking at the lack of success they had the last couple of decades?

I don’t think history is a great predictor for future success in the NFL, you want to be ahead of the curve.

Theory aside: Look at our offense. The one position that has a starter that is suspect is the RB position. Swift may or may not be ‘good enough’ but obviously Taylor is on another level.

So if you think that’s all that is left to do, why save your ressources for the future? You might as well go all in and give it your best shot. And no positional value debate can convince me otherwise.

We are no longer rebuilding. Different rules apply.

15 minutes ago, Infam said:

I don’t think history is a great predictor for future success in the NFL, you want to be ahead of the curve.

Theory aside: Look at our offense. The one position that has a starter that is suspect is the RB position. Swift may or may not be ‘good enough’ but obviously Taylor is on another level.

So if you think that’s all that is left to do, why save your ressources for the future? You might as well go all in and give it your best shot. And no positional value debate can convince me otherwise.

We are no longer rebuilding. Different rules apply.

Right...the future of the game is passing.  I agree...dumb move to pay a RB the big money... unless he offers you something in the passing game. 

Our RB room is much better than last year.   Much more versatile. 

29 minutes ago, GreenbleedinNC said:

Toss in a 7th,see anybody can do this

The Colts released your boy Perriman.  

31 minutes ago, GreenbleedinNC said:

Toss in a 7th,see anybody can do this

I was actually thinking Howie could sell Taylor to come here to finish his contract. But then he wouldn't dominate the touches ...so not sure it drives up his value?

Plus it seems like that would be a forfeit to Taylor.... but even if Taylor is on board, then you gotta convince Indy not to attempt to getting higher compensation. 

All that,and still need to see how that changes the room.  By all reports the RB room is looking really good.

If you want the big $$ as an RB, you gotta move the needle in the passing game.  You can bet that's what these next generation RBs will be working on.  

29 minutes ago, joemas6 said:

The Colts released your boy Perriman.  

He got hurt in Baltimore and was never the same after that

22 minutes ago, joemas6 said:

I was actually thinking Howie could sell Taylor to come here to finish his contract. But then he wouldn't dominate the touches ...so not sure it drives up his value?

Plus it seems like that would be a forfeit to Taylor.... but even if Taylor is on board, then you gotta convince Indy not to attempt to getting higher compensation. 

All that,and still need to see how that changes the room.  By all reports the RB room is looking really good.

Yeah A drop off in touches would decrease his value for his next contract? I see no advantage to him to come here,or you'd have to sit 2/3 of the RB's we have which make us 1 dimensional at RB

29 minutes ago, joemas6 said:

I was actually thinking Howie could sell Taylor to come here to finish his contract. But then he wouldn't dominate the touches ...so not sure it drives up his value?

Plus it seems like that would be a forfeit to Taylor.... but even if Taylor is on board, then you gotta convince Indy not to attempt to getting higher compensation. 

All that,and still need to see how that changes the room.  By all reports the RB room is looking really good.

So Sermon is on the bubble here. IMO he can be a serviceable 3 or even a 2 somewhere(maybe I have not seen enough). So that speaks pretty well of our RB room

Re; Sermon-Ham hates him so that's good enough for me!!!! 🤣

1 hour ago, Infam said:

I don’t think history is a great predictor for future success in the NFL, you want to be ahead of the curve.

Theory aside: Look at our offense. The one position that has a starter that is suspect is the RB position. Swift may or may not be ‘good enough’ but obviously Taylor is on another level.

So if you think that’s all that is left to do, why save your ressources for the future? You might as well go all in and give it your best shot. And no positional value debate can convince me otherwise.

We are no longer rebuilding. Different rules apply.

Hint: there IS no starter,it's the RBBC LOL. So what is your plan for bringing Taylor in, are you renting him for the year or planning on tying up assets for 5 years@ 14 million a year? He was "on another level" because he WAS their offense. There was noone else. We lost like 7 good players after the SB game? We're not rebuilding? If I wanted to overpay at RB I would just have re-signed Sanders

18 hours ago, joemas6 said:

Sanders was forced the ball...no impact.  Rushed better the year before. The passing game kinda made the difference last year right?

AJ and year 2 of Smith.

Passing game obviously was a big addition. Reagor and rookie DeVonta the year before wasn’t nearly getting it done. DeVonta slim year two with Quez out there all boosted by adding Hurts best buddy to that phase…clearly boosted the passing game. With Goedert very much coming into his own…except when injured. Think the running game was better. But just had some huge passing moments. Think it was Steelers game Hurts just lit them up big time through the air. Both facets, running and passing, set each other up to make the other better.

47 minutes ago, GreenbleedinNC said:

Yeah A drop off in touches would decrease his value for his next contract? I see no advantage to him to come here,or you'd have to sit 2/3 of the RB's we have which make us 1 dimensional at RB

I think he’s be a perfect fit reuniting with Siri. The question on compensation is clearly based on whether he will accept an extension from his new team. I’ve been thinking Taylor is not in nearly his best leverage situation to hit on a big new deal. RB Market is practically rock bottom. He’s coming off his worst season that included missing time to injury. Decently likely he just wants to play out this year on 4 mil to setup his big new contract next offseason. Pretty sure what works best for us, even if we desire to extend is: to only have the Colts be capable of trading for the last year rental of contract. Then we could even extend him during the season on our own.

18 minutes ago, cunninghamtheman said:

I think he’s be a perfect fit reuniting with Siri. The question on compensation is clearly based on whether he will accept an extension from his new team. I’ve been thinking Taylor is not in nearly his best leverage situation to hit on a big new deal. RB Market is practically rock bottom. He’s coming off his worst season that included missing time to injury. Decently likely he just wants to play out this year on 4 mil to setup his big new contract next offseason. Pretty sure what works best for us, even if we desire to extend is: to only have the Colts be capable of trading for the last year rental of contract. Then we could even extend him during the season on our own.

You're ok with Taylor having been off with injury but against Penny having been off with injury? And for 13 million less? I don't understand your thinking. he wants a BIG long term contract,not to finish out somewhere

And having a RBBC here(which Joe pointed out) would mean reduced touches,which means a reduced "big" contract next year. There is no advantage for him to play here. He would probably do better playing in Minnesota replacing Cook to "finish out",but they have shown no interest I am aware of. He wants paid NOW

3 minutes ago, GreenbleedinNC said:

You're ok with Taylor having been off with injury but against Penny having been off with injury? And for 13 million less? I don't understand your thinking. he wants a BIG long term contract,not to finish out somewhere

Swift would be such a perfect compliment to Taylor. But obviously they were checking and considering the thought of Penny/Swift.

He wants a 14-15 million a year long term contract and Indy wants a round 1 pick. He will play in Indy this year if he/they stick to that. Deadline tomorrow at 3. If there was a contract he wanted and a deal Indy agreed to,it would have been presented and accepted by now. OR someone is going to overpay

With the addition of Taylor ….pretty much ends the real committee approach. Would make Swift the more just Scat Back. If Gainwell is retained? He knows the whole playbook supposedly, so he could come on for any breather down….and to block.

3 minutes ago, cunninghamtheman said:

Swift would be such a perfect compliment to Taylor. But obviously they were checking and considering the thought of Penny/Swift.

Penny was awesome when he was on the field. I hope the RBBC keeps him on the field and we got him for a song vs taylor

1 minute ago, cunninghamtheman said:

With the addition of Taylor ….pretty much ends the real committee approach. Would make Swift the more just Scat Back. If Gainwell is retained? He knows the whole playbook supposedly, so he could come on for any breather down….and to block.

Are you adding Taylor on a one year or the big 5 year contract he wants? And you're giving up a round 1 pick also?

1 minute ago, GreenbleedinNC said:

He wants a 14-15 million a year long term contract and Indy wants a round 1 pick. He will play in Indy this year if he/they stick to that. Deadline tomorrow at 3. If there was a contract he wanted and a deal Indy agreed to,it would have been presented and accepted by now. OR someone is going to overpay

That was reports of what he wanted to start this offseason from what I’ve retained in my understanding of the situation. Just like Saquan. Barkley even rejected a bigger…long term extension…for a bit of a raise this year over the tag. Barkley had to accept humble pie. Never heard Taylor getting offered anything so substantial from Irsay.

2 minutes ago, GreenbleedinNC said:

Penny was awesome when he was on the field. I hope the RBBC keeps him on the field and we got him for a song vs taylor

No reason to not still have Penny really. Unless he gets moved as part of the trade. He can be here with two better backs. If he steps up to earn the start over both of them…that’s still nothing but good news. Didn’t sign him to any large money….or need to keep some promise to him he was guaranteed to start. Frankly he’s paid third string money.

6 minutes ago, cunninghamtheman said:

That was reports of what he wanted to start this offseason from what I’ve retained in my understanding of the situation. Just like Saquan. Barkley even rejected a bigger…long term extension…for a bit of a raise this year over the tag. Barkley had to accept humble pie. Never heard Taylor getting offered anything so substantial from Irsay.

I heard 16 now it's down to 14-15. Indy has not budged on the round 1 pick,so what are you going to do? Taylor will also have to accept humble pie when there is no deal. If there is a deal someone will overpay or he will cave to reality and Indy also has to back off the round 1 pick

https://bleacherreport.com/articles/10087551-jonathan-taylor-trade-rumors-2-teams-willing-to-give-colts-rb-market-contract

https://www.cbssports.com/nfl/video/hq-spotlight-jonathan-taylors-trade-deadline-approaching/