I'm not necessarily talking about GML purposes. It's a tough task but a decent cap situation. We will agree to disagree on the 2 wins bad part. You replace Luck with Mike Glennon or Geno Smith and they're 2 wins bad.
plus there's: -the cost involved w/ Tampa gaining the #1 overall pick: nothing. The Bucs started out with it. -the cost involved w/ Indy gaining the #6 overall pick: a trade up using Jerrell Freeman, Dan Herron, 3.65. Or it could be looked at this way: Tampa is currently sitting at Indy's original 1.29 slot, however, in the process they've netted Aqib Talib, Brandon Marshall [LB], Jerrell Freeman, Dan Herron, 2.59, and 3.65. That's an additional 4 solid players and 2 valuable draft picks added to their roster from the start, whereas those teams originally drafting at the bottom of Round 1 receive nothing for picking there. Then in round 2, Tampa began with 2.34, a stone's throw away from round 1; however, for the Colts to get back into Round 1, it cost us Vontae Davis & Donte Moncrief. All total, Indy had to give away Vontae, Moncrief, Freeman, Herron, 3.65, and 5.157 just to get roughly where Tampa's first two picks were located. Now what does Indy look like on paper compared to Tampa after that, with the Bucs not having to sacrifice any of Lavonte David, Mike Evans, Gerald McCoy, Vincent Jackson, Seferian-Jenkins, Alterraun Vernor, etc to have picks 1.1 and 2.34?
But those 2 guys are on the team. You cant subtract players from a roster when you're discussing the overall talent level of the roster. Makes no sense. And I agree, take Luck away and the offense would suck. Could say that for Arizona, for Pittsburgh, heck for the Bengals with Dalton (imagine how bad the guy behins him is), the Seahawks, the Chargers, the Ravens, look at what happened to Denever when Peyton was hurt, the Giants, maybe the Pats. It's not fair to say "take x player out of the equation and they will be x much worse." it's assumed the roster loses value without a starting qb, but it's impossible to truly quantify it until it happens. With all that said, yes I agree the agree the Colts would be in a world of hurt without Luck. Not ready to say they'd be rhe worst team in the league though. And again, not ready to apply that to GML when cap is figured in. Like Mr. Gump said, that's All I gotta say about that. Gotta get some sleep now.
Wait, was this at Grambling State, Paul, where you also met your Jewish wife, learned the fine art of accounting, and bought your first Honda?
Also if you are one of the folks who live and die by PFF, you really should've voted for the Rams last season.
I agree the Colts as a whole have a bottom half of the league roster, Hilton for example?? Is vastly overrated, he put up great fantasy stats but stick him in Miami and he's not even Mike Wallace.
Jones is good but hes not a player that elevates the players around him but yet the Colts paid him 7.1M and yet his numbers were dragged down by the players around him and probably him to a degree trying to overcompensate.
I dont live and die by PFF but I did vote for you in best offense, defense and front 7. the only reason I didnt vote for you as best GM was because I thought you had a ton of assets to work with (i.e. draft picks) and I didnt think you maximized it even if you did do a really good job. Plus I thought the 3 GM's I did vote for did a great job with as little or less to work with. http://www.thephins.com/forums/showthread.php?81911-Final-Voting-(VOTE-HERE)
I mentioned it and cited their signature stats section (because frankly they do a better job with that then any other part of it) for drops. Frankly though, I only use it to back up points I believe to be true and not for the sake of simply arguing or citing PFF.
I had 2 first rounders yes... But? 3M in cap space and most Importantly...NO FRANCHISE QB, which is hard to overcome in this league. But hey what would I have done without that extra 12th overall pick.
That so-called tons of cap was my creation, not something I inherited. You're original cap was lower than mine dude. I had like $85 million worth of roster that presented little to no trade value, so I had no choice but to gut it. You could've done the same any time you wanted, but it wouldn't be worth it for you b/c there's little return value in gutting a roster like I had to do. Ideally I would've had LESS cap space than I currently do and would have MORE players of value established on my roster so that I'm getting a greater overall bang for my buck. I was given a 150 million budget to work within just like you, well 147 million after taking the hit from trading Freeman & Herron, and about $90 million of that will cost me full retail price in Free Agency my friend. That's not the greatest thing since Fun-Dips. That plus starting off with the 29th pick of each round makes it even tougher.
I've felt this way for a while, it certainly wasn't you mentioning PFF that made me have this opinion lol.
but a big difference is where the teams are drafting. Top of the 1st round vs bottom of it makes a world of difference b/c the Jags, Titans, Bucs, etc can trade back a bunch of times to acquire valuable picks and players to bolster their rosters with that teams picking at the bottom of each round aren't privy to. Show me what Tampa's roster looks like compared to Indy's after multiple trade-backs from 1.1 to 1.29 and then again from 2.34 back to 2.61....... or vice versa if Indy traded up from 1.29 to 1.1 and then again from 2.61 to 2.34. Tampa would win the roster battle hands down. Trading back to 1.29, Tampa could already have trimmed cap, added an additional valuable pick or two, added an additional valuable player or two, and used a pick or two on an expensive but great QB like Brees or Manning so that by the time the Bucs have plundered and pillaged their way to 1.29 and Indy has sacrificed its roster to reach 1.1, the teams aren't remotely comparable.
Not trying to put you on the defensive. As noted earlier, I think you're doing a good job. I didn't say that all $85 mil in space was how it started lol. You, factually, did have more cap to work with than a majority of teams and I think you actually had more space to work with than me, at least according to OTC: http://overthecap.com/salary-cap-space At the end of the day, you had the third pick in our GM Draft. There were dozens of teams to pick from and almost every GM had less options to work with, so I'm just not sure where this "I have a crappy roster" narrative came from. Perhaps I was mistaken, but it seemed like you were complaining about the roster you inherited. If so, there's no reason to complain because you picked the team with plenty of other options. If not, my bad for misinterpreting that. In my mind, the Colts were the top team to take over. Again, I think you've played it the right way. There were some bad contracts to work with (I had some too, we all do) but you had the benefit of a very affordable franchise QB and more cap space to start out with than 80 percent of the team. I'm sure there plenty of inherent downsides with your roster, but that was the case for everyone here. No roster is perfect. This has become so diluted, I forget what my original point was. Like I said, I think you are doing well. My point, I guess, was that I don't think it was a **** roster to start off with. In fact, it was a pretty good situation and one I valued high enough to put No. 1 on my wish list before we picked our teams. That is all.
It was necessary due to having a few needs that stand a chance of not being fillable via trade or Free Agency. Is your sole purpose here to bust my balls er?
Moncrief is easily replaceable imo, Luck is a QB that can make guys like that look real good. Davis on the other hand will be next to impossible to replace, the best way to compensate for that loss?? Create a pass rush that will nullify a CB having to cover the WR for too long.
Boik makes plenty of sense. In GML you're trying to build/improve a team through trades and such, but you can't do that with Luck b/c it'd be retarded to trade him. Omit Luck and a great coaching staff from the equation and it's a roster easily deserving of a top 5 pick, which could then be used to trade back numerous times to accumulate more picks and players with while simultaneously dumping cap.... but Indy can't b/c its crappy roster owns the 29th pick. It's similar to Carolina's situation who finished below .500 but still made the playoffs.
exactly except Carolina has a better roster then the colts IMO. The Colts just play in a division with great teams like Jacksonville Houston and Tennessee (no offense to those GM's all of which are doing a solid job). In reality though that division is horrid. The Raiders would win 8 games in that division.
Haha yup. I wish they had food trucks instead you have the option to buy $3.50 lunchables or a $4.25 sandwich.
The real Colts have made cuts since rosters were released. You began with 115 million; I began with 116 million. Cap space isn't the end-all be-all BTW. What matters most is cap space relative to overall roster talent, the number of valuable trade-worthy contracts, and draft position. Starting off with $35 million in cap space isn't anything special for a bottom 5 roster. Like I said, respectfully, we ALL are given the same 150 million to work with, and no one is forcing us to keep the players we start off with. If cap space is as great as you say, then why don't you gut your roster tomorrow and get down to $90 million in FA dollars? I'll tell you why you won't. It's because no one wants a roster full of players who cost full retail. They want $250 million worth of players that cost them $150 million, not $180 million in players that cost $150 million. because it is a crappy roster dude. Some of us enjoy being tasked with challenges, just like I took Seattle last year despite knowing I'd be compared to the team that just won the Super Bowl but did it without a ton of players lost in FA, and with me having no cap space and the last pick of the draft. I'm not complaining about having Indy. I'm arguing against your notion that it's some sort of cake-walk team to own. It's a tough team to own, even tougher than I thought it would be. If this team didn't have Luck, it's a challenge that not even I would wanna take on. ... and you would've been in for a rude awakening WADR. No worries about it all though my friend. If my tone sounds harsh it's not.
I think you are taking heat because you took over a team that made it to the AFC championship game and then are complaining about the talent level on the roster; not to mention the fact that you had the 3rd pick overall pick in the GML draft. So you could have conceivably picked nearly any team in the NFL and chose the Colts and then are complaining about their roster and talent level.... That's just my two cents though
My 2 cents looking at the trades. So there were some deals he lost but really the moves he made weren't that bad. He is a huge player in the draft and a huge player in FA. I do wish he talked to me before trading Castanzo, lol.
I don't think his moves were necessarily bad however I do feel it seems he is looking to completely rebuild his team... Considering Luck is only 25, not like I can really blame him.
It pretty much was. Which was my argument for the last 5 pages. There's a handful of good players there a good coach and a great and a lot of mediocrity and back up types
Again, I'm not complaining about having the Colts. Merely pointing out that it's not an easy roster to work with, just as Boik stated as well. I picked them b/c they posed a challenge, not b/c they'd be the easiest team to own. FinFanGirl has a roster that's equally as bad overall, if not worse... but it didn't stop her from taking them with the 1st overall pick, and I'm sure she'll tell you that her roster is pretty crappy as well.
there isnt enough mayonnaise in the free world to make chicken salad out of this bunch of chicken ****.