Landon Collins

[Chromeburn]

I thought we had a Collins thread but I couldn’t find it.

Looks like Collins is going to hit the market. He threatened to sit out the season like Bell if he was tagged. Also the Giants don’t want to pay him 11 million as a tagged player. I think he would be a good fit here at SS. Giant fans complain about his coverage but tackling is a lost art and he is often fixing mistakes made by other players on that defense. As an in box safety he is very good.

[Coltsalr]

He’d be a great fit (seems like he’d be the perfect complement to Hooker) and to my knowledge he doesn’t have any red flags that would make Ballard shy away.

As a nice bonus, it’d be yet more evidence that Grigson should’ve drafted him.

[VeveJones007]

I thought we had a Collins thread but I couldn’t find it.

Looks like Collins is going to hit the market. He threatened to sit out the season like Bell if he was tagged. Also the Giants don’t want to pay him 11 million as a tagged player. I think he would be a good fit here at SS. Giant fans complain about his coverage but tackling is a lost art and he is often fixing mistakes made by other players on that defense. As an in box safety he is very good.

I’ll believe it when I see it. He’s too good for the Giants to simply let walk. If he somehow is available, Ballard should jump into that market quickly.

[Chromeburn]

I’ll believe it when I see it. He’s too good for the
Giants to simply let walk. If he somehow is available, Ballard should jump into that market quickly.

My source was NFL radio this morning. But here are some recent articles from
PFT

https://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2019/02/27/dave-gettleman-casts-doubt-on-tagging-landon-collins/

https://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2019/02/20/report-landon-collins-likely-to-sit-out-offseason-if-tagged/

[HoosierinFL]

He should def be a top target for us if he hits the market.

[FatDT]

Do we play enough single-high to warrant signing Collins? He seems to be a good box safety that struggles in coverage.

[Butter]

Do we play enough single-high to warrant signing Collins? He seems to be a good box safety that struggles in coverage.

I hope Reich and Erberflus are good enough and smart enough coaches to adapt to good players.

[apballin]

Fuck yea go after him, One of the best defenders in the league when he’s on his game

[Puck]

Do we play enough single-high to warrant signing Collins? He seems to be a good box safety that struggles in coverage.

I asked in another thread about Big Nickle. Could he be in the box with 2 FS or how do we run that?

2FS 1 SS. or 1FS AND 2 SS?

[omahacolt]

I don’t want this dude. Mainly because everyone else seems to want him

[omahacolt]

I asked in another thread about Big Nickle. Could he be in the box with 2 FS or how do we run that?

2FS 1 SS. or 1FS AND 2 SS?

Doesn’t really matter. Unless you have 2 Malik Hookers.

[Butter]

Doesn’t really matter. Unless you have 2 Malik Hookers.

2 Hookers are better than One!

[Dam8610]

2 Hookers are better than One!

So you're advocating for drafting Amani, then?

[Coltsalr]

Dan Duggan from The Athletic on Landon Collins possibly hitting the open market:

I arrived in Indianapolis for​ the​ combine​ on Tuesday​ convinced​ that despite the locker​ drama,​ there was no​​ way the Giants would let Pro Bowl safety Landon Collins walk into free agency without applying the franchise tag. But with the deadline to apply the tag approaching at 4 p.m. on Tuesday, I now believe it’s entirely possible that the Giants will let the 25-year-old hit the market.

Here’s why my view on that changed, plus news and notes on a variety of topics based on five days at the NFL’s annual gossip convention:

• It seemed like common sense for the Giants to use the franchise tag to maintain contractual control over Collins. General manager Dave Gettleman blamed the team’s 5-11 record on a lack of defensive playmakers, so surely he couldn’t just let a three-time Pro Bowler entering his prime walk out the door.

That was the impression from agents and executives I spoke to early in the week. But my take changed after Gettleman addressed the media on Wednesday.

Gettleman showed last year when he gushed nonstop about eventual No. 2 pick Saquon Barkley that he doesn’t practice much subterfuge when he speaks to the media. So it was notable that whenever Gettleman was asked about tagging Collins, the general manager only fixated on the negative implications of the move.

The franchise tag for safeties will cost $11.15 million in 2019. The Giants currently are projected to have $27 million in cap space, according to overthecap.com. Gettleman acknowledged that number is close to accurate, but then pointed out that the team has much less cap space than it appears because he plans to set aside $8-10 million to sign veterans as injury replacements during the season.

“Now that conversation’s different isn’t it?” Gettleman said of how much money is available for Collins. “Now, it’s, ‘Man, they’ve only got $17 million.’ Nothing can be done in a vacuum. You’ve got to look at the whole picture.”

Additionally, all indications point to Collins being unhappy if he gets tagged. He could follow the same path as Earl Thomas, who are both repped by agent David Mulugheta, when the Seahawks safety reported four days before the 2018 opener due to unhappiness with his contract.

“Let’s go to the conversation of eliminating distractions,” Gettleman said. “You tag a guy, he’s mad and that’s all you guys are going to write about for six months. That’s what’s going to be (in the media). So, I have to say to myself, ‘Is it worth it?’”

There still had been no discussions about a long-term contract as of late last week. That didn’t sit well with Collins’ camp, since the tag is often used to buy time to negotiate a long-term deal. But the Giants have shown no interest in making a long-term commitment to a homegrown player who was voted a team captain last season.

Gettleman spoke for approximately 53 minutes on Wednesday. At no point did he reference the benefits of locking up a young star player when discussing Collins. Instead, Gettleman focused on shrinking cap space and potential distractions. Those comments plus the lack of any progress in negotiations had me leaving Indianapolis with a completely different view of Collins’ future.

• Maybe it shouldn’t be surprising that Gettleman is willing to let Collins walk. Gettleman’s track record shows a lack of value placed on the safety position.

In five drafts as the general manager of the Panthers, Gettleman never took a safety in the first three rounds. And the biggest contract he gave to a safety was a three-year, $17 million extension to Kurt Coleman after the 2015 season.

Gettleman mostly patched the safety position together by signing veterans from the discount rack. Even with Collins on an affordable rookie contract last season, Gettleman went cheap at the position, as free safety Curtis Riley was signed to a veteran’s minimum contract.

It looks like Gettleman is going to need to replace both starting safeties this offseason. History suggests he won’t spend much to fill those holes.

• Gettleman’s desire for an $8-10 million rainy day fund struck me as high and an NFL executive agreed. The executive said his preference is to sign young players to replace injured veterans during the season so he didn’t put as much of an emphasis on setting aside money for in-season acquisitions.

The Giants went into last season with $8.9 million in cap space after signing receiver Odell Beckham Jr. to an extension, restructuring cornerback Janoris Jenkins’ contract and trading offensive lineman Brett Jones to the Vikings for a seventh-round pick in the weeks leading up to the opener. They finished with $5.9 million in cap space despite being extremely active in claiming veterans off of waivers during the season.

There are always ways to create cap space, as the Giants demonstrated with their moves in the two weeks before the start of last season. So allowing the desire to have an emergency fund limit the money available to spend in free agency seems like a questionable approach, especially for a team that is in dire need of upgrades at almost every position.

• The chatter about the Giants potentially trading Beckham just won’t die. The Athletic’s Jay Glazer doubled down on his bold prediction that Beckham would be traded, reporting on Thursday that, “In talking to sources in Indianapolis I have more confidence in my prediction if the Giants get a fair offer.”

It makes sense that the rumors about Beckham are coming from national reporters because the Giants haven’t been fueling them. They haven’t been shutting them down, either.

Gettleman repeated his line that, “We didn’t sign Odell to trade him.” Told that sounds like he didn’t intend to trade Beckham when the team gave the receiver a $90 million contract in August, Gettleman responded, “That’s good ears.”

Gettleman’s line doesn’t definitively rule out the possibility of a trade now and he seems comfortable leaving that wiggle room.

“First of all, why is it my responsibility to eliminate that speculation? Because you guys could say anything, get it cooking around the table and now I’ve got to answer that,” Gettleman said. “Am I wrong? No, I’m not wrong. So, I told you what I said. Next question.”

Gettleman’s right, but it’s not as if he’s refusing to address the Beckham speculation. He’s just doing so in a manner that keeps the door open a crack. And the rumors involving Beckham serve as a distraction, as the receiver makes it abundantly clear that he’s aware of everything said about him. If Gettleman said the Giants won’t trade Beckham under any circumstances, the talk would subside. But that’s a commitment Gettleman is resistant to making.

My sense is the Giants aren’t shopping Beckham, but they’re willing to listen to offers. As Glazer noted, if they get blown away by an offer, they’ll pull the trigger. The 49ers were the team that came up most often as a potential trade partner last week. The 49ers are among the league leaders in cap space ($67 million), need a No. 1 receiver for quarterback Jimmy Garoppolo and have the type of draft capital (No. 2 pick) that would entice the Giants.

As I’ve said all along, I don’t think the Giants will actually trade Beckham. But there’s too much smoke to continue to dismiss the possibility.

• The Giants publicly threw their support behind quarterback Eli Manning, who will return for his 16th season as the team’s starter.

“I’ve really been thinking about this: The narrative around Eli for the past four years, five years since I was gone was really negative,” Gettleman said. “And there’s an old saying: Tell a lie long enough, you’ll believe it. The narrative is so negative that when you take that position, most people struggle getting off that spot. Most people struggle saying, ‘I’m going to look at this with fresh eyes.’ So for example, when you evaluate pro players, every year’s a new year. When you evaluate him, it’s a new year. Yes, before, he was at this level, but that doesn’t mean when you look at him he’s automatically at this level or at this level. You’ve got to take everything for what it’s worth at that time. And I think that the narrative has been negative, and I don’t think it’s been fair.”

It was pointed out that the negativity has coincided with the Giants losing an inordinate amount of their games over that span. Gettleman conceded that was part of it, but emphasized that, “You don’t win it by yourself, you don’t lose it by yourself.”

Gettleman’s sentiment was echoed by various Giants personnel in casual conversations throughout the week. The belief in the 38-year-old isn’t just something expressed when recorders are rolling. Members of the organization truly believe that Manning has gotten too much blame and is capable of succeeding if he has proper support.

• After hearing the Giants recommit to Manning and Gettleman stating that “I’m not going there right now” when asked about lowering the quarterback’s $23.2 million cap hit, I was left to wonder what exactly Gettleman and Manning spoke about in their “no-holds barred” conversation the day after the season finale. It doesn’t seem like any particularly sticky topics have been tackled between the parties since the season ended.

• Reports surfaced last week that the Giants are trying to trade Olivier Vernon. That doesn’t come as a surprise, but it’s hard to imagine any team willing to give up much for the 28-year-old pass rusher.

The problem with moving Vernon is that he’s due $15.5 million in each of the final two seasons of the backloaded contract he signed in 2016. Expecting a team to take on that huge sum and give up a valuable draft pick is a fantasy. The best the Giants can hope for is to get a Day 3 pick for Vernon. Otherwise, cutting him is the most likely resolution. The Giants would create $11.5 million in cap savings and eat $8 million in dead money if they trade or cut Vernon before June 1.

• You always have to be on the lookout for smokescreens at this time of year, but my sense is that coach Pat Shurmur’s admiration for Oklahoma quarterback Kyler Murray is genuine. The 5-foot-10 Murray may not have ideal height, but Shurmur had success with 6-foot-1 Case Keenum in Minnesota in 2017. Murray is a dynamic talent and he checks the boxes of what Shurmur looks for in a quarterback: “They need to be productive, they need to make good decisions, they need to know how to throw the ball accurately, throw the ball on time, they’ve got to lead their team to victories and they’ve got to do all the things necessary to play the position.”

That sounds a lot like what Murray did at Oklahoma. But even if Murray has won over Shurmur, it would be shocking if the old-school Gettleman and the rest of a scouting apparatus that is rooted in a size-and-speed grading system falls for the Heisman Trophy winner.

• The Giants won’t tender restricted free agent Antonio Hamilton, according to Pro Football Talk. That’s not a surprising development, since the lowest tender for an RFA is around $2 million for a one-year contract (keep that figure in mind for fellow RFAs Corey Coleman and Spencer Pulley).

Hamilton emerged as an exceptional gunner in punt coverage last season, but the cornerback didn’t play a single snap on defense. The $2 million price tag is too high for a player with such a limited role. The Giants could try to sign Hamilton to a cheaper contract.

• The Giants typically play the Jets in the third game of the preseason, but that could change this year since the teams are slated to meet in the regular season. The “Snoopy Bowl” could be moved to the preseason opener and the third exhibition game, which typically most resembles an actual game, would then be against a team the Giants don’t face during the regular season.

https://theathletic.com/848484/2019/03/04/giants-combine-chatter-the-latest-on-landon-collins-olivier-vernon-and-more-after-five-days-in-indianapolis/?redirected=1

[sherck]

Dan Duggan from The Athletic on Landon Collins possibly hitting the open market:



https://theathletic.com/848484/2019/03/04/giants-combine-chatter-the-latest-on-landon-collins-olivier-vernon-and-more-after-five-days-in-indianapolis/?redirected=1

If Landon Collins makes it to free agency, I hope he is very high on Ballard's wish list for signing free agents.

The kid is still young, a talent and fills a whole that we have. I would still want Farley back as the 3rd safety and would love to draft a kid in the draft to deliver depth duties but having a starting combo of Hooker and Collins would be great.

Walk Worthy,

[FatDT]

I'm not against Collins but having two 1st rounders as the starting safeties in this defense just seems off. If he is brought in I'll expect to see more opportunities to make plays for the safeties this year. Mayber Eberflus has plans for that.

[Puck]

Doesn’t really matter. Unless you have 2 Malik Hookers.


I actually think FS and SS are the positions of need following a dominate edge rush.

Then 3 tech.

take BPA at any of those positions which could be a safety at 26. As in look at how far Hooker fell and we got him.

[Coltsalr]

If Landon Collins makes it to free agency, I hope he is very high on Ballard's wish list for signing free agents.

The kid is still young, a talent and fills a whole that we have. I would still want Farley back as the 3rd safety and would love to draft a kid in the draft to deliver depth duties but having a starting combo of Hooker and Collins would be great.

Walk Worthy,

Holder seems to think he's on Ballard's wishlist (at a price):


@HolderStephen
My hunch is the Colts are watching this Landon Collins situation closely. This breaks down where the Giants are with the looming decision of whether to franchise him:


@HolderStephen
Now, remember, the context here is this: Even if Collins makes it to the market, he will have multiple suitors. The Colts are very adamant about sticking to their assigned contract value, so they shy away from bidding wars. Stay tuned.

[YDFL Commish]

So who's the top paid safety in the league and does Collins deserve a similar contract?

Because, I'll bet that's what he will be asking for.

[Dewey 5]

1 reply 0 retweets 2 likes
Reply 1 Retweet Like 2 Direct message

WFAN Sports Radio
‏
Verified account

@WFAN660
44m44 minutes ago
More
#Giants are unlikely to franchise tag safety Landon Collins before tomorrow's deadline, according to @KimJonesSports. Collins would become a free agent.
http://bit.ly/2EMIwTl
https://twitter.com/WFAN660?ref_src=twsrc%5Egoogle%7Ctwcamp%5Eserp%7Ct wgr%5Eauthor

[omahacolt]

I actually think FS and SS are the positions of need following a dominate edge rush.

Then 3 tech.

take BPA at any of those positions which could be a safety at 26. As in look at how far Hooker fell and we got him.

Well

That is absurd but ok

[Maniac]

Holder seems to think he's on Ballard's wishlist (at a price):


@HolderStephen
My hunch is the Colts are watching this Landon Collins situation closely. This breaks down where the Giants are with the looming decision of whether to franchise him:


@HolderStephen
Now, remember, the context here is this: Even if Collins makes it to the market, he will have multiple suitors. The Colts are very adamant about sticking to their assigned contract value, so they shy away from bidding wars. Stay tuned.

If he hits the market, we'll get a quick look at how aggressive Ballard will or will not be.

[Dewey 5]

If he hits the market, we'll get a quick look at how aggressive Ballard will or will not be.

I fully expect Freaks to freak out & meltdown when we don’t sign him. I would like to get him in Indy as much as everyone else here but there will be some team that will overpay for him & Ballard isn’t going to do that.

[Puck]

Well

That is absurd but okBe nice if you would elaborate

[Maniac]

I fully expect Freaks to freak out & meltdown when we don’t sign him. I would like to get him in Indy as much as everyone else here but there will be some team that will overpay for him & Ballard isn’t going to do that.

Yeah, that will likely be the case.

[Dam8610]

I fully expect Freaks to freak out & meltdown when we don’t sign him. I would like to get him in Indy as much as everyone else here but there will be some team that will overpay for him & Ballard isn’t going to do that.

I don't think the market will go much above 5/60/30. There's absolutely no reason the Colts couldn't afford that contract, including Ballard's preferred method of making all the guarantees happen in years 1 and 2. So the question is do the Colts think he's worth that? I could see that going either way. That said, there aren't many safeties his size with his athleticism, and maybe none in the upcoming draft class.

[omahacolt]

Be nice if you would elaborate

Hooker can play the free safety role ok for a deep single high. Guys like Farley, geathers and Mitchell can function as ss or big nickel guy. Easy to bring them back.

We have zero top notch dline talent. Need more lbers. Depth at cb is not great to be nice.

That front 7 needs a lot of help to be worried about the safeties much.

But we do have a ton of cash and can improve a lot of places.

[VeveJones007]

I don't think the market will go much above 5/60/30. There's absolutely no reason the Colts couldn't afford that contract, including Ballard's preferred method of making all the guarantees happen in years 1 and 2. So the question is do the Colts think he's worth that? I could see that going either way. That said, there aren't many safeties his size with his athleticism, and maybe none in the upcoming draft class.

The Colts can afford any single player that’s available, but that doesn’t mean they should be irresponsible. If Ballard doesn’t want to go that high, he’s earned enough of my trust that he’ll still find a good SS option.

[VeveJones007]

Hooker can play the free safety role ok for a deep single high. Guys like Farley, geathers and Mitchell can function as ss or big nickel guy. Easy to bring them back.

We have zero top notch dline talent. Need more lbers. Depth at cb is not great to be nice.

That front 7 needs a lot of help to be worried about the safeties much.

But we do have a ton of cash and can improve a lot of places.

Signing Collins won’t have any impact on bringing in help in the front 7.

[Chromeburn]

Signing Collins won’t have any impact on bringing in help in the front 7.

It would give us one more pick in the draft to potentially use on the dline.

[VeveJones007]

It would give us one more pick in the draft to potentially use on the dline.

I meant that it won’t in adversely affect it, but that might be a fair assessment as well. Though, I fully expect Ballard to draft DL & EDGE at 26 and 34 regardless of what happens in UFA.

[sherck]

So, looking down a list of "best free agents" available in 2019, I was struck by how many young, quality safeties are hitting free agency:

Landon Collins, NYG, 25
Adrian Amos, CHI, 26
Earl Thomas, SEA, 30
Ha Ha Clinton-Dix, 26
Lamarcus Joyner, LAR, 28
Clayton Geathers, IND, 27
Tre Boston, ARI, 27

That is Water Football's rankings of the top seven safeties on the open market (with Mike Mitchell at #11 and Matthias Farley at #12 as an RFA). His rankings are not out of line with other rankings that I have seen.

Other that Thomas, all are under 30 and all are talented. If Collins wants too much, I have little doubt that one of the others will be in our price range.

Hooker, Free Agent, Geathers and Farley along with a lower round draft pick (of the ball hawking variety) is a good looking safety position group.

I hope that free agent is Collins but I would be happy with about anyone on that list.

Walk Worthy,

[FatDT]

FA safeties have not been getting paid the last few years. I don't know why that position has been devalued but the top 5 highest-paid safeties right now (by annual salary) are

Eric Berry - KC - $13M/year
Reshad Jones - MIA - $12M/year
Kam Chancellor - SEA - $12M/year
Harrison Smith - MIN - $10M/year
Devin McCourty - NE - $9.5M/year

The Colts can afford that type of salary easily. The question is just whether or not they want to.

[VeveJones007]

FA safeties have not been getting paid the last few years. I don't know why that position has been devalued but the top 5 highest-paid safeties right now (by annual salary) are

Eric Berry - KC - $13M/year
Reshad Jones - MIA - $12M/year
Kam Chancellor - SEA - $12M/year
Harrison Smith - MIN - $10M/year
Devin McCourty - NE - $9.5M/year

The Colts can afford that type of salary easily. The question is just whether or not they want to.

Yep. I think Collins negotiations start at 5/60/30, with something like 5/65/33 getting it done. I don't know if Ballard wants to go that high, but it does sound like Collins is a good fit culture-wise and in the locker room. This will be an interesting test case to see if Ballard goes harder for certain exceptions.

[omahacolt]

I meant that it won’t in adversely affect it, but that might be a fair assessment as well. Though, I fully expect Ballard to draft DL & EDGE at 26 and 34 regardless of what happens in UFA.

I have no issue bringing in Collins if Ballard thinks he is an upgrade. Safety isn’t a top need like Puck thinks.n

[Coltsalr]

@RapSheet
The #Giants have now informed S Landon Collins that he won’t be franchise tagged, putting a top player on the free agent market, sources say.

He’s hitting the open market!

If the Colts don’t get him it’ll be because Ballard didn’t want him.

[Coltsalr]

Ebron appears to agree with me:

https://twitter.com/ebron85/status/1102987999992795138?s=21

[rcubed]

I have no issue bringing in Collins if Ballard thinks he is an upgrade. Safety isn’t a top need like Puck thinks.n
when you say not a top need, are you assuming farley and geathers will be back?

[VeveJones007]

I have no issue bringing in Collins if Ballard thinks he is an upgrade. Safety isn’t a top need like Puck thinks.n

One thing to keep in mind is that Eberflus was in the same division as Collins in 2016-2017. Even though Eberflus is scheming against offenses, you have to think he would have a good impression of Collins and whether or not he would be a good fit with what he wants to do.

[VeveJones007]

@RapSheet
The #Giants have now informed S Landon Collins that he won’t be franchise tagged, putting a top player on the free agent market, sources say.

He’s hitting the open market!

If the Colts don’t get him it’ll be because Ballard didn’t want him.

I disagree with the bold. Collins will be a key target for many teams. Money will be roughly equivalent for several offers, meaning that Collins can pick location, team, and scheme.

He's from Louisiana, so maybe he would prefer a team in the southeast? Maybe he'd like to be in a more attacking-oriented scheme?

[VeveJones007]

PFF has some thoughts (https://www.profootballfocus.com/news/pro-how-a-team-can-get-the-most-out-landon-collins)on Collins:

When he first entered the league in 2015, Collins was used as a true free safety and played deep down the field en route to an underwhelming overall grade of 49.2, which was the third-lowest grade among safeties that year. Then, in 2016, Collins was moved to strong safety and played much closer to the line of scrimmage and his grade sky-rocketed as he earned a spot on the PFF top 101 for two straight years. For such a turn to take place, it should be obvious that Collins is much better suited for playing as a box safety, and that’s the role he should play on his new team if he wants to reclaim his spot as one of the league’s best safeties.

For someone who has star potential like Collins, you can’t blame him for looking elsewhere this offseason, but teams need to understand that they can’t just plug him at deep safety and expect him to fly all over the field with range like Earl Thomas. If anything, he’s more of a Kam Chancellor.

Landon Collins can return to his 2016 and 2017 form, but, again, it must be as primarily a box safety. This past season, Collins had 23 run stops when lined up within eight yards of the line of scrimmage, ranking second among safeties. In other words, Collins tackled running backs for losses or short gains more often than most when lined up close to the action. He can also rough up slot receivers and tight ends and cover routes over the middle; Collins proved as much when he earned a top-fifteen coverage grade among safeties in 2017.

Not sure it's anything that we don't know. He's basically a better Clayton Geathers without the long injury track record.

[VeveJones007]

Erickson chimes in (https://www.indystar.com/story/sports/nfl/colts/2019/03/05/landon-collins-indianapolis-colts-chris-ballard-bob-sanders-clayton-geathers/3066884002/).

Safety is a position that matters more to the Indianapolis defense than most teams. Safeties are critical in Matt Eberflus’ defense, a fact fans in Indianapolis know all too well after watching what Bob Sanders could do in Tony Dungy's scheme when he was healthy.

The Colts need a strong safety who can tackle, both as a thumping presence in the running game and a sure stopper in the open field. As good as Indianapolis was against the run last season — the Colts finished eighth in the NFL — Eberflus repeatedly said improved tackling from the defensive backs was key to taking the next step.

And even in an NFL that’s increasingly focused on the pass, defensive backs who tackle are critical to a Colts defense that forces opposing quarterbacks to throw it underneath and trusts its linebackers and secondary to make tackles in the open field.

No defensive back in the NFL makes more plays than Collins, who has made 437 tackles over the past four seasons.

“There’s no doubt it’s important,” Ballard said last week. “Because of the way we play, the 8-man fronts, we ask our safeties to do a lot. They’ve got to drop in the box and be able to play the run in the 8-man front, they’ve got to be able to play in a half field, we’re going to ask them to play man-to-man sometimes on a slot and on a tight end.”

[omahacolt]

when you say not a top need, are you assuming farley and geathers will be back?

I think Farley will be for sure. And geathers would be easy to get back if they want.

[Chromeburn]

Erickson chimes in (https://www.indystar.com/story/sports/nfl/colts/2019/03/05/landon-collins-indianapolis-colts-chris-ballard-bob-sanders-clayton-geathers/3066884002/).


Yeah, he would fit into our defense. Is young, 3 time pro bowler, good in the box safety. He is their best defender, just surprised they are letting him walk, but they want to trade O'dell also. I'm not impressed with Gettleman, I don't think he will be there in a couple of years.

[Lawrence Owen]

First off, he is a quality character. So he fits Ballard's locker room build.
Secondly, he is similar to Geathers, only better, with less injury history.
Thirdly, he's not used to having a real secondary around him. Our Corner's might be young, but they are very disciplined in the scheme. A nice change for a safety that is used to trying to make up for deficiencies of others around him, (which is one reason I think his coverage skills were lacking, he had too many things on his mind) .
With Hooker beside him playing sideline to sideline, He can just play 'free', and make plays. This is what he is really good at.
Hooker is a close friend, so I think if we really wanted him, he could be sold on coming here, and probably cheaper than what the Giants could have re-signed him for.
P.S. I'm probably going to put this question in my next pod, and plug this site as the reference for this question.)

[VeveJones007]

First off, he is a quality character. So he fits Ballard's locker room build.
Secondly, he is similar to Geathers, only better, with less injury history.
Thirdly, he's not used to having a real secondary around him. Our Corner's might be young, but they are very disciplined in the scheme. A nice change for a safety that is used to trying to make up for deficiencies of others around him, (which is one reason I think his coverage skills were lacking, he had too many things on his mind) .
With Hooker beside him playing sideline to sideline, He can just play 'free', and make plays. This is what he is really good at.
Hooker is a close friend, so I think if we really wanted him, he could be sold on coming here, and probably cheaper than what the Giants could have re-signed him for.
P.S. I'm probably going to put this question in my next pod, and plug this site as the reference for this question.)

Yeah, it definitely seems to make a lot of sense on paper. I would be very interested in what Eberflus thinks of Collins.

[Chromeburn]

Was watching NFL network and they said 5 pro bowl safeties will be on the market. Earl Thomas will be a free agent at 30. Looks like Houston wants to resign the honey badger.

I still think Collins is the best option when considering youth, production and scheme fit.

[Dam8610]

Was watching NFL network and they said 5 pro bowl safeties will be on the market. Earl Thomas will be a free agent at 30. Looks like Houston wants to resign the honey badger.

I still think Collins is the best option at youth, production and scheme for though.

He and Amos are very close for me. I'd rate Amos lower, but also expect he'll sign for significantly less (say $9-10m vs $12-13m AAV).

[Luck4Reich]

Apparently Ebron is trying to recruit Collins on Twitter.

[Luck4Reich]

Ebron appears to agree with me:

https://twitter.com/ebron85/status/1102987999992795138?s=21

Sorry didnt see this.

[Chromeburn]

Sorry didnt see this.

Those Detroit fans are all over his twitter. Man are they haters.

[Luck4Reich]

Those Detroit fans are all over his twitter. Man are they haters.

Haha I had to stop reading after the guy in Detroit said nobody wants to go to Indy.. lmfao!!

Like they are lining up to get to Detroit. :rolleyes:

[Chaka]

Collins seemingly is a player that checks most/all of the boxes of a player that Ballard should be interested in, but here are a few concerns I see with signing him to the kind of deal some of you are talking about (5 yr/65M, etc)

1. Is it concerning to anyone that the Giants - the team who should know his capabilities best - thought the franchise tag number was too much for him? I didn't get the sense that this was a situation where the Giants hated him personally or were forced to allow him to leave because they couldn't afford him - they just thought it would be an overpayment.

2. Is this the best use of our resources? Several have pointed out that safety isn't the greatest need on the team. So paying big money to a player who, even if he performs well, will only incrementally improve the defense may not be the best strategy. We could get better bang for our buck by spending that $13M to improve the areas where greater improvement can be achieved - even if it isn't a high profile signing.

3. Related to point #1, the safety position has been devalued in recent years as several have pointed out. Lots of good players have gone unsigned or signed greatly reduced contracts. The signs suggest this may happen again this year, given the number of seemingly high quality safeties that will be flooding the market. So is it necessary to pay top dollar for this guy? Is he that much better than the rest of the safeties?

I'm asking these questions out of honest curiosity. Usually the top free agents end up being overpaid, sometimes massively so, and as a consequence I'm perhaps biased against signing those guys. I know one of the responses is likely to be that we've got lots of cap space, which is true, so why not sign him? But I believe Ballard when he says that the cap space will start to disappear when he starts resigning the Colts own free agents, so I expect him to keep a large chunk of that cap space intact this offseason.

[FatDT]

Collins seemingly is a player that checks most/all of the boxes of a player that Ballard should be interested in, but here are a few concerns I see with signing him to the kind of deal some of you are talking about (5 yr/65M, etc)

1. Is it concerning to anyone that the Giants - the team who should know his capabilities best - thought the franchise tag number was too much for him? I didn't get the sense that this was a situation where the Giants hated him personally or were forced to allow him to leave because they couldn't afford him - they just thought it would be an overpayment.

2. Is this the best use of our resources? Several have pointed out that safety isn't the greatest need on the team. So paying big money to a player who, even if he performs well, will only incrementally improve the defense may not be the best strategy. We could get better bang for our buck by spending that $13M to improve the areas where greater improvement can be achieved - even if it isn't a high profile signing.

3. Related to point #1, the safety position has been devalued in recent years as several have pointed out. Lots of good players have gone unsigned or signed greatly reduced contracts. The signs suggest this may happen again this year, given the number of seemingly high quality safeties that will be flooding the market. So is it necessary to pay top dollar for this guy? Is he that much better than the rest of the safeties?

I'm asking these questions out of honest curiosity. Usually the top free agents end up being overpaid, sometimes massively so, and as a consequence I'm perhaps biased against signing those guys. I know one of the responses is likely to be that we've got lots of cap space, which is true, so why not sign him? But I believe Ballard when he says that the cap space will start to disappear when he starts resigning the Colts own free agents, so I expect him to keep a large chunk of that cap space intact this offseason.

Signing Collins is not critical but it's fine. He's a young All-Pro with a great team-first attitude and only 5 games missed in 4 seasons. We have the cap space to sign him to whatever he could possibly want and still have just as much flexibility as we need going forward.

That said, based on what we've seen so far, I don't think safety needs to be a top draft pick or FA to be successful. There are other safeties available in FA that will be cheaper and despite Collins talent I'm not convinced he will be in position to impact that many plays. If we were in a tighter cap situation I would say the money would be far-better spent on a front 7 player.

If we do sign him, that will tell me that either Eberflus wants to do some things differently with the DBs, or that Ballard is relaxing his approach a bit to FA.

[Chromeburn]

Haha I had to stop reading after the guy in Detroit said nobody wants to go to Indy.. lmfao!!

Like they are lining up to get to Detroit. :rolleyes:

They are a toxic fanbase. Have been for a long time. They just can't let Ebron go.

But it is pretty delusional to see the Lions as a better spot either historically or when projecting the future.

[Dam8610]

Collins seemingly is a player that checks most/all of the boxes of a player that Ballard should be interested in, but here are a few concerns I see with signing him to the kind of deal some of you are talking about (5 yr/65M, etc)

1. Is it concerning to anyone that the Giants - the team who should know his capabilities best - thought the franchise tag number was too much for him? I didn't get the sense that this was a situation where the Giants hated him personally or were forced to allow him to leave because they couldn't afford him - they just thought it would be an overpayment.

2. Is this the best use of our resources? Several have pointed out that safety isn't the greatest need on the team. So paying big money to a player who, even if he performs well, will only incrementally improve the defense may not be the best strategy. We could get better bang for our buck by spending that $13M to improve the areas where greater improvement can be achieved - even if it isn't a high profile signing.

3. Related to point #1, the safety position has been devalued in recent years as several have pointed out. Lots of good players have gone unsigned or signed greatly reduced contracts. The signs suggest this may happen again this year, given the number of seemingly high quality safeties that will be flooding the market. So is it necessary to pay top dollar for this guy? Is he that much better than the rest of the safeties?

I'm asking these questions out of honest curiosity. Usually the top free agents end up being overpaid, sometimes massively so, and as a consequence I'm perhaps biased against signing those guys. I know one of the responses is likely to be that we've got lots of cap space, which is true, so why not sign him? But I believe Ballard when he says that the cap space will start to disappear when he starts resigning the Colts own free agents, so I expect him to keep a large chunk of that cap space intact this offseason.

1) Gettleman completely devalues DBs, see his tenure in Carolina for more proof.

2) Fair point. Adrian Amos could provide 85-90% of the player at 70-75% of the price.

3) Safeties are important to this scheme, regardless of their leaguewide importance. Further, if the Colts are deriving value from leaguewide devalued positions, they're going to get bargains and be ahead of the curve.

[Coltsalr]

In other news, Brad Wells is still a retard:

@BradWellsNFL
Tweeting this late, but I do agree with many of you followers that Landon Collins would be great in Indy. However, signing Collins to a huge deal would be Ballard admitting that Malik Hooker isn’t the answer at safety. I don’t see him doing that.

[Chromeburn]

In other news, Brad Wells is still a retard:

@BradWellsNFL
Tweeting this late, but I do agree with many of you followers that Landon Collins would be great in Indy. However, signing Collins to a huge deal would be Ballard admitting that Malik Hooker isn’t the answer at safety. I don’t see him doing that.

What? Because we only field one safety or does he mean Geathers who was a Grigs draftee? :rolleyes: Is this troll bait or does he actually believe this?

[smitty46953]

What? Because we only field one safety or does he mean Geathers who was a Grigs draftee? :rolleyes: Is this troll bait or does he actually believe this?

Brad Wells is a well known idiot :rolleyes:

[Coltsalr]

What? Because we only field one safety or does he mean Geathers who was a Grigs draftee? :rolleyes: Is this troll bait or does he actually believe this?

Can it be both?

[FatDT]

Every aspect of anything Wells says is stupid.

[Chromeburn]

Can it be both?

Brad Wells is a well known idiot :rolleyes:

Yeah, I read through it. So if Ballard signs Collins they, therefore, are admitting Hooker is not good and worth resigning to a second contract. Because only a stupid team pays two safeties second contracts. That's a leap of logic. Really it's just another attempt to feed his anti-Ballard narrative that he has adopted for some reason.

[Lawrence Owen]

Signing Collins won’t have any impact on bringing in help in the front 7.

Signing Collins IS help for the front 7. He is a primarily box defender. A guy with great instincts, and tackling ability. Another person an O-line and coach HAS to account for, and even game plan for. Eberflus loves blitzing with DB's, and with Collins athletic ability, he'd be a dangerous person on our defense. Look at what DC's did with athletic safeties in the past,...Troy P., and even last years DROTY- runner-up. Used effectively, A really good box safety is dangerous.
And Like said above,...It does free up another draft pick where this years D-line class is deeper than it has been in over a decade.

[Lawrence Owen]

Yeah, I read through it. So if Ballard signs Collins they, therefore, are admitting Hooker is not good and worth resigning to a second contract. Because only a stupid team pays two safeties second contracts. That's a leap of logic. Really it's just another attempt to feed his anti-Ballard narrative that he has adopted for some reason.

Funny, because 90% of Well's stance is PFF stats,..Yet PFF rated Hooker VERY high last year...you don't see him posting that all over twitter...lol

[VeveJones007]

Signing Collins IS help for the front 7. He is a primarily box defender. A guy with great instincts, and tackling ability. Another person an O-line and coach HAS to account for, and even game plan for. Eberflus loves blitzing with DB's, and with Collins athletic ability, he'd be a dangerous person on our defense. Look at what DC's did with athletic safeties in the past,...Troy P., and even last years DROTY- runner-up. Used effectively, A really good box safety is dangerous.
And Like said above,...It does free up another draft pick where this years D-line class is deeper than it has been in over a decade.

Fair. I should have said that signing Collins does nothing that adversely affects the team's ability to add on the DL/EDGE.

Just to add to your comments on what he offers the defense, I look at these zone defenses from a bit of a basketball perspective. You need players who can soak up more space, taking it away from an offense. A guy like Collins who can knife across the field, especially downhill and in the box, is something this defense really needs. He would be like adding another Darius Leonard, but in the secondary. Those two guys would eat up so much space and limit extra yards via the run and short passing game. That'll get the team into good down and distance situations, but they still need more pass rush to consistently capitalize on those situations...

[Chaka]

Signing Collins is not critical but it's fine. He's a young All-Pro with a great team-first attitude and only 5 games missed in 4 seasons. We have the cap space to sign him to whatever he could possibly want and still have just as much flexibility as we need going forward.

That said, based on what we've seen so far, I don't think safety needs to be a top draft pick or FA to be successful. There are other safeties available in FA that will be cheaper and despite Collins talent I'm not convinced he will be in position to impact that many plays. If we were in a tighter cap situation I would say the money would be far-better spent on a front 7 player.

If we do sign him, that will tell me that either Eberflus wants to do some things differently with the DBs, or that Ballard is relaxing his approach a bit to FA.

Well put, thank you. I'm not quite as sold on him as others here unless the price is lower than expected (and I'm hoping it will be). I just think there are better values to be had elsewhere. I don't care how much cap space we have, I want the money to be spent smartly. Except in rare instances, I think that signing the top free agents isn't good business. They are very expensive and have lots of negotiating leverage so you end up with lots of guaranteed money, so if they don't work out they will damage your team for years. That's what concerns me here.

[Chaka]

1) Gettleman completely devalues DBs, see his tenure in Carolina for more proof.

2) Fair point. Adrian Amos could provide 85-90% of the player at 70-75% of the price.

3) Safeties are important to this scheme, regardless of their leaguewide importance. Further, if the Colts are deriving value from leaguewide devalued positions, they're going to get bargains and be ahead of the curve.


1. Maybe - after reading your comment, I ran a brief Google search and found this article discussing what I think you're referring to:

https://247sports.com/nfl/carolina-panthers/Article/Dave-Gettleman-Landon-Collins-franchise-tag-Panthers-decisions-129743945/

The problem is that each of the referenced decisions Gettleman made, while controversial at the time, ended up working out in his favor.

2. Agreed, though I'd hope a lower profile player like Amos wouldn't cost 85-90% of Collins.

3. I don't disagree, but I'm not sure I understand how this responds to my comment. My point is that because the safeties are devalued, we don't need to pay top dollar for one like Collins. We can get most of the production we need from a MUCH less expensive player because there are so many good ones available. We probably could get one of them to sign a Ballard one year with options deal, too, rather than committing to a long term guaranteed contract.

[VeveJones007]

Collins seemingly is a player that checks most/all of the boxes of a player that Ballard should be interested in, but here are a few concerns I see with signing him to the kind of deal some of you are talking about (5 yr/65M, etc)

1. Is it concerning to anyone that the Giants - the team who should know his capabilities best - thought the franchise tag number was too much for him? I didn't get the sense that this was a situation where the Giants hated him personally or were forced to allow him to leave because they couldn't afford him - they just thought it would be an overpayment.

2. Is this the best use of our resources? Several have pointed out that safety isn't the greatest need on the team. So paying big money to a player who, even if he performs well, will only incrementally improve the defense may not be the best strategy. We could get better bang for our buck by spending that $13M to improve the areas where greater improvement can be achieved - even if it isn't a high profile signing.

3. Related to point #1, the safety position has been devalued in recent years as several have pointed out. Lots of good players have gone unsigned or signed greatly reduced contracts. The signs suggest this may happen again this year, given the number of seemingly high quality safeties that will be flooding the market. So is it necessary to pay top dollar for this guy? Is he that much better than the rest of the safeties?

I'm asking these questions out of honest curiosity. Usually the top free agents end up being overpaid, sometimes massively so, and as a consequence I'm perhaps biased against signing those guys. I know one of the responses is likely to be that we've got lots of cap space, which is true, so why not sign him? But I believe Ballard when he says that the cap space will start to disappear when he starts resigning the Colts own free agents, so I expect him to keep a large chunk of that cap space intact this offseason.

1) The Giants thought enough of Collins to make him a co-captain of the defense. This is strictly a decision from the GM, who I might point out drafted a RB in the top 10 each of the last two years and ignored the QB position in favor of Eli Manning last draft. I don't give their hesitancy to extend Collins any credibility.

#2 and #3 really play together, so I'll address them that way. You have to view this through the prism of the Colts scheme. After pass rusher, a slashing SS is the biggest need on this defense. Collins is a perfect fit in that regard and there isn't a pass rusher available who justifies a premium investment. Thus, Collins should be considered.

However, after that, it all comes down to value. If Ballard and Eberflus think Collins is worth $9MM/year to them and he signs somewhere for $12MM, then they'll address the position in another manner.

[YDFL Commish]

1) The Giants thought enough of Collins to make him a co-captain of the defense. This is strictly a decision from the GM, who I might point out drafted a RB in the top 10 each of the last two years and ignored the QB position in favor of Eli Manning last draft. I don't give their hesitancy to extend Collins any credibility.

#2 and #3 really play together, so I'll address them that way. You have to view this through the prism of the Colts scheme. After pass rusher, a slashing SS is the biggest need on this defense. Collins is a perfect fit in that regard and there isn't a pass rusher available who justifies a premium investment. Thus, Collins should be considered.

However, after that, it all comes down to value. If Ballard and Eberflus think Collins is worth $9MM/year to them and he signs somewhere for $12MM, then they'll address the position in another manner.

Collins is getting a minimum of $12MM no matter where he signs.

[VeveJones007]

Collins is getting a minimum of $12MM no matter where he signs.

I think so, but there's a possibility that his deficiencies keep some teams from pursuing him. Those drawbacks to his game aren't as big of a factor in the Colts scheme.

Anyway, my broader point is that the Colts should consider Collins. If the market is too high for them to justify, so be it. They've earned some trust over the past year.

[Butter]

In other news, Brad Wells is still a retard:

@BradWellsNFL
Tweeting this late, but I do agree with many of you followers that Landon Collins would be great in Indy. However, signing Collins to a huge deal would be Ballard admitting that Malik Hooker isn’t the answer at safety. I don’t see him doing that.

Holy shit, I always knew Wells was stupid, but he clearly has no understanding of football at all. Hooker and Collins really do not play the same position at all.

[Chromeburn]

He and Amos are very close for me. I'd rate Amos lower, but also expect he'll sign for significantly less (say $9-10m vs $12-13m AAV).

I would be ok with Amos. He can lay the wood and play deep safety. He is a different kind of safety than Collins though and can play more deep coverage. If they went after Amos instead of Collins that would tell me they expect more coverage out of the position and less in the box run defense. Depends what kind of 4-3 we are emulating, something like the Seattle defense, or something like the Cowboys or old Bucs.

[Dam8610]

Holy shit, I always knew Wells was stupid, but he clearly has no understanding of football at all. Hooker and Collins really do not play the same position at all.

Exactly. FREE safety and STRONG safety are two distinct positions, especially in this defense. Much like Earl Thomas and Kam Chancellor played two completely different positions, Landon Collins would play a completely different position than Malik Hooker. Hopefully the latter duo turns out as well as the former if the Colts sign Collins.

[Chromeburn]

Exactly. FREE safety and STRONG safety are two distinct positions, especially in this defense. Much like Earl Thomas and Kam Chancellor played two completely different positions, Landon Collins would play a completely different position than Malik Hooker. Hopefully the latter duo turns out as well as the former if the Colts sign Collins.

Wells was arguing that safety positions are indistinguishable from each other in their responsibilities now. But that isn't quite the case with our D. Which he should know. Sometimes they do mix it up with Hooker and Geathers, but most of the time they wanted Hooker to play the deep defense.

[Chromeburn]

Funny, because 90% of Well's stance is PFF stats,..Yet PFF rated Hooker VERY high last year...you don't see him posting that all over twitter...lol

He is just a weird dude. Even going back to his stampede blue days. He would get in these weird arguments with fans all the time. Guy is just a strange angry ginger.

[VeveJones007]

I would be ok with Amos. He can lay the wood and play deep safety. He is a different kind of safety than Collins though and can play more deep coverage. If they went after Amos instead of Collins that would tell me they expect more coverage out of the position and less in the box run defense. Depends what kind of 4-3 we are emulating, something like the Seattle defense, or something like the Cowboys or old Bucs.

Don’t forget the importance of open field tackling on short passes. Consistently taking away those yards will make QB hold the ball longer and give the pass rush more time.

[Chromeburn]

Don’t forget the importance of open field tackling on short passes. Consistently taking away those yards will make QB hold the ball longer and give the pass rush more time.

Collins is by far the better tackler. Guy is a machine. PFF even wrote an article saying he should be moved to linebacker.

[Puck]

Erickson chimes in (https://www.indystar.com/story/sports/nfl/colts/2019/03/05/landon-collins-indianapolis-colts-chris-ballard-bob-sanders-clayton-geathers/3066884002/).


Originally Posted by omahacolt
I have no issue bringing in Collins if Ballard thinks he is an upgrade. Safety isn’t a top need like Puck thinks.


Apparently I’m on to something

[Chaka]

1) The Giants thought enough of Collins to make him a co-captain of the defense. This is strictly a decision from the GM, who I might point out drafted a RB in the top 10 each of the last two years and ignored the QB position in favor of Eli Manning last draft. I don't give their hesitancy to extend Collins any credibility.

#2 and #3 really play together, so I'll address them that way. You have to view this through the prism of the Colts scheme. After pass rusher, a slashing SS is the biggest need on this defense. Collins is a perfect fit in that regard and there isn't a pass rusher available who justifies a premium investment. Thus, Collins should be considered.

However, after that, it all comes down to value. If Ballard and Eberflus think Collins is worth $9MM/year to them and he signs somewhere for $12MM, then they'll address the position in another manner.

Thank you. As far as your first point is concerned, to be fair the RBs Gettleman drafted (Saquon Barkley and Christian McCaffrey) have worked out pretty well, so it's hard to fault him for those picks - particularly if he wasn't enamored with any of the available QBs in last year's draft. If the guy was making wild picks and reaching for players instead of taking obvious upgrades, then I'd place less weight in his decision making. So while I don't question that you're right that this decision comes from the GM, it doesn't really address my original question of whether the decision he made (not to tag Collins) causes any concern. From what I've read (and admittedly it's a fairly small amount of info - I knew next to nothing about Gettlemen until this thread was created), the guy isn't afraid to make unpopular decisions, but they are often proven right in retrospect. So I remain concerned about this.

As far as the importance of the safety position in our defense, I'll defer to you and others who are more knowledgeable than me about the X's and O's. I can accept that a good SS may be more valuable to us than to other teams, but that should mean that the other teams won't be willing to pay top dollar for him, and we should be able to get him more cheaply. Ultimately, it's really a question of how much to pay, rather than whether to sign him. Here's an article I came across when looking up Gettleman info which makes the observation that 7 of 8 best paid safeties are free safeties and that strong safeties are usually paid much less:

https://www.bigblueview.com/2019/3/6/18252608/ny-giants-trying-to-make-sense-of-the-landon-collins-decision-dave-gettleman

So by paying Collins as one of the best paid safeties in the league, we'd be shattering precedent more than most realize. It bears noting that this sort of thing worked out pretty well when we drafted Nelson, of course.

[Dam8610]

Thank you. As far as your first point is concerned, to be fair the RBs Gettleman drafted (Saquon Barkley and Christian McCaffrey) have worked out pretty well, so it's hard to fault him for those picks - particularly if he wasn't enamored with any of the available QBs in last year's draft. If the guy was making wild picks and reaching for players instead of taking obvious upgrades, then I'd place less weight in his decision making. So while I don't question that you're right that this decision comes from the GM, it doesn't really address my original question of whether the decision he made (not to tag Collins) causes any concern. From what I've read (and admittedly it's a fairly small amount of info - I knew next to nothing about Gettlemen until this thread was created), the guy isn't afraid to make unpopular decisions, but they are often proven right in retrospect. So I remain concerned about this.

As far as the importance of the safety position in our defense, I'll defer to you and others who are more knowledgeable than me about the X's and O's. I can accept that a good SS may be more valuable to us than to other teams, but that should mean that the other teams won't be willing to pay top dollar for him, and we should be able to get him more cheaply. Ultimately, it's really a question of how much to pay, rather than whether to sign him. Here's an article I came across when looking up Gettleman info which makes the observation that 7 of 8 best paid safeties are free safeties and that strong safeties are usually paid much less:

https://www.bigblueview.com/2019/3/6/18252608/ny-giants-trying-to-make-sense-of-the-landon-collins-decision-dave-gettleman

So by paying Collins as one of the best paid safeties in the league, we'd be shattering precedent more than most realize. It bears noting that this sort of thing worked out pretty well when we drafted Nelson, of course.

Shattering precedent? The Colts made Bob Sanders one of the highest paid safeties in the NFL.

[Chaka]

Shattering precedent? The Colts made Bob Sanders one of the highest paid safeties in the NFL.

Wasn't that like 10-15 years ago? I was talking about current existing precedent, based upon the info in the article I linked which addressed the current status of safeties in the NFL.

Also, with regard to Sanders, though I can't recall the terms of that particular contract, I'm guessing there were lots of escape hatches in that agreement due to Sanders' extreme injury history, so whatever the contract amount was I doubt he ever received close to what was reported in the media.

[VeveJones007]

Thank you. As far as your first point is concerned, to be fair the RBs Gettleman drafted (Saquon Barkley and Christian McCaffrey) have worked out pretty well, so it's hard to fault him for those picks - particularly if he wasn't enamored with any of the available QBs in last year's draft. If the guy was making wild picks and reaching for players instead of taking obvious upgrades, then I'd place less weight in his decision making. So while I don't question that you're right that this decision comes from the GM, it doesn't really address my original question of whether the decision he made (not to tag Collins) causes any concern. From what I've read (and admittedly it's a fairly small amount of info - I knew next to nothing about Gettlemen until this thread was created), the guy isn't afraid to make unpopular decisions, but they are often proven right in retrospect. So I remain concerned about this.

As far as the importance of the safety position in our defense, I'll defer to you and others who are more knowledgeable than me about the X's and O's. I can accept that a good SS may be more valuable to us than to other teams, but that should mean that the other teams won't be willing to pay top dollar for him, and we should be able to get him more cheaply. Ultimately, it's really a question of how much to pay, rather than whether to sign him. Here's an article I came across when looking up Gettleman info which makes the observation that 7 of 8 best paid safeties are free safeties and that strong safeties are usually paid much less:

https://www.bigblueview.com/2019/3/6/18252608/ny-giants-trying-to-make-sense-of-the-landon-collins-decision-dave-gettleman

So by paying Collins as one of the best paid safeties in the league, we'd be shattering precedent more than most realize. It bears noting that this sort of thing worked out pretty well when we drafted Nelson, of course.

The Giants are a dumpster fire and Gettleman's decisions over the last year are a big part of the reason why. If you're looking at decisions that have worked for him, try taking a look at that Nate Solder contract. There are also reports that Gettleman passed on a future 1st round pick offered last year for Collins. Simply letting him walk isn't justifiable.

I don't know what value Ballard will place on Collins. Maybe Ballard sees him as an $8-10MM/year player and won't overpay. Maybe the market is a little more suppressed and the Colts get him at a relative discount.

[rcubed]

Shattering precedent? The Colts made Bob Sanders one of the highest paid safeties in the NFL.
technically there is a highest paid player at every position, every year.

[smitty46953]

updated list of safeties on the market... :cool:

Lamarcus Joyner
Tyrann Mathieu
Landon Collins
Tre Boston
Earl Thomas
Jonathan Cyprien
Tashaun Gipson
Adrian Amos
Ha Ha Clinton-Dix
Eric Weddle
Glover Quin
Jimmie Ward
Darian Stewart

[sherck]

updated list of safeties on the market... :cool:

Lamarcus Joyner
Tyrann Mathieu
Landon Collins
Tre Boston
Earl Thomas
Jonathan Cyprien
Tashaun Gipson
Adrian Amos
Ha Ha Clinton-Dix
Eric Weddle
Glover Quin
Jimmie Ward
Darian Stewart
Plus our own Clayton Geathers!

There are a huge number of quality safeties hitting the free agency market next week. I have zero double that Ballard will end up with what he wants out of the process to pair alongside Hooker as starters and for quality depth. He has all the tools needed between free agency and the draft to make the position group deep and good.

Go get 'em, Ballard! :)

Walk Worthy,

[VeveJones007]

updated list of safeties on the market... :cool:

Lamarcus Joyner
Tyrann Mathieu
Landon Collins
Tre Boston
Earl Thomas
Jonathan Cyprien
Tashaun Gipson
Adrian Amos
Ha Ha Clinton-Dix
Eric Weddle
Glover Quin
Jimmie Ward
Darian Stewart

Ballard has said that he has a better feel for the type of player the coaches want for their schemes. I think a big portion of this decision comes down to Eberflus’s assessment of the type of SS he wants.

[jasperhobbs]

Weddle is now a ram

[smitty46953]

Cardinals just cut Antoine Bethea. :cool:

[Racehorse]

updated list of safeties on the market... :cool:

Lamarcus Joyner
Tyrann Mathieu
Landon Collins
Tre Boston
Earl Thomas
Jonathan Cyprien
Tashaun Gipson
Adrian Amos
Ha Ha Clinton-Dix
Eric Weddle
Glover Quin
Jimmie Ward
Darian Stewart

With that number, wouldn't this drive the prices down a bit?

[VeveJones007]

With that number, wouldn't this drive the prices down a bit?

Maybe, but remember that some of these guys are scheme-specific, so the number of fits per team will vary.

[JAFF]

Cardinals just cut Antoine Bethea. :cool:

Sign him and let him retire a Colt

[Dam8610]

With that number, wouldn't this drive the prices down a bit?

Not for Collins. Maybe for Amos.

[Chromeburn]

Sign him and let him retire a Colt

He had 100 tackles for them last year. He might actually be able to still play.

[Chromeburn]

With that number, wouldn't this drive the prices down a bit?

Collins is probably considered cream of the crop. 25 years old, 1 team all pro, 3 time pro bowler, good tackler, team captain, great character. He will likely set the market. Depends on scheme fit also as well.

[Coltsalr]

Rap seems to indicate the Colts are in on Landon Collins:

https://twitter.com/rapsheet/status/1104830898502021120?s=21

[Dewey 5]

Rap seems to indicate the Colts are in on Landon Collins:

https://twitter.com/rapsheet/status/1104830898502021120?s=21

I hope so. I really want this guy. That also means we probably won't get him. I think KC making moves is because they want him as well. Plus Spags is his former DC.

[VeveJones007]

Matt Bowen wrote an article on scheme fits for free agents and picked the Colts for Collins. That's an opinion I really trust.

[Chaka]

The Giants are a dumpster fire and Gettleman's decisions over the last year are a big part of the reason why. If you're looking at decisions that have worked for him, try taking a look at that Nate Solder contract. There are also reports that Gettleman passed on a future 1st round pick offered last year for Collins. Simply letting him walk isn't justifiable.

I don't know what value Ballard will place on Collins. Maybe Ballard sees him as an $8-10MM/year player and won't overpay. Maybe the market is a little more suppressed and the Colts get him at a relative discount.

Look, I'm not going to pretend to know a whole lot about Gettleman other than what I read and referred to previously. I agree the Solder contract looks pretty aggressive and a typical high profile free agent signing, exactly the kind of thing I spoke about earlier and what I worry about if the Colts were to chase Landon Collins and sign him to a record-setting contract. Solder probably got the Giants fanbase excited at the time, but now they are not so thrilled about it.

As far as passing on a 1st rounder for Collins, I can't find a reference to that and it's plainly inconsistent with the theory that he devalues DBs - so I question whether it actually happened (I realize you said there were only "reports" of this, and did not definitively say that it happened either).

[smitty46953]

Ian Rapoport‏Verified account @RapSheet

Source: The #Vikings are not exercising the option on starting S Andrew Sendejo, making him a free agent. Another talented safety in the mix before free agency.

Add another Safety to the list :cool:

[rm1369]

Ian Rapoport‏Verified account @RapSheet

Source: The #Vikings are not exercising the option on starting S Andrew Sendejo, making him a free agent. Another talented safety in the mix before free agency.

Add another Safety to the list :cool:

Hopefully Ballard upgrades SS and overall depth at safety in free agency and saves the draft picks for other areas.

[smitty46953]

josinaanderson‏Verified account @JosinaAnderson

Landon Collins just told me he will go to the #Skins.

:cool:

[VeveJones007]

josinaanderson‏Verified account @JosinaAnderson

Landon Collins just told me he will go to the #Skins.

:cool:

Sources: Former #Giants star S Landon Collins is signing a 6-year deal for a whopping $84M with the rival #Redskins. Hard to imagine a box safety with this kind of deal after last year’s slow safety market. This moves the market dramatically.

I like Collins, but I also can't fault Ballard for not going completely bat-shit crazy like that. I'm interested if this moves the pricetag up for Amos as well.

[smitty46953]

I like Collins, but I also can't fault Ballard for not going completely bat-shit crazy like that.


Ian Rapoport‏Verified account @RapSheet

Sources: Former #Giants star S Landon Collins is signing a 6-year deal for a whopping $84M with the rival #Redskins. Hard to imagine a box safety with this kind of deal after last year’s slow safety market. This moves the market dramatically. :cool:

[VeveJones007]

Ian Rapoport‏Verified account @RapSheet

Sources: Former #Giants star S Landon Collins is signing a 6-year deal for a whopping $84M with the rival #Redskins. Hard to imagine a box safety with this kind of deal after last year’s slow safety market. This moves the market dramatically. :cool:

$45MM guaranteed! And we were throwing around numbers like 5/60/30!

[smitty46953]

$45MM guaranteed! And we were throwing around numbers like 5/60/30!

Can't blame the guy his grandkids are set for life :cool:

[Coltsalr]

Do or die on signing Adrian Amos now, I guess.

[Chaka]

Wow, the Redskins and the Raiders spending money like drunken sailors on leave. Who would have ever thunk it?

[VeveJones007]

Can't blame the guy his grandkids are set for life :cool:

Yep, good day for him and his...and potentially other safeties. Amos would be another really good fit for the Colts, but that's still probably too much for a SS even at 80% of Collins cost.

[VeveJones007]

Do or die on signing Adrian Amos now, I guess.

No. This draft has some excellent SS prospects.

[Butter]

Ian Rapoport‏Verified account @RapSheet

Sources: Former #Giants star S Landon Collins is signing a 6-year deal for a whopping $84M with the rival #Redskins. Hard to imagine a box safety with this kind of deal after last year’s slow safety market. This moves the market dramatically. :cool:

I am comfortable with not paying that.

[Oldcolt]

With all the free agents and available draft picks we will be fine at safety.

[FatDT]

Collins is great but those are bonkerkong numbers. The Redskins' stupidity is so bad it actually hurts other teams.

[Chaka]

Collins is great but those are bonkerkong numbers. The Redskins' stupidity is so bad it actually hurts other teams.

I look at it this way: its a strategy game, and if you can get your opponent to overspend on a player, it serves to reduce their ability to do other things, and in the end it actually plays to the benefit of the teams who spend more wisely. Your opponent eventually collapses under the weight of all of the bad contracts they enter into. I only regret that it wasn't JAX, HOU or TEN that signed him at these numbers.

[FatDT]

I look at it this way: its a strategy game, and if you can get your opponent to overspend on a player, it serves to reduce their ability to do other things, and in the end it actually plays to the benefit of the teams who spend more wisely. Your opponent eventually collapses under the weight of all of the bad contracts they enter into.

That might be true of an actual threatening team but the Redskins put themselves into irrelevant obscurity years ago. Spending money frivolously is all Snyder is good at.

[Chaka]

That might be true of an actual threatening team but the Redskins put themselves into irrelevant obscurity years ago. Spending money frivolously is all Snyder is good at.

Yep - fair point.

[Chaka]

Just mentioned this in the free agency thread, but its interesting to note that all of the signings thus far have been by non-playoff teams. Perhaps they tend to be the teams with more cap space, but I think it also says something that the "smart" teams have remained on the sidelines to this point.

[VeveJones007]

Just mentioned this in the free agency thread, but its interesting to note that all of the signings thus far have been by non-playoff teams. Perhaps they tend to be the teams with more cap space, but I think it also says something that the "smart" teams have remained on the sidelines to this point.

When you can't win during the season, you try to win during the offseason to increase your job security.

[Pez]

When you can't win during the season, you try to win during the offseason to increase your job security.

Probably a great deal of truth to that... "see, I'm fixing it... please don't fire me"

[rcubed]

yeah those numbers are a bit bonkers. i kinda assumed we would not spend the money on collins but was hoping his deal would not drive up the prices on other safeties. guess we will see...

[albany ed]

If a safety with weak pass coverage skills can get this kind of money, I think Bell may get a ton from the Jets.

[VeveJones007]

yeah those numbers are a bit bonkers. i kinda assumed we would not spend the money on collins but was hoping his deal would not drive up the prices on other safeties. guess we will see...

Vaccaro just went from a $1.5MM 1 year deal to 4/$26MM. The market is robust for safeties. Maybe Amos comes in closer to what we thought for Collins (5/$60MM/$30MM), or maybe he gets even more.

[smitty46953]

If a safety with weak pass coverage skills can get this kind of money, I think Bell may get a ton from the Jets.

Yep, I agree

#SpendThat$$$ :cool:

[Chromeburn]

If a safety with weak pass coverage skills can get this kind of money, I think Bell may get a ton from the Jets.

I wonder what Earl Thomas is thinking. He may try to surpass that, but he won't get the same length in his contract.

I think we are going after Smith and maybe Williams. I don't know if we put that amount in safety. Might just resign Geathers and draft a guy to take over in a year or two. Maybe faster if Geathers keeps getting hurt.

[VeveJones007]

It’s behind a paywall, but Holder says the Colts were involved with Collins until the price tag got outrageous.

[1965southpaw]

It’s behind a paywall, but Holder says the Colts were involved with Collins until the price tag got outrageous.

I just heard Holder on JMV. He said his sources tell him that Ballard did make an offer to Collins and it was significantly lower than what the Redskins signed him for. He also said they were involved in the Amos market. Again, Ballard doing what he said he'd do.....assign a value and stay disciplined.

[VeveJones007]

I just heard Holder on JMV. He said his sources tell him that Ballard did make an offer to Collins and it was significantly lower than what the Redskins signed him for. He also said they were involved in the Amos market. Again, Ballard doing what he said he'd do.....assign a value and stay disciplined.

I'd be willing to bet all other offers to Collins were "significantly lower than what the Redskins signed him for." That contract is stupid money.

[JAFF]

I just heard Holder on JMV. He said his sources tell him that Ballard did make an offer to Collins and it was significantly lower than what the Redskins signed him for. He also said they were involved in the Amos market. Again, Ballard doing what he said he'd do.....assign a value and stay disciplined.

The Redskins have sucked for as long as Synder has been their owner. He throws money around and hasn't sniffed more than .500 in his tenure. If the Skins are outspending anyone else, it's a bad deal

[Luck4Reich]

I'd be willing to bet all other offers to Collins were "significantly lower than what the Redskins signed him for." That contract is stupid money.

Yet Redskins will still suck ass...

You go there to make money.. not win

[VeveJones007]

Yet Redskins will still suck ass...

You go there to make money.. not win

And I don't hold that against Collins one bit. He probably got $20MM more than any other offer. I wouldn't be able to look my wife in the eye if I passed up that kind of financial opportunity.

[Spike]

I'd be willing to bet all other offers to Collins were "significantly lower than what the Redskins signed him for." That contract is stupid money.

I'll say it again, Snyder and Allen are fucking dumb asses.

[Chromeburn]

What really pisses me off about the whole thing is we could have drafted the guy. We had a need and he fit great. Fans wanted him, media was picking him in mocks. Everything seemed to align. Then big sweaty takes a receiver. I’m sure he would have been resigned and not hit the market. Sucks.

[Luck4Reich]

What really pisses me off about the whole thing is we could have drafted the guy. We had a need and he fit great. Fans wanted him, media was picking him in mocks. Everything seemed to align. Then big sweaty takes a receiver. I’m sure he would have been resigned and not hit the market. Sucks.

Now I'm pissed off all over again. Lol

[Coltsalr]

What really pisses me off about the whole thing is we could have drafted the guy. We had a need and he fit great. Fans wanted him, media was picking him in mocks. Everything seemed to align. Then big sweaty takes a receiver. I’m sure he would have been resigned and not hit the market. Sucks.

Now I'm pissed off all over again. Lol

If you’re looking for some real fun, revisit the thread from when Dorsett got drafted (I for the record was saying that I hoped Dorsett’s arrival would get Cribbs off the team not Josh Gordon like I said there):

http://coltfreaks.com/phpbb/viewtopic.php?f=4&t=1699

[Luck4Reich]

If you’re looking for some real fun, revisit the thread from when Dorsett got drafted (I for the record was saying that I hoped Dorsett’s arrival would get Cribbs off the team not Josh Gordon like I said there):

http://coltfreaks.com/phpbb/viewtopic.php?f=4&t=1699

Haha nobody liked that pick... funny reading our own comments.

[Luck4Reich]

I seriously wonder wtf Grigson was thinking there? He could have addressed a lot of needs and had the options. Phillip effing Dorsett. Lmao!

[VeveJones007]

If you’re looking for some real fun, revisit the thread from when Dorsett got drafted (I for the record was saying that I hoped Dorsett’s arrival would get Cribbs off the team not Josh Gordon like I said there):

http://coltfreaks.com/phpbb/viewtopic.php?f=4&t=1699

I'll probably re-up that thread as well when I dunk on people after Funchess has a good year.

[Coltsalr]

I'll probably re-up that thread as well when I dunk on people after Funchess has a good year.

The problem is is that if I’m right about Funchess then I’ll look like a douche for bumping the thread C&O-style next year.

If you do it then nobody will be happier than me to be wrong.

[VeveJones007]

The problem is is that if I’m right about Funchess then I’ll look like a douche for bumping the thread C&O-style next year.

If you do it then nobody will be happier than me to be wrong.

I already gave C&O permission to bump my posts in the Funchess thread, so I'm counting on him to come through.

If you're right, I won't hold it against you. Part of being a fan is irrationally choosing which mountain to die on. I went hard against the Dorsett pick and I was right. I'm going hard again with Funchess, but we'll see how it looks. I just think Reich will try to magnify his strengths and steer away from his weaknesses like he did with Ebron.

[Chromeburn]

Haha nobody liked that pick... funny reading our own comments.

Ehh I actually tried defending him. Cringe. I liked Dorsett, just not as a number 1 pick, I did want Collins. I liked him as a second rounder. Was really wrong on him, why I put more emphasis on route running now.

I watched Dorsett play in the Miami FSU game and he was amazing. Funny thing is, I think the pats really would have taken him in round 1 that year.

[FatDT]

I just read that the Redskins did not bother consulting HC Jay Gruden before signing Collins to that deal. That he heard about it on TV. What a POS organization.

[Chromeburn]

I just read that the Redskins did not bother consulting HC Jay Gruden before signing Collins to that deal. That he heard about it on TV. What a POS organization.

Wow! Hotseat? That deal was crazy.

[Luck4Reich]

Ehh I actually tried defending him. Cringe. I liked Dorsett, just not as a number 1 pick, I did want Collins. I liked him as a second rounder. Was really wrong on him, why I put more emphasis on route running now.

I watched Dorsett play in the Miami FSU game and he was amazing. Funny thing is, I think the pats really would have taken him in round 1 that year.

Yeah... do you think Grigson caught wind of that possibility and took him thinking he got a player and screwed the Pat's at the same time? Only to screw the Colts.:confused:

[Chromeburn]

Yeah... do you think Grigson caught wind of that possibility and took him thinking he got a player and screwed the Pat's at the same time? Only to screw the Colts.:confused:

I think he knew. I think it might have been a bigger factor than it should have been. He really did not like the pats and I think he was the driving factor behind deflate gate. Not that I blame him, every one knows they cheat. But it shouldn’t influence our draft picks. Defense was a much bigger need. If they needed less pressure on Hilton, they should have worked on Moncrief’s game more.