Colts signing Justin Houston

[Voosh]

Adam Schefter
‏Verified account @AdamSchefter
2m2 minutes ago

Colts reached agreement with former Chiefs’ LB Justin Houston, source tells ESPN.

[Voosh]

Adam Schefter
‏Verified account @AdamSchefter
3m3 minutes ago

Adam Schefter Retweeted Adam Schefter

Colts are giving Justin Houston a two-year, $24 million contract, per source.

[Coltsalr]

Ballard lives!!!!!

[Indiana V2]

I kind of expected this to happen, good to see we got him.

[GoBigBlue88]

I was a little miffed Colts weren't in on Ford, but this mitigates it completely. Ballard is killing this offseason.

[Maniac]

Whew. Ballard did something! :D

[Coltsalr]

I was a little miffed Colts weren't in on Ford, but this mitigates it completely. Ballard is killing this offseason.

Funny story about that, apparently Ballard thought about it:

https://twitter.com/adamschefter/status/1108823629389803520?s=21
Colts inquired about trading for former Chiefs’ LB Dee Ford; ultimately held on to draft-pick compensation and instead opted to sign former Chiefs’ LB Justin Houston.


I’m honestly floored to hear that Ballard even considered it. Maybe he isn’t as conservative as we all think he is.

[Oldcolt]

I'm almost giddy with how competent this administration seems to be

[Hoopsdoc]

Outstanding!! Now, to keep him healthy.

[Hoopsdoc]

I was a little miffed Colts weren't in on Ford, but this mitigates it completely. Ballard is killing this offseason.

I agree. Loving the way he operates. He’s the anti-Grigson.

[Chaka]

I won't deny that in my heart I'm a little excited by this signing, but my brain is telling me not to get TOO excited about signing an oft-injured 30-year old pass rusher who was just jettisoned by his team. Not a typical Ballard-type signing, at least based on his short time in Indy, though he undoubtedly has insight into Houston from his time in KC so that provides some additional comfort. I'll be interested to see the contract details.

Incidentally, here's a 2015 article someone on Stampede Blue posted regarding the surprising effectiveness of pass rushers in their early 30's, though the then-30 year old subject of the article (Mario Williams) didn't exactly live up to the premise of the article:

https://www.cbssports.com/nfl/news/sacking-father-time-elite-pass-rushers-productive-into-their-30s/

[Coltsalr]

Great deep dive analysis article from The Athletic on Justin Houston:


Every​ list of difficult offseason questions for​ the​ Kansas​ City Chiefs​ begins​ with what they should​ do​ with Justin Houston.​​

Ever since Houston received a massive contract following his outstanding 2014 season, he has been under more intense scrutiny than any player in Kansas City besides the quarterback. After a brutal knee injury in 2015 affected him well into 2016, fans began to question the wisdom of Houston’s deal. He was healthy in 2017 and played at a high level, but the questions did not go away.

Now the Chiefs face a dilemma in 2019 with Houston set to cost $21.1 million against the cap. Kansas City could save $14 million by cutting the pass rusher. As such, there are quite a few calls for the Chiefs to do just that, adding with the argument the fact that Houston missed multiple games with a hamstring injury last season.

Any decision about Houston should start with a simple question: How good a player is he now? To determine this, box-score analysis is close to useless. Instead, it’s necessary to examine every snap and look at what Houston did, charting wins/losses and neutral plays as well as stuffs, effective double-teams, chips drawn and pressures/hits/sacks. For a more detailed explanation on those terms, click here. Because we’ve reviewed Houston’s film previously in this manner, we can compare his 2018 numbers to his 2017 numbers and determine whether he’s trending downward. We can also compare him to fellow pass rusher Dee Ford, another important contract decision the Chiefs must make this offseason.

Notes: “Chips” were a new addition this year, as it seemed relevant to count how often teams used a running back or tight end to help with Houston. Additionally, it’s worth mentioning that “losses” for defensive players are going to outnumber “wins” almost every time. That’s simply the nature of their roles.

One of the first takeaways from Houston’s numbers this season is that his win rate remains very high. In fact, it was higher than his 2017 season and significantly higher than Ford’s was in 2018. This goes against the now-prevalent narrative that Houston is no longer an impact player or has lost his effectiveness. While there’s an argument that Houston received less attention from defenses this year, an examination of the number of chips and double teams he drew show that he still received plenty of extra attention from teams.

The reality is Houston continues to be an extremely good pass rusher and an effective run defender. Perhaps the best example of this came against the Los Angeles Rams, arguably the toughest matchup the Chiefs’ edge rushers faced this season. The Rams sent multiple blockers after Houston throughout the day, and his primary opponent, Andrew Whitworth, is one of the better left tackles in football. Despite this, Houston had a highly productive game.

Houston collected a sack, two hits and three pressures despite the difficult matchup, and it’s representative of what makes him so valuable: Tougher opponents don’t prevent him from making plays. This trait sets him apart from most pass rushers in that he isn’t dependent on beating up lesser opponents.

Houston has changed his pass-rush approach over the past year. Where he once was a combination of speed and power off the edge, he seems to have lost a step and no longer has the freakish athleticism he once did off the line. As a result, he has adapted to become a power/technique rusher. He wins in a variety of ways, starting with his favorite move: a combination of dip-and-rip and swat moves.

Houston usually initiates contact when rushing the passer, using his long arms to keep tackles from getting inside his pads. His favorite method of winning to the outside is to establish contact, then swat the tackle’s hands aside with one or both of his hands. He then dips his inside shoulder and transitions into a “rip” move around the corner.

Because of Houston’s combination of strength, technique and functional bend around the corner, this is a tough move for opponents to stop. And while Houston, as noted earlier, is a step slower than he was at his peak, he still possesses solid athleticism and is capable of cornering quite quickly.

Houston uses some combination of the swat/dip/rip frequently, varying the timing of the move based on how the blocker sets up. It’s effective on its own, but it’s made even tougher because Houston uses a variety of other moves to complement these. One of those is a modified bull rush in which Houston starts off with power then converts into an inside rush toward the quarterback.

Houston starts this move as though he’s going to use a traditional bull rush to power the blocker straight into the quarterback. However, he’s not trying to go that direction, instead moving the tackle backward to provide a lane to move inside. This is highly effective in combination with Houston’s outside swat/dip/rip in that if a tackle sets up for the outside move, he’s vulnerable to being moved backward. Additionally, Houston can use a more traditional bull rush to push the blocker right into the quarterback rather than straight backward, so the tackle never knows what direction he’ll be fighting.

Pass-rushing with a plan defines what Houston does, and he can be seen altering his approach throughout games with a plethora of moves. Even in the course of one snap, he’ll transition from one move to another to gain the advantage.

On this play, Houston starts off with an attempted double-handed slap in an apparent outside rush. However, even as the tackle attempts to adjust his set to get deep, Houston converts to a long-arm move to take advantage of the blocker’s momentum and shoves him off-balance. This provides an open path to the quarterback.

At times, when other moves fail, Houston will use his unnatural strength to simply throw offensive linemen to the side with an impressive push-pull.

Houston’s unique power and veteran savvy makes him a very difficult matchup once he has engaged the blocker. He varies his moves so consistently that there’s no one way to play him, and it shows over the course of a game. In many games, Houston would win more often against tackles as the game moved along, taking advantage of blockers’ attempting to “read” him as a rusher and anticipate his moves. He uses a bull rush, dip-and-rip, long arm, double- and single-handed swat, a modified inside bull rush and a push-pull with frequency.

And just when a tackle begins to anticipate Houston initiating contact and using some sort of power move, he uses a quick inside juke to leave them blocking air.

There’s really no consistently “correct” way to block Houston. If a tackle sets up wide in preparation for a dip-and-rip, Houston will either bull rush or use his modified inside bull rush to quickly close the distance to the quarterback. If a tackle tries to initiate contact and lean on Houston, he’s subject to a push-pull or having his hands swatted aside as Houston moves around the edge. Houston’s varied ability also allows him to move around the line. Former defensive coordinator Bob Sutton had him rush from every conceivable gap in 2018, from wide-9 to just over the center, and he did it all well.

As a run defender, Houston continues to be solid, though he wasn’t as dominant as in years past. He’s very strong at the point of attack and is able to hold the edge against any blocker. He also sheds tackles and tight ends quickly when the run is in his direction.

Houston’s run defense has been so consistent that there really isn’t much to discuss. Teams don’t run at his edge as often as they run the other direction, which doesn’t give him a lot of opportunities to collect “wins” in that area. However, he’s consistently in the right position and often forces plays to go away from him even when they are designed his direction initially, which doesn’t show up in the stats sheet.

The run game, however, is also where it makes sense to start talking about Houston’s negatives. There was a time when he was flawless in this area. However, in 2018, he collected more losses against the run than in the past. It often wasn’t an issue of being overpowered at the point of attack or being driven off the ball. Rather, Houston had more times when he failed to diagnose the run and what direction it was going and found himself washed out of a play because of it.

While these failures weren’t often, mind you, they were higher than in previous seasons. Additionally, Houston wasn’t as capable as a pursuit defender as he was in years past given his lost step.

That lost step is worth discussing. Houston is certainly not a “slow” defender, but he’s slower than he used to be. He’s now a rather average athlete for an outside linebacker. (It’s a different story with him at defensive end, but there’s no way of knowing where new defensive coordinator Steve Spagnuolo will use him.) In particular, Houston’s change of direction in open space is not what it used to be.

Because Houston is no longer able to simply win with sheer athleticism, he has a difficult time when blockers are able to battle him to a stalemate in the hand-fighting contest or are strong enough to stand up against his power. This resulted in more snaps in which Houston was stonewalled than previous seasons, even though the number was still not very high.

Houston no longer being an elite athlete has also affected how quickly his wins as a pass rusher affect the quarterback. Because he’s often reliant on winning after making contact with a blocker, it takes him a split-second longer to generate pressure even on good snaps when compared to the much faster Ford. This is the biggest reason for the discrepancy between the two players in win percentage vs. sacks/hits/pressures.

Both Ford and Houston “win” on this play, but it happens differently. Ford blows by his blocker around the edge. Houston wins as well, but it’s after contact and through the result of his strength and balance. While Ford had the advantage of not having to worry about a potential chip — even when running backs do not actively chip, their presence forces rushers to alter their approach — the speed of his win is noticeably faster than Houston’s.

Houston’s lost step could be the reason his loss percentage increased this season. He historically has lost at a rate lower than virtually any other edge defender. While his loss percentage remains solid, it’s significantly higher than past seasons. Going from “elite” to “good” in loss percentage is a small step, but an important one that must be noted.

While the idea of Houston losing a step might be frightening to Chiefs fans, he remains a highly effective player who has adjusted to life past his prime years. Winning with strength and technique is something that will age nicely, and worked very well for him last season.

Of course, Houston being a very good player wasn’t much in question outside of a vocal minority. The problem remains his contract. Despite the fact that Houston is one of the top-10 edge defenders in the NFL, his contract is designed for a player who is more than that. “Very good” just isn’t enough when a player is set to cost $21.1 million against the cap.

This is the rock and a hard place Chiefs GM Brett Veach finds himself in with Houston, who is such a good player that replacing him would be quite difficult without signing a top-end free agent. Those players rarely hit the open market, and when they do, they’re generally signed to extremely high-end deals. On the other hand, paying a defensive player who is not Aaron Donald or Khalil Mack that much money is not sound cap management. Also to be taken into consideration: the new system the Chiefs will be utilizing and where Houston fits in it. He may be best off as a defensive end with his current skill set, but that’s Ford’s obvious fit as well.

There is no “easy answer” with Houston. He’s too good to cut, but too expensive to keep. It would have been simpler had his detractors been correct and his play had fallen off last season, but he remains good enough to be a cornerstone of the defense. As it stands, the Chiefs put themselves in a tough position if they keep Houston barring a restructuring of his deal. But they put themselves in a tough position if they move on as well. Whatever direction they go will likely set the stage for the rest of the offseason decisions the Chiefs must make.


https://theathletic.com/830517/2019/02/21/justin-houston-film-review-pass-rusher-expensive-to-keep-but-difficult-to-replace/

[rm1369]

This is a move I like. Improves an area of need, adds veteran experience, pushes the young guys to earn their snaps, and doesn’t hurt the long term cap situation. Good move.

[Maniac]

Great deep dive analysis article from The Athletic on Justin Houston:



https://theathletic.com/830517/2019/02/21/justin-houston-film-review-pass-rusher-expensive-to-keep-but-difficult-to-replace/

Thanks, great article. I like that he has adjusted his game as he lost a bit of his speed to keep himself effective. Good signing.

[Luck4Reich]

This forum just picked up :D

[YDFL Commish]

Houston may prove me wrong and I hope he does. A couple of things in his favor are he probably won't have to play as many snaps in Indy and playing on the carpet for more than 50% of his games.

[Dam8610]

Ballard seems smart enough to recognize this as the stopgap it is. I expect if a good pass rusher somehow is available at 26, the Colts will take him. This is way better than signing Za'darius Smith for 4/66 or Preston Smith for 4/52.

[rcubed]

Funny story about that, apparently Ballard thought about it:

https://twitter.com/adamschefter/status/1108823629389803520?s=21
Colts inquired about trading for former Chiefs’ LB Dee Ford; ultimately held on to draft-pick compensation and instead opted to sign former Chiefs’ LB Justin Houston.


I’m honestly floored to hear that Ballard even considered it. Maybe he isn’t as conservative as we all think he is.
See I disagree with that statement. I don’t think Ballard is super conservative he just has a plan and sticks to it. I think he looks at all the options and the cost that goes along with making that decision and does whats in the best interest for the club

[Dam8610]

Houston may prove me wrong and I hope he does. A couple of things in his favor are he probably won't have to play as many snaps in Indy and playing on the carpet for more than 50% of his games.

Yes, but what about his 3 cone?

[Chromeburn]

Funny story about that, apparently Ballard thought about it:

https://twitter.com/adamschefter/status/1108823629389803520?s=21
Colts inquired about trading for former Chiefs’ LB Dee Ford; ultimately held on to draft-pick compensation and instead opted to sign former Chiefs’ LB Justin Houston.


I’m honestly floored to hear that Ballard even considered it. Maybe he isn’t as conservative as we all think he is.

I think that was a good decision. I’m not sold on Ford.

[VeveJones007]

Houston may prove me wrong and I hope he does. A couple of things in his favor are he probably won't have to play as many snaps in Indy and playing on the carpet for more than 50% of his games.

Low risk, potential high reward. The kind of smart move well run organizations make.

I’m not counting on a ton due to his recent injury history, but this is basically a one year deal. Ballard is rolling the dice in a smart gamble.

[YDFL Commish]

Yes, but what about his 3 cone?

Not a WR. Also, Polian is the one who said that the 3-cone was one of the few tests that he considered useful in evaluating a WR.

He said this at a time when he was discussing the drafting of Dallas Clark and how Clark had a 3-cone drill that was comparable to some of the better WR's.

Now, let's stop derailing this thread any further.

[Brylok]

Woo-hoo! I love this one! Helps in a position of need and will be a great influence on the young guys. 2 years/$24M isn't too bad, either

[Chromeburn]

I agree. Loving the way he operates. He’s the anti-Grigson.

Ahem Trent Cole. Let’s just hope he and Houston have little in common.

Still this is the kind of stuff I’m talking about. We have some funny money for a few years. Short term deal, if it works awesome. If it doesn’t, used up some short term available cap. That was just going to sit there anyway.

[VeveJones007]

Ballard seems smart enough to recognize this as the stopgap it is. I expect if a good pass rusher somehow is available at 26, the Colts will take him. This is way better than signing Za'darius Smith for 4/66 or Preston Smith for 4/52.

Agreed, but I’ll just add that perhaps Ballard doesn’t anticipate a Rd 1 grade pass rusher to be there. I wouldn’t be shocked to see him go a route like Taylor Rapp and Simmons at 26 and 34 now.

[GoBigBlue88]

I won't deny that in my heart I'm a little excited by this signing, but my brain is telling me not to get TOO excited about signing an oft-injured 30-year old pass rusher who was just jettisoned by his team. Not a typical Ballard-type signing, at least based on his short time in Indy, though he undoubtedly has insight into Houston from his time in KC so that provides some additional comfort. I'll be interested to see the contract details.

Incidentally, here's a 2015 article someone on Stampede Blue posted regarding the surprising effectiveness of pass rushers in their early 30's, though the then-30 year old subject of the article (Mario Williams) didn't exactly live up to the premise of the article:

https://www.cbssports.com/nfl/news/sacking-father-time-elite-pass-rushers-productive-into-their-30s/

I follow the logic, but I think he was booted because he's an OLB and was null in coverage for them. His pass-rush ability -- though more power than speed now -- is still ++++.

[Coltsalr]

Ahem Trent Cole. Let’s just hope he and Houston have little in common.

Still this is the kind of stuff I’m talking about. We have some funny money for a few years. Short term deal, if it works awesome. If it doesn’t, used up some short term available cap.

Justin Houston had WAY more in the tank last year than Trent Cole had his final year in Philly, when he was clearly in decline and Grigson still went hard after him.

The better comparison would’ve been had Grigson gone after Demarcus Ware instead (a guy that clearly isn’t 100% of what he once was but still able to be quite productive).

[GoBigBlue88]

Agreed, but I’ll just add that perhaps Ballard doesn’t anticipate a Rd 1 grade pass rusher to be there. I wouldn’t be shocked to see him go a route like Taylor Rapp and Simmons at 26 and 34 now.

I don't have many draft TAKES because I don't watch a TON of CFB. But 1 of the maybe 3 takes I have is that Jeffrey Simmons can be special. Just from combo of what I've heard and what little I've seen.

Would take Simmons at 26 in a heartbeat.

[Butter]

I follow the logic, but I think he was booted because he's an OLB and was null in coverage for them. His pass-rush ability -- though more power than speed now -- is still ++++.

KC is switching to a 4-3 I thought that is why they shipped Ford to SF and cut Houston.

[VeveJones007]

I don't have many draft TAKES because I don't watch a TON of CFB. But 1 of the maybe 3 takes I have is that Jeffrey Simmons can be special. Just from combo of what I've heard and what little I've seen.

Would take Simmons at 26 in a heartbeat.

And with an extra pick at 34 + 8 solid players already on the DL, Ballard has the luxury to take Simmons.

[VeveJones007]

KC is switching to a 4-3 I thought that is why they shipped Ford to SF and cut Houston.

That and they’re planning ahead for their cap charges on extensions for Hill and Maholmes. They can’t afford every one of their good players.

[Chromeburn]

Not a WR. Also, Polian is the one who said that the 3-cone was one of the few tests that he considered useful in evaluating a WR.

He said this at a time when he was discussing the drafting of Dallas Clark and how Clark had a 3-cone drill that was comparable to some of the better WR's.

Now, let's stop derailing this thread any further.

Polian has actually said it was also the one of the best tools for pass rushers also and he would not draft a guy below a certain time. Can’t remember what the time was though.

[smitty46953]

And with an extra pick at 34 + 8 solid players already on the DL, Ballard has the luxury to take Simmons.

I could definitely understand grabbing Simmons at 26. Just a gut feeling that Ballard will pick someone who can contribute this year at 26 & 34. :cool:

[Chaka]

KC is switching to a 4-3 I thought that is why they shipped Ford to SF and cut Houston.

Maybe, but the Colts would never have let a great pass rusher go just because they changed defenses. I mean, we had Dwight Freeney and – oh, wait…

[Butter]

Maybe, but the Colts would never have let a great pass rusher go just because they changed defenses. I mean, we had Dwight Freeney and – oh, wait…

I know, the parallel is strong there.

[Chaka]

I follow the logic, but I think he was booted because he's an OLB and was null in coverage for them. His pass-rush ability -- though more power than speed now -- is still ++++.

I'm glad to hear you say that. I want to like this signing, but I just get an uneasy feeling about it. If Washington had made this signing, would it deserve as much praise? I suppose I'll reserve judgment until I see the contract terms.

[Dam8610]

Ahem Trent Cole. Let’s just hope he and Houston have little in common.

Still this is the kind of stuff I’m talking about. We have some funny money for a few years. Short term deal, if it works awesome. If it doesn’t, used up some short term available cap. That was just going to sit there anyway.

This is a completely different situation. Cole was going into his age 33(!) season when Grigson signed him and had clearly run out of gas completely. Houston is going into his age 30 season, has been more productive than Cole, and has had 18.5 sacks in the last 2 seasons.

I don't have many draft TAKES because I don't watch a TON of CFB. But 1 of the maybe 3 takes I have is that Jeffrey Simmons can be special. Just from combo of what I've heard and what little I've seen.

Would take Simmons at 26 in a heartbeat.

Afraid the Raiders will get him at 27? I'd prefer to take him at 34, and I think he could end up having a Jaylon Smith or Myles Jack type of impact, both players who were selected early in round 2 despite being considered top 15 talents before knee injuries.

[Coltsalr]

And with an extra pick at 34 + 8 solid players already on the DL, Ballard has the luxury to take Simmons.

Also, with 8-10 month recovery time from ACL, Simmons could be back in November.

It’s not a foregone conclusion that he’d redshirt.

That said, with his past, I’m not sure he’s not off Ballard’s board entirely as a guy that “doesn’t fit the culture.”

[omahacolt]

I'm glad to hear you say that. I want to like this signing, but I just get an uneasy feeling about it. If Washington had made this signing, would it deserve as much praise? I suppose I'll reserve judgment until I see the contract terms.

Why the fuck do the contract terms matter at this point?

[JAFF]

I was a little miffed Colts weren't in on Ford, but this mitigates it completely. Ballard is killing this offseason.

Wasnt ballard part of the chiefs when they drafted ford?

[Dam8610]

Also, with 8-10 month recovery time from ACL, Simmons could be back in November.

It’s not a foregone conclusion that he’d redshirt.

That said, with his past, I’m not sure he’s not off Ballard’s board entirely as a guy that “doesn’t fit the culture.”

He was a model player at MSU after the high school incident. I don't think that will play as big of a factor as some think it will, because all of his coaches seem to give glowing reviews from a character perspective.

[JAFF]

Yes, but what about his 3 cone?

Kiling me smalls

[JAFF]

Polian has actually said it was also the one of the best tools for pass rushers also and he would not draft a guy below a certain time. Can’t remember what the time was though.

Its 8:55 pm

[JAFF]

Why the fuck do the contract terms matter at this point?


Exactly. Its all monopoly money.

[omahacolt]

Exactly. Its all monopoly money.

Shut up

[apballin]

Love this move

[YDFL Commish]

Kiling me smalls

Are you guys husband and wife?

[Chromeburn]

This is a completely different situation. Cole was going into his age 33(!) season when Grigson signed him and had clearly run out of gas completely. Houston is going into his age 30 season, has been more productive than Cole, and has had 18.5 sacks in the last 2 seasons.

Err pass rusher at the end of his career. Houston might have more in the tank. It is not like 33 is the cut off point for pass rushers. Age catches up to guys at different points.

I think it’s pretty low risk, he will get spot duty and should be effective. Might even show the young guys a few moves.

[YDFL Commish]

Err pass rusher at the end of his career. Houston might have more in the tank. It is not like 33 is the cut off point for pass rushers. Age catches up to guys at different points.

I think it’s pretty low risk, he will get spot duty and should be effective. Might even show the young guys a few moves.

And maybe Mathis can show him a few moves.

[Luck4Reich]

Err pass rusher at the end of his career. Houston might have more in the tank. It is not like 33 is the cut off point for pass rushers. Age catches up to guys at different points.

I think it’s pretty low risk, he will get spot duty and should be effective. Might even show the young guys a few moves.

He just turned 30 too. Not like he is turning 31 to start the season. I'm betting dude has plenty!

[Chromeburn]

He was a model player at MSU after the high school incident. I don't think that will play as big of a factor as some think it will, because all of his coaches seem to give glowing reviews from a character perspective.

It was before he even left for college. I’m ok with it. All the reports from college were glowing and he was a model player. At a certain point you have to forgive a kid for a mistake.

[DrSpaceman]

I was hoping for more free agent signings, but this one really helps.

Huge area of need.

Add in that this is supposed to be a huge draft class for pass rushers and the Colts can really upgrade that area of the team this offseason between this signing and the draft and not spend huge money for the future doing it.

[Thorgrim]

My respect for Ballard continues to climb. Even more excited about the draft now.

[rcubed]

Wasnt ballard part of the chiefs when they drafted ford?
What is your point? Ballard wasn't gm in KC.

[Indiana V2]

What is your point? Ballard wasn't gm in KC.

He still could have had input on drafting Ford though, the GM doesn't do everything by themselves.

[ukcolt]

So the defensive linemen that we now have are:
Houston, Sheard, Autry and Hunt, that's probably our starting 4 right now. Then we have Turay, Muhammad, Lewis and Ward as the likely next guys up at each position, with Stewart and Ridgeway as our 9th and 10th guys.

We are talking about bringing in yet more additions via the draft at the edge and interior spots, we are going to be cutting some guys who have had some serious playing time in the league. My guess is that both Stewart and Ridgeway are looking doubtful to make the final roster with Muhammad and Ward also possibly struggling to make it. A good position to be in, but could we possibly be in a position where we are looking to trade some of the depth guys and seek some value in return? It is highly unlikely that we keep more than 8 guys, let alone 11 or 12.

[Luck4Reich]

He still could have had input on drafting Ford though, the GM doesn't do everything by themselves.

Probably the problem with Grigson. He thought he could do it all himself and didn't care about anyones.input.

[rcubed]

He still could have had input on drafting Ford though, the GM doesn't do everything by themselves.
And? How does that really affect contract/trade negotiations for this offseason? Ballard has repeatedly said he has a price/value for everyone and wont exceed that.

[FatDT]

I've stayed aloof about him and Ford. Both are obviously talented, and Houston is more proven, but I didn't know how well they'd make the transition to 4-3 DE. But few are in a better position to know what Houston can do than Ballard.

We have a shit ton of cap space so money doesn't matter here. Houston appears to still have gas in the tank.

I hope, in addition to being productive himself, that he does for Turay and Lewis what Mitchell did for Wilson last year.

[Chaka]

Why the fuck do the contract terms matter at this point?

Since you asked so nicely, I’ll tell you. The terms of the contract matter because we have a salary cap, and a good general manager needs to consider cap implications no matter how much cap space is presently available. I suspect you’ll say that we have so much cap space that we shouldn’t worry about it. It’s the same logic that drives lottery winners bankrupt a few years after winning. You ALWAYS have to consider the cap when evaluating a contract. While it is nice to have lots of cap space, a few bad deals and you’re back struggling against the cap like everyone else. I’ve explained this in detail in other threads, and won’t repeat it here, but essentially, the playing field is level as everyone has the same salary cap. It’s how you spend your allotted money that makes all the difference (and please don’t tell me that it’s all about drafting well or having a good QB – those are simply the other side of the same coin).

It seems to me that Houston is a risky signing. The degree of risk is in large part a function of the contract price. The guy is past his prime, he’s been plagued by injuries over the last few years, and he’s now changing teams and being asked to change his position. Not saying that it’s not a risk worth taking, given his history, but the risk is much greater if, for instance, his contract is fully guaranteed Kirk Cousins-style contract. If the Colts have the option of exiting after the first year (like with Hankins) then the risk is reduced.

This is not the type of signing that Ballard has made in the past. While he has brought in some veterans, they’ve mostly been low cost, serviceable role players. Ballard has emphasized youth and development. So it also concerns me that this is a departure from what I thought was his gameplan. Now, I realize he has a history with Houston, and that 30 is not over-the-hill for a pass rusher, so I remain hopeful. It also might be that Ballard is not satisfied with Turay’s development progress, and doesn’t foresee getting anyone in the draft who can immediately help. I don’t know. It’s just a striking departure from Ballard’s past strategy, so I expressed some concern.

[omahacolt]

I've stayed aloof about him and Ford. Both are obviously talented, and Houston is more proven, but I didn't know how well they'd make the transition to 4-3 DE. But few are in a better position to know what Houston can do than Ballard.

We have a shit ton of cap space so money doesn't matter here. Houston appears to still have gas in the tank.

I hope, in addition to being productive himself, that he does for Turay and Lewis what Mitchell did for Wilson last year.

4-3 de or 3-4 olber doesn’t really matter at this point does it with Houston? I don’t think he will be an early down player much. If he is primarily rushing the passer then he can do that from any stance he wants. He can fucking somersault to the qb for all I care if he gets home

[E.M.H.]

Just out of curiosity, does anyone know what Houston's cap hit is? On a 2 year contract it doesn't feel like it'd be terrible, but I don't know this part of the NFL very well.

Outside of cap talk: I like this move. He's still got gas in the tank, and he'll be asked to stick with his core competency: Pass rushing. This just feels good all around.

[JAFF]

What is your point? Ballard wasn't gm in KC.

he worked in the front office at KC aroung 2012-2016 i think

[Oldcolt]

Chaka I appreciate your concern but do not share it. Yes Houston has some red flags. I'm assuming everyone in free agency does. His are not that large and even though he is changing position he has played quite a bit with his hand in the dirt. He should be a big help on pass rush. As far as Ballard changing his approach with this I'm not so sure. Everything I've read about Houston says he is great in the locker room. It is a two year deal that does nothing to hinder the build for this team. He helps out in one of our greatest needs. He does't fix it but he helps. It seems like a good signing.

[FatDT]

4-3 de or 3-4 olber doesn’t really matter at this point does it with Houston? I don’t think he will be an early down player much. If he is primarily rushing the passer then he can do that from any stance he wants. He can fucking somersault to the qb for all I care if he gets home

He was supposedly effective as a run defender though as recently as last year. I don't know what Ballard and Reich's plans are for him, maybe he will not start. But if he's the best overall DE on the team, and he might be, then I'd expect him to play more than just obvious passing downs. It's not like Sheard/Turay/Lewis/whoever is so great that they're guaranteed a starting spot.

[VeveJones007]

Just out of curiosity, does anyone know what Houston's cap hit is? On a 2 year contract it doesn't feel like it'd be terrible, but I don't know this part of the NFL very well.

Outside of cap talk: I like this move. He's still got gas in the tank, and he'll be asked to stick with his core competency: Pass rushing. This just feels good all around.

I don't think we've gotten any more detail than 2/$24MM. However, pretty much any 2 year NFL deal is structured with little to nothing guaranteed after year 1.

[JAFF]

Chaka I appreciate your concern but do not share it. Yes Houston has some red flags. I'm assuming everyone in free agency does. His are not that large and even though he is changing position he has played quite a bit with his hand in the dirt. He should be a big help on pass rush. As far as Ballard changing his approach with this I'm not so sure. Everything I've read about Houston says he is great in the locker room. It is a two year deal that does nothing to hinder the build for this team. He helps out in one of our greatest needs. He does't fix it but he helps. It seems like a good signing.

I think signing Houston makes sense:

1 it addresses a need and there are few unknowns
2 maybe ballard is concerned about what DE will fall to them in the draft.
3 they take a De in the first round. Depth with ability cant hurt
4 hand up or doesnt matter, he knows how to play. Even freeney didnt start a game immedately.
5 it puts pressure on the young guys to step it up or get less playing time

[Chromeburn]

Since you asked so nicely, I’ll tell you. The terms of the contract matter because we have a salary cap, and a good general manager needs to consider cap implications no matter how much cap space is presently available. I suspect you’ll say that we have so much cap space that we shouldn’t worry about it. It’s the same logic that drives lottery winners bankrupt a few years after winning. You ALWAYS have to consider the cap when evaluating a contract. While it is nice to have lots of cap space, a few bad deals and you’re back struggling against the cap like everyone else. I’ve explained this in detail in other threads, and won’t repeat it here, but essentially, the playing field is level as everyone has the same salary cap. It’s how you spend your allotted money that makes all the difference (and please don’t tell me that it’s all about drafting well or having a good QB – those are simply the other side of the same coin).

It seems to me that Houston is a risky signing. The degree of risk is in large part a function of the contract price. The guy is past his prime, he’s been plagued by injuries over the last few years, and he’s now changing teams and being asked to change his position. Not saying that it’s not a risk worth taking, given his history, but the risk is much greater if, for instance, his contract is fully guaranteed Kirk Cousins-style contract. If the Colts have the option of exiting after the first year (like with Hankins) then the risk is reduced.

This is not the type of signing that Ballard has made in the past. While he has brought in some veterans, they’ve mostly been low cost, serviceable role players. Ballard has emphasized youth and development. So it also concerns me that this is a departure from what I thought was his gameplan. Now, I realize he has a history with Houston, and that 30 is not over-the-hill for a pass rusher, so I remain hopeful. It also might be that Ballard is not satisfied with Turay’s development progress, and doesn’t foresee getting anyone in the draft who can immediately help. I don’t know. It’s just a striking departure from Ballard’s past strategy, so I expressed some concern.

Are you an accountant/money manager?

[Chromeburn]

I've stayed aloof about him and Ford. Both are obviously talented, and Houston is more proven, but I didn't know how well they'd make the transition to 4-3 DE. But few are in a better position to know what Houston can do than Ballard.

We have a shit ton of cap space so money doesn't matter here. Houston appears to still have gas in the tank.

I hope, in addition to being productive himself, that he does for Turay and Lewis what Mitchell did for Wilson last year.

The biggest concern I would have in that type of switch is the ability to defend the run. But from what I know Houston is very good against the run. He can’t be any more of a liability than Turay.

But most of the time we are in sub packages. He will pretty much just have to rush the passer.

[rm1369]

This is not the type of signing that Ballard has made in the past. While he has brought in some veterans, they’ve mostly been low cost, serviceable role players. Ballard has emphasized youth and development. So it also concerns me that this is a departure from what I thought was his gameplan. Now, I realize he has a history with Houston, and that 30 is not over-the-hill for a pass rusher, so I remain hopeful. It also might be that Ballard is not satisfied with Turay’s development progress, and doesn’t foresee getting anyone in the draft who can immediately help. I don’t know. It’s just a striking departure from Ballard’s past strategy, so I expressed some concern.

I think it’s entirely possible that Ballard simply saw a guy on the market that fit an immediate short term need that he knew wouldn’t upset the locker room culture he wants. Pass rushers typically take time to develop so Houston adds some current ability with little risk. In this case, it’s not really a departure from his previous method. More like a rare exception.

What I hope is that Ballard is actually tweaking his methods to match the current team situation and make up. He made comments late last season that the team developed a lot quicker than he expected. And in a recent radio interview he mentioned the team needing to learn to win and alluded to some of the early season losses as not about talent. The optimistic side of me wants to combine those two things with the Houston signing and say Ballard realizes the team can win now and that you shouldn’t waste that always playing for tomorrow. That a more even balance between now and the long term is needed.

The reality is that it’s probably just the first one - a rare exception and not a shift in philosophy.

[Chaka]

Chaka I appreciate your concern but do not share it. Yes Houston has some red flags. I'm assuming everyone in free agency does. His are not that large and even though he is changing position he has played quite a bit with his hand in the dirt. He should be a big help on pass rush. As far as Ballard changing his approach with this I'm not so sure. Everything I've read about Houston says he is great in the locker room. It is a two year deal that does nothing to hinder the build for this team. He helps out in one of our greatest needs. He does't fix it but he helps. It seems like a good signing.

No problem Oldcolt. I really don’t mean to rain on everyone’s parade, but I’ve seen a lot of backslapping but very little commentary on the issues I’ve mentioned. I understand what you’re saying and I agree to a certain extent. I am excited to see what a great pass rusher can do in our defense. I’m just concerned about seeing us make this type of move – signing high-priced veterans who are on the downside of their careers is generally a bad practice and usually the type of thing I expect from Washington or the Raiders (sorry to keep using them as an example, but they are such easy targets).

I’ve tried to be clear that this may be an understandable exception given Ballard’s presumed “inside” knowledge of Houston and our obvious need at the position, but I certainly don’t want to see the Colts make a habit of this type of signing because I think such an approach will ultimately blow up in their face. Nobody here has been a bigger supporter of Ballard’s approach than me, but I don’t blindly follow him. What I’ve liked (and continue to like) is his very businesslike practical approach to running the Colts, and I think we can reach the goal he has set (long term dominance) if he stays the course. This move is a little different than what I was expecting, that’s all.

[Chaka]

Are you an accountant/money manager?

No I am not.

[Chaka]

I think it’s entirely possible that Ballard simply saw a guy on the market that fit an immediate short term need that he knew wouldn’t upset the locker room culture he wants. Pass rushers typically take time to develop so Houston adds some current ability with little risk. In this case, it’s not really a departure from his previous method. More like a rare exception.

What I hope is that Ballard is actually tweaking his methods to match the current team situation and make up. He made comments late last season that the team developed a lot quicker than he expected. And in a recent radio interview he mentioned the team needing to learn to win and alluded to some of the early season losses as not about talent. The optimistic side of me wants to combine those two things with the Houston signing and say Ballard realizes the team can win now and that you shouldn’t waste that always playing for tomorrow. That a more even balance between now and the long term is needed.

The reality is that it’s probably just the first one - a rare exception and not a shift in philosophy.

That's pretty much what I think (and hope) as well. Though I disagree that there's any substantial evidence to this point that Ballard needs to tweak his methods, as I think last year was about as good a year as any Colts fan could have reasonably expected. So, until the evidence suggests otherwise, I'd advocate that we stay the course that Ballard originally set.

[Dam8610]

He was supposedly effective as a run defender though as recently as last year. I don't know what Ballard and Reich's plans are for him, maybe he will not start. But if he's the best overall DE on the team, and he might be, then I'd expect him to play more than just obvious passing downs. It's not like Sheard/Turay/Lewis/whoever is so great that they're guaranteed a starting spot.

I envision him starting at RE next year. No reason not to at 6'3" 260, and as you mentioned good run defense in addition to pass rush ability.

Since you asked so nicely, I’ll tell you. The terms of the contract matter because we have a salary cap, and a good general manager needs to consider cap implications no matter how much cap space is presently available. I suspect you’ll say that we have so much cap space that we shouldn’t worry about it. It’s the same logic that drives lottery winners bankrupt a few years after winning. You ALWAYS have to consider the cap when evaluating a contract. While it is nice to have lots of cap space, a few bad deals and you’re back struggling against the cap like everyone else. I’ve explained this in detail in other threads, and won’t repeat it here, but essentially, the playing field is level as everyone has the same salary cap. It’s how you spend your allotted money that makes all the difference (and please don’t tell me that it’s all about drafting well or having a good QB – those are simply the other side of the same coin).

It seems to me that Houston is a risky signing. The degree of risk is in large part a function of the contract price. The guy is past his prime, he’s been plagued by injuries over the last few years, and he’s now changing teams and being asked to change his position. Not saying that it’s not a risk worth taking, given his history, but the risk is much greater if, for instance, his contract is fully guaranteed Kirk Cousins-style contract. If the Colts have the option of exiting after the first year (like with Hankins) then the risk is reduced.

This is not the type of signing that Ballard has made in the past. While he has brought in some veterans, they’ve mostly been low cost, serviceable role players. Ballard has emphasized youth and development. So it also concerns me that this is a departure from what I thought was his gameplan. Now, I realize he has a history with Houston, and that 30 is not over-the-hill for a pass rusher, so I remain hopeful. It also might be that Ballard is not satisfied with Turay’s development progress, and doesn’t foresee getting anyone in the draft who can immediately help. I don’t know. It’s just a striking departure from Ballard’s past strategy, so I expressed some concern.

It's a 2 year deal. This has no long term cap implications and is basically a 1 year deal with an option. In the short term, it helps the Colts meet the 89% four year rolling average threshold, and gives the team an opportunity to see if they can bring him back to his peak form, which would at least temporarily solve the team's need for an elite pass rusher. There's no downside here.

[Discflinger]

I didn't know they released the terms of his contract. Still waiting to hear about Geathers'.

[omahacolt]

He was supposedly effective as a run defender though as recently as last year. I don't know what Ballard and Reich's plans are for him, maybe he will not start. But if he's the best overall DE on the team, and he might be, then I'd expect him to play more than just obvious passing downs. It's not like Sheard/Turay/Lewis/whoever is so great that they're guaranteed a starting spot.

I agree. I just have a feeling they will have Lewis starting at re and sheard at le. I could be wrong

[Chaka]

It's a 2 year deal. This has no long term cap implications and is basically a 1 year deal with an option. In the short term, it helps the Colts meet the 89% four year rolling average threshold, and gives the team an opportunity to see if they can bring him back to his peak form, which would at least temporarily solve the team's need for an elite pass rusher. There's no downside here.

Do you know this, or is it just an assumption?

[VeveJones007]

I agree. I just have a feeling they will have Lewis starting at re and sheard at le. I could be wrong

I think this it what it will end up being. They'll stack the line against the run on 1st and 10 and then mix and match from there.

They'll monitor Houston's snaps to try and keep him healthy and fresh for pass rush downs.

[Dam8610]

Do you know this, or is it just an assumption?

We'll call it an educated guess based on Ballard's history. It's probably first year fully guaranteed with a second year roster bonus that can be avoided by cutting him. That's Ballard's track record, so there's no reason to believe otherwise unless something different is reported. Either way, hyperventilating over cap space when the Colts are projected to have something like $120 million next year (even with Houston) is silly.

[Chaka]

...hyperventilating over cap space when the Colts are projected to have something like $120 million next year (even with Houston) is silly.

Nobody is "hyperventilating" over cap space. What's silly is to adopt a free-wheeling spending attitude just because we have lots of cap space. That's a mistake, and to adopt a "I don't care whether this was money well spent because we have plenty of cap space" attitude is a short-term, poor strategy. The Colts just need to make smart moves, regardless of cap space.

I'm not even saying that this was necessarily a bad move in an of itself, merely that I was surprised by it and that I hope that it doesn't signal a change in the approach that has been working so well. However, comments like yours are troubling and all too common unfortunately.

[omahacolt]

Nobody is "hyperventilating" over cap space. What's silly is to adopt a free-wheeling spending attitude just because we have lots of cap space. That's a mistake, and to adopt a "I don't care whether this was money well spent because we have plenty of cap space" attitude is a short-term, poor strategy. The Colts just need to make smart moves, regardless of cap space.

I'm not even saying that this was necessarily a bad move in an of itself, merely that I was surprised by it and that I hope that it doesn't signal a change in the approach that has been working so well. However, comments like yours are troubling and all too common unfortunately.
It is short term. It’s a 2 year deal that doesn’t hurt us at all. We have 40 billion dollars in cap space

[VeveJones007]

Nobody is "hyperventilating" over cap space. What's silly is to adopt a free-wheeling spending attitude just because we have lots of cap space. That's a mistake, and to adopt a "I don't care whether this was money well spent because we have plenty of cap space" attitude is a short-term, poor strategy. The Colts just need to make smart moves, regardless of cap space.

I'm not even saying that this was necessarily a bad move in an of itself, merely that I was surprised by it and that I hope that it doesn't signal a change in the approach that has been working so well. However, comments like yours are troubling and all too common unfortunately.

I can’t remember ever seeing a 2 year NFL deal that wasn’t really a one year deal with an option. We’ll see.

Even if there are some Y2 guarantees, I don’t think the hand-wringing is necessary. If Ballard wanted to go on a crazy spending spree, why didn’t he last week? This is just a low risk, high reward type of move with limited repercussions on 2020 if it doesn’t pan out.

[Dam8610]

Nobody is "hyperventilating" over cap space. What's silly is to adopt a free-wheeling spending attitude just because we have lots of cap space. That's a mistake, and to adopt a "I don't care whether this was money well spent because we have plenty of cap space" attitude is a short-term, poor strategy. The Colts just need to make smart moves, regardless of cap space.

I'm not even saying that this was necessarily a bad move in an of itself, merely that I was surprised by it and that I hope that it doesn't signal a change in the approach that has been working so well. However, comments like yours are troubling and all too common unfortunately.

You think it's troubling to be less than concerned about a 2 year deal that, even if fully guaranteed (it's not), means the difference between $120 million and $130 million in cap space in 2020? And that would be off the books after 2020? That seems a bit alarmist to me.

[YDFL Commish]

I agree. I just have a feeling they will have Lewis starting at re and sheard at le. I could be wrong

The plan last season was to get Lewis playing more 3-Tech, which according to Ballard is what he is best suited for.

So, I expect Lewis to take snaps away from Autry and possible unseat him as the starter. The Houston signing allows that to happen.

[omahacolt]

The plan last season was to get Lewis playing more 3-Tech, which according to Ballard is what he is best suited for.

So, I expect Lewis to take snaps away from Autry and possible unseat him as the starter. The Houston signing allows that to happen.

The plan for hunt was to be a de. It didn’t stay that way

[jasperhobbs]

I don't think Houston will be a 3 down player. Pass rush specialist role I would think.

[YDFL Commish]

The plan for hunt was to be a de. It didn’t stay that way

No it didn't and Lewis played mostly or all the time at DE last season. My point was the direction that they have been planning on is Lewis at 3-tech.

It will be interesting to see how it plays out for sure, as the draft may influence those plans as well.

[omahacolt]

No it didn't and Lewis played mostly or all the time at DE last season. My point was the direction that they have been planning on is Lewis at 3-tech.

It will be interesting to see how it plays out for sure, as the draft may influence those plans as well.

I agree that Lewis will play inside some and that was the plan. I just think he will be playing de on early downs. I could be wrong. That is just my own speculation

[ZionsvilleColtsFan]

Nice acquisition for the Colts

[IndyNorm]

Nobody is "hyperventilating" over cap space. What's silly is to adopt a free-wheeling spending attitude just because we have lots of cap space. That's a mistake, and to adopt a "I don't care whether this was money well spent because we have plenty of cap space" attitude is a short-term, poor strategy. The Colts just need to make smart moves, regardless of cap space.

I'm not even saying that this was necessarily a bad move in an of itself, merely that I was surprised by it and that I hope that it doesn't signal a change in the approach that has been working so well. However, comments like yours are troubling and all too common unfortunately.

You're acting like the Colts signed him to a $100M contract. Even if there is no option on the 2nd year, 2 years at $24M is very reasonable for a player coming off of a 9 sack 5 FF season. Yes, there's some age and injury concerns, but not that concerning since he's played 27/32 games over the past 2 seasons and been very productive when doing so (9.5 sacks as well in '17).

[Butter]

https://twitter.com/BaldyNFL/status/1109852354076164096?s=19

[Chaka]

You're acting like the Colts signed him to a $100M contract. Even if there is no option on the 2nd year, 2 years at $24M is very reasonable for a player coming off of a 9 sack 5 FF season. Yes, there's some age and injury concerns, but not that concerning since he's played 27/32 games over the past 2 seasons and been very productive when doing so (9.5 sacks as well in '17).

You guys are missing my point. If you want to argue the merits of the signing based upon Houston's production, that's fine and I won't necessarily disagree. My concern was the bigger picture in that this seemed to be a departure from the prior strategy that Ballard has employed, and the dangers inherent in signing guys on the downside of their careers to big contracts.

As far as the cap issue, I was taking issue with those of you whose justification for the Houston signing was not his performance, but rather that we have plenty of cap space so we shouldn't worry about it. That is an undeniably bad strategy and silly. No matter who we sign or how much cap space we have at the time, the signing should be smart (again, I'm NOT saying that this wasn't a good signing, just taking issue with those who use our available cap space to justify the signing).

[ukcolt]

I really don't care if we use all of this years cap space on decent to average guys on 2 year deals, that are really a 1 year contract. We will still have that space free the following year if those guys don't pan out. I do think it would be better to front load a few contract extensions early to help out with future cap space. But you could argue that we are overpaying our own guys now when we don't need to. The best option is probably what Ballard will do, and that is to mix and match both. Sign a few guys to short term deals, with little real salary cap impact down the line but also use up some of the cap with new deals for our own guys ahead of when we really need to do them.

[Oldcolt]

Chaka I really think you are making to big of a deal about one signing. I don't think that Ballard is deviating in any real sense from what he wants to do. It is not a huge contract in terms of years and the money isn't outrageous. He seems to be a good locker room guy. From a price point view he was the best player available. He is an upgrade from what we had last year.

[FatDT]

Even with signing Funchess and Houston I still see this offseason as incredibly conservative. I see no purpose in hand-wringing and no point in justifying anything. We still have a metric shit-ton of cap space and are probably done signing meaningful contracts. The cap will go up again and we'll have top 5 space again next season.

I'll have high expectations for Funchess and Houston but if they don't work out I'll be critical of the signing, not the money. Funchess is unproven, Houston might be too old. They are our marquee signings. The money won't matter, but how they produce (or don't) matters a lot.

[VeveJones007]

Even with signing Funchess and Houston I still see this offseason as incredibly conservative. I see no purpose in hand-wringing and no point in justifying anything. We still have a metric shit-ton of cap space and are probably done signing meaningful contracts. The cap will go up again and we'll have top 5 space again next season.

I'll have high expectations for Funchess and Houston but if they don't work out I'll be critical of the signing, not the money. Funchess is unproven, Houston might be too old. They are our marquee signings. The money won't matter, but how they produce (or don't) matters a lot.

And to go one step further, regardless of whether or not Funchess and Houston produce, the vast majority of improvement was always going to come from the progression of young players already on the roster.

[Chaka]

Some Houston contract details, per Holder:

https://twitter.com/HolderStephen/status/1110894019817562112

Not fully guaranteed, but not a one year deal w/option either. Sorry Dam...

[Dam8610]

Some Houston contract details, per Holder:

https://twitter.com/HolderStephen/status/1110894019817562112

Not fully guaranteed, but not a one year deal w/option either. Sorry Dam...

Being on the hook for $3.5 million isn't exactly the sort of thing that prevents a player from being released if a team needs to. This is essentially an option, which is what I said. If you look at sports where player options are a thing, they have buyouts. Think of it as a $9 million option with a $3.5 million buyout.

[smitty46953]

Being on the hook for $3.5 million isn't exactly the sort of thing that prevents a player from being released if a team needs to. This is essentially an option, which is what I said. If you look at sports where player options are a thing, they have buyouts. Think of it as a $9 million option with a $3.5 million buyout.

Yes, that's how I see it too. :cool:

[Chaka]

Being on the hook for $3.5 million isn't exactly the sort of thing that prevents a player from being released if a team needs to. This is essentially an option, which is what I said. If you look at sports where player options are a thing, they have buyouts. Think of it as a $9 million option with a $3.5 million buyout.

I hesitate to respond at the risk of igniting a whole new debate, but I’ve got a number of issues with what you've said:

1) To begin with, your numbers are slightly off. The second year has $4.5 million guaranteed (according to Holder, the second year $1 million roster bonus is also guaranteed, though I’ll admit that’s kind of confusing). In sum, 100% of his 2019 salary is guaranteed, and 50% of his 2020 salary. Much larger than a typical buyout, as you characterized it.

2) This is nothing like an option – in fact, it’s the exact opposite. An option is for the team’s benefit. A buyout is for the player’s. There’s a reason buyout clauses aren’t very common in the NFL, given the risk of injury. We could end up paying $18.5 million for one year of a 30-year old Houston.

3) Further, $4.5 million (or even $3.5 million) is nothing to sneeze at, even in the cash-rich NFL. We just signed Geathers for $2.75 million, most of which isn’t even guaranteed.

4) Based upon Holder’s characterization, we’re tying up a minimum of $18.5 million (and up to $23M) in cap space on Houston – that’s an average of roughly 5-7% of our combined total cap space each of the two years on a single player. Such a large expenditure merits scrutiny.

In fairness, the one point you don’t bring up is that we don’t know what the guarantees apply to. I doubt Holder has seen the contract. As I’ve mentioned in other threads, the “guarantees” in some of these NFL contracts are only for injury, or only go into effect upon meeting certain criteria (being on the roster on a given date, etc.). By way of example, Colin Kaepernick signed a contract with the 49ers a few years ago that was reported to have had something like $60 million in guarantees, but a closer look at the language revealed that the “guarantees” were only effective if he was injured. So he could still be cut (and was cut) with limited cap impact.

[Dam8610]

I hesitate to respond at the risk of igniting a whole new debate, but I’ve got a number of issues with what you've said:

1) To begin with, your numbers are slightly off. The second year has $4.5 million guaranteed (according to Holder, the second year $1 million roster bonus is also guaranteed, though I’ll admit that’s kind of confusing). In sum, 100% of his 2019 salary is guaranteed, and 50% of his 2020 salary. Much larger than a typical buyout, as you characterized it.

2) This is nothing like an option – in fact, it’s the exact opposite. An option is for the team’s benefit. A buyout is for the player’s. There’s a reason buyout clauses aren’t very common in the NFL, given the risk of injury. We could end up paying $18.5 million for one year of a 30-year old Houston.

3) Further, $4.5 million (or even $3.5 million) is nothing to sneeze at, even in the cash-rich NFL. We just signed Geathers for $2.75 million, most of which isn’t even guaranteed.

4) Based upon Holder’s characterization, we’re tying up a minimum of $18.5 million (and up to $23M) in cap space on Houston – that’s an average of roughly 5-7% of our combined total cap space each of the two years on a single player. Such a large expenditure merits scrutiny.

In fairness, the one point you don’t bring up is that we don’t know what the guarantees apply to. I doubt Holder has seen the contract. As I’ve mentioned in other threads, the “guarantees” in some of these NFL contracts are only for injury, or only go into effect upon meeting certain criteria (being on the roster on a given date, etc.). By way of example, Colin Kaepernick signed a contract with the 49ers a few years ago that was reported to have had something like $60 million in guarantees, but a closer look at the language revealed that the “guarantees” were only effective if he was injured. So he could still be cut (and was cut) with limited cap impact.

1) Roster bonuses aren't guaranteed unless you're on the roster on a specific date, hence the name. It was how the Colts opted out of Manning's last contract with them.

2) Team options have buyouts in sports where they're prevalent. Hence it IS like a team option.

3) If the Colts don't want Houston in 2020, they'll cut him before the roster bonus date and be on the hook for $3.5 million, which won't even make a dent in their cap space. Further, a Houston cut would increase the Colts 2020 cap space overall by $5.5 million.

4) Houston is making $23 million over 2 years where the Colts are flush with cap space, and even then it's frontloaded. $9 million in 2020 will only happen if he's a good-elite pass rusher, and that's a bargain price to pay for that type of talent in the NFL.

[Chaka]

1) Roster bonuses aren't guaranteed unless you're on the roster on a specific date, hence the name. It was how the Colts opted out of Manning's last contract with them.

I understand that's how it USUALLY works, but Holder is saying otherwise in this case, so I'm working with that info for the moment. You are assuming something else. Nevertheless, I acknowledged that it was confusing to me.

2) Team options have buyouts in sports where they're prevalent. Hence it IS like a team option.

I don't understand what you're trying to say here. Do you mean that there BOTH options and buyouts in the same contract in other sports? If so, I still don't see what relevance that observation has here. The point is that this is nothing like an option as you had originally said.

3) If the Colts don't want Houston in 2020, they'll cut him before the roster bonus date and be on the hook for $3.5 million, which won't even make a dent in their cap space. Further, a Houston cut would increase the Colts 2020 cap space overall by $5.5 million.

But it begs the question of whether we should have signed him at all. By this logic we could "increase" our cap space by $18.5 million if we didn't sign him at all.

4) Houston is making $23 million over 2 years where the Colts are flush with cap space, and even then it's frontloaded. $9 million in 2020 will only happen if he's a good-elite pass rusher, and that's a bargain price to pay for that type of talent in the NFL.

Please stop using the Colts cap space as an excuse for the contract. It's not a good one as I've explained in countless prior posts. If he's worth the money, he's worth it regardless of our cap space.

[Dam8610]

I understand that's how it USUALLY works, but Holder is saying otherwise in this case, so I'm working with that info for the moment. You are assuming something else. Nevertheless, I acknowledged that it was confusing to me.



I don't understand what you're trying to say here. Do you mean that there BOTH options and buyouts in the same contract in other sports? If so, I still don't see what relevance that observation has here. The point is that this is nothing like an option as you had originally said.



But it begs the question of whether we should have signed him at all. By this logic we could "increase" our cap space by $18.5 million if we didn't sign him at all.



Please stop using the Colts cap space as an excuse for the contract. It's not a good one as I've explained in countless prior posts. If he's worth the money, he's worth it regardless of our cap space.

You should read up on contracts, options, and how the NFL salary cap works, because your comments here are reflecting a poor understanding of these concepts.

Point by point:

1) Roster bonuses are only ever guaranteed if you're on the roster on the day the bonus requires. This money is always referred to as guaranteed when the figure is reported, but it isn't actually guaranteed unless the team decides to keep the player on the roster.

2) Yes, options have buyouts. That's what makes them options, the team has the OPTION to pay the full salary and keep the player, or pay a lesser amount, the buyout, and terminate the contract. It's structured a little differently in the NFL, but the functional effect is the same.

3) No, it doesn't. Justin Houston is a very good player who could still possibly produce at an elite level. Considering the player and the position, the Colts got a very good deal.

4) I still don't understand why you believe this contract is bad, or at the very least not good. You haven't really explained that well. If you think Houston is washed up, you're entitled to that opinion, but you're arguing against his production in that case, and he's actually produced quite well in the past 2 seasons. I see no other logical reason why anyone could consider this contract a not good contract.

[Dam8610]

Put it this way: compare Justin Houston's last two seasons to Jadeveon Clowney's, then compare their 2019 salaries and tell me who is getting the better deal: the Colts or the Texans? NFL teams pay a lot of money for pass rushers.

[FatDT]

Dear God a Dam/Chaka point-by-point response argument is my nightmare come to life.

[VeveJones007]

Good quotes from Ballard at the owners meetings this week:

https://theathletic.com/892290/2019/03/27/draft-intel-peyton-and-more-seven-takeaways-from-the-colts-brass-at-the-nfls-annual-meeting/

I think this scheme, where he can get off the ball and really disrupt and rush the passer, is going to be good.

“One of the things that we really sold him on was we want to be able to play eight guys,” Ballard said. “You would hope when you get it right, the most anybody is playing is 60, 65 percent (of the defensive snaps). That way you’re getting a rotation through the season where they’re not wearing down. I just think depth and having seven, eight quality guys that you can really play with, is going to benefit the whole group in the long term so when you do get into December and January, they’re still playing good football.”

Hopefully limiting his snaps will maximize what he can give the team (and keep him healthier).

[Chaka]

You should read up on contracts, options, and how the NFL salary cap works, because your comments here are reflecting a poor understanding of these concepts.

Point by point:

1) Roster bonuses are only ever guaranteed if you're on the roster on the day the bonus requires. This money is always referred to as guaranteed when the figure is reported, but it isn't actually guaranteed unless the team decides to keep the player on the roster.

2) Yes, options have buyouts. That's what makes them options, the team has the OPTION to pay the full salary and keep the player, or pay a lesser amount, the buyout, and terminate the contract. It's structured a little differently in the NFL, but the functional effect is the same.

3) No, it doesn't. Justin Houston is a very good player who could still possibly produce at an elite level. Considering the player and the position, the Colts got a very good deal.

4) I still don't understand why you believe this contract is bad, or at the very least not good. You haven't really explained that well. If you think Houston is washed up, you're entitled to that opinion, but you're arguing against his production in that case, and he's actually produced quite well in the past 2 seasons. I see no other logical reason why anyone could consider this contract a not good contract.

Thanks for the advice Thurgood, I can see you’ve got an amazing grasp of “contracts, options, and how the NFL salary cap works”.

Dude, like many you don’t even seem to recognize what you don’t know. The term “roster bonus” indeed implies that it is contingent upon being on a roster, which is precisely why I said (from the outset) it was confusing that Holder called it guaranteed. However, the truth is that you and I have no idea what that contract says or how the guarantees work, but you somehow feel supremely qualified to speak, condescendingly no less, about the terms anyway. I pointed this out in an earlier post to help you out, but you ignored it for some reason. Regardless, I’ll work with the info Holder (who might actually know something) has provided, until I learn otherwise.

As far as your “option” argument – whatever. An option gives the holder the option to buy or sell something at a pre-arranged price/time. A buyout clause allows someone to extinguish an obligation at a preset price/time. One creates an obligation, the other extinguishes it. They are different concepts – look it up.

Lastly, as for Houston himself, I’ve got nothing against the guy and never said it was a bad signing. I’ve merely expressed a bit of concern over spending a lot of money on a guy on the downside of his career, and who has been injured a lot over the last few years and will be changing teams and positions. I think if the Raiders entered into the same contract with him, nobody here would be raving about what a great signing the Raiders had made. Regardless, I’m still excited to have him – it’s just not the type of signing that I’d envisioned the Colts making. That’s all I’ve said. All my other comments were directed to those who sought to justify the signing based not upon Houston’s skills or other football qualifications, but rather on the simple fact that we have a lot of cap space. That is nonsense.

[Chaka]

Dear God a Dam/Chaka point-by-point response argument is my nightmare come to life.

And yet you continue to read them for some reason, despite my requests that you not do so.

[JAFF]

Its like watching two old guys arguing about the chicken salad in a deli

[FatDT]

And yet you continue to read them for some reason, despite my requests that you not do so.

Nah I'm not I just scroll and scroll and scroll until I finally get past them.

[Racehorse]

Dear God a Dam/Chaka point-by-point response argument is my nightmare come to life.

True. Further, I can't believe it is Dam who is the logical one. When does this ever happen?

[Chaka]

Nah I'm not I just scroll and scroll and scroll until I finally get past them.

Well, I think you'd find that if you'd clean the Cheeto dust off your scroll wheel every once in a while, it'll work better.

[Chaka]

True. Further, I can't believe it is Dam who is the logical one. When does this ever happen?

Dude, if you can’t see the misinformation and garbage he’s spewing, then I can’t help you.

[Racehorse]

Dude, if you can’t see the misinformation and garbage he’s spewing, then I can’t help you.
The only thing he has said that might be considered as wrong is the word "option". It is possible that he meant it as you say and that he is merely putting spin into it (he does this on other points), but the fact remains that the team has an option with Houston; they can pay him to leave or they can pay him more to leave. His contract is not going to be an issue for us this year, or next. That is where Dam is 100% correct on this matter.

I feel dirty saying Dam is 100% correct, so please give it up.

[Chaka]

The only thing he has said that might be considered as wrong is the word "option". It is possible that he meant it as you say and that he is merely putting spin into it (he does this on other points), but the fact remains that the team has an option with Houston; they can pay him to leave or they can pay him more to leave. His contract is not going to be an issue for us this year, or next. That is where Dam is 100% correct on this matter.

I feel dirty saying Dam is 100% correct, so please give it up.

Haha - Fair enough. I've got no beef with you and I've said my peace on the subject. His facts are wrong, but his opinions are what they are and you can judge for yourself what you agree with. No issue there. There's no need to beat this particular dead horse any further.

[Dam8610]

Thanks for the advice Thurgood, I can see you’ve got an amazing grasp of “contracts, options, and how the NFL salary cap works”.

Dude, like many you don’t even seem to recognize what you don’t know. The term “roster bonus” indeed implies that it is contingent upon being on a roster, which is precisely why I said (from the outset) it was confusing that Holder called it guaranteed. However, the truth is that you and I have no idea what that contract says or how the guarantees work, but you somehow feel supremely qualified to speak, condescendingly no less, about the terms anyway. I pointed this out in an earlier post to help you out, but you ignored it for some reason. Regardless, I’ll work with the info Holder (who might actually know something) has provided, until I learn otherwise.

As far as your “option” argument – whatever. An option gives the holder the option to buy or sell something at a pre-arranged price/time. A buyout clause allows someone to extinguish an obligation at a preset price/time. One creates an obligation, the other extinguishes it. They are different concepts – look it up.

Lastly, as for Houston himself, I’ve got nothing against the guy and never said it was a bad signing. I’ve merely expressed a bit of concern over spending a lot of money on a guy on the downside of his career, and who has been injured a lot over the last few years and will be changing teams and positions. I think if the Raiders entered into the same contract with him, nobody here would be raving about what a great signing the Raiders had made. Regardless, I’m still excited to have him – it’s just not the type of signing that I’d envisioned the Colts making. That’s all I’ve said. All my other comments were directed to those who sought to justify the signing based not upon Houston’s skills or other football qualifications, but rather on the simple fact that we have a lot of cap space. That is nonsense.

You can have a rudimentary understanding of these things without being a supreme court justice or an expert in contract law.

Unless you're holding out your copy of the contract on us, all any of us are doing here is speculating. That said, you can observe prior contracts with similar clauses in them and generally predict what to expect from this contract. Data is a wonderful thing in that regard. My explanation is based on how I've seen the roster bonus clause operate in every other NFL contract, and how I've seen those contracts reported in terms of total salary and guarantees. It's possible that Ballard wrote an entirely new contract clause that operates completely differently than any other roster bonus I've seen, but unlikely, especially since that would disadvantage the team.

You're referring to "option" in the security sense. Even then, it's a similar concept. Apply a sunk cost in exchange for an opportunity to purchase or sell a security at a previously agreed upon price at a given point in time. In the case of a team option (which is typically what these clauses are called in baseball where contracts are fully guaranteed unless otherwise specified), the buyout is the sunk cost (guaranteed money in the second year of the contract in this case) with the option for the team to purchase his services for the second season.

The issue I've taken this whole time is you calling this contract "a lot of money". For the caliber of player the Colts are getting, I just can't see that argument as valid. As an example, the Texans will play Clowney $17.128 million next season if they don't work out a long term deal for him, and when you include the postseason, Houston has more sacks than Clowney over the last two years. You don't seem to be taking into account the value NFL teams place on pass rushers in your argument.

True. Further, I can't believe it is Dam who is the logical one. When does this ever happen?

It happens all the time. Glad you're finally recognizing it.

Haha - Fair enough. I've got no beef with you and I've said my peace on the subject. His facts are wrong, but his opinions are what they are and you can judge for yourself what you agree with. No issue there. There's no need to beat this particular dead horse any further.

You keep saying my facts are wrong but don't seem to give an example of that. What fact do I have wrong?

[JAFF]

You keep saying my facts are wrong but don't seem to give an example of that. What fact do I have wrong?

Killing me smalls, just killing me

[VeveJones007]

Athletic article from Holder on Houston. Has some good clips showcasing what Houston offers the Colts.

https://theathletic.com/904992/2019/04/04/film-review-what-are-the-colts-getting-in-pass-rusher-justin-houston/