Originally Posted by Chromeburn (Post 112628)

The money is high, but i agree, was probably the only way he would take the deal.

Originally Posted by FatDT (Post 112636)

I don't understand why someone like Funchess would have any leverage.

It's not a big deal in the grand scheme as long as signings like this don't become a habit. It seems like a bad contract to me. If he sucks, or even if he's OK but not great, then we just paid $10M+ for yet another disappointing/trash WR2. If he plays well, then Ballard has put himself in a bad position to re-sign him.

Originally Posted by Chromeburn (Post 112638)

We aren’t going to spend much money again. We tried for Amos and Smith and got outbid again. So 10 million is nothing this year.

Originally Posted by FatDT (Post 112656)

I agree it is nothing. It just seems really inconsistent with Ballard's approach. I don't see much upside. The floor is a D+/C- and the ceiling is maybe a B- or B.

If Desir goes to another team for a "reasonable" overpay this move will look that much dumber.

Originally Posted by Chromeburn (Post 112638)

He doesn’t have any leverage, and it is a bad contract. I would say he is worth half that. He is a stopgap till our own draft picks develop. I bet they draft a big WR in the draft now. He could probably get a multi year deal somewhere else for less money if he waited. He should put up better numbers fitting a niche in our offense for certain routes. Unless he absolutely dominates, I doubt we have any intention of resigning him.

We aren’t going to spend much money again. We tried for Amos and Smith and got outbid again. So 10 million is nothing this year.

Originally Posted by Coltsalr (Post 112615)

Actually, particularly with Humphries, I thought that his quick twitch ability to get open quickly would fit well with Reich’s hope or quick release passes.

It’d be nice if Funchess could do what you’re saying, but I’m skeptical to say the least.

Originally Posted by VeveJones007 (Post 112674)

Based on what?

Originally Posted by Oldcolt (Post 112683)

I totally understand why people would be skeptical. My optimism is not based on Funchess himself. Yes he has great physical attributes. He hasn't turned himself into a player to match those attributes so far. My faith is not in him but in Reich and the coaching staff. They seem to be able to put players in position to due whatever it is that that particular player is best at. They also show patience in working things out. Remember the offensive play calling the first part of last year. It evolved as the team began to come together. Even though they were losing, no panic. I really believe this is a damn good coaching staff and that fuels my optimism about this signing.

Originally Posted by Chaka (Post 112581)

Understood, those are some reasonable points, and I’ll admit that I don’t feel I completely understand this signing. On the one hand, I don’t see it as a “placeholder” type signing as you described it, because (1) Funchess was signed on the first negotiating day, so we obviously targeted him, (2) the dollar amount of the contract is high, and (3) he fills a specific position of need (big bodied outside receiver)

On the other hand, it’s also curious because we haven’t committed to him long term, and we didn’t get any option years, so those items support your argument. The lack of option years is notable in particular and unusual for Ballard except, as I’m sure you’ll point out, for Grant last year (and Slauson if I recall). However, neither of those deals was nearly as high profile as this signing, and both of those players were signed deep in the free agent period when the Colts had much more leverage. This might also be the only one-year deal announced yesterday, so it's unusual in that sense as well.

So I can’t quite figure it out. My best guess is that the Colts are suspicious of free agent wide receivers, having been burned by several over the last few years (Grant, Andre Johnson, Kamar Aiken, etc) and thus feel that it would be better to bring someone in for one year to see if they fit before making a long term commitment. If they do, it will end up costing them a bit more, but if it doesn’t work out they don’t get stuck in a large, long term, unproductive contract. However, this one year strategy wouldn’t be appealing to the uppermost tier of free agents who have the leverage to secure a long term guaranteed deal, but might be attractive to a slightly lesser free agent like Funchess who could have the hope of getting a big time deal next year with a productive 2019.

So, while all of this is just a guess of course, it really doesn’t feel like a placeholder-type signing to me. And I’ll admit that it is a little perplexing. Regardless, I’m still excited about this signing following the relative success of last year’s free agent crop. Funchess is a big-bodied 25 year old receiver who is heading into (rather than out of) his prime years, and Ballard has proven to be a strong talent evaluator – both in the draft and free agency. So I think there’s reasonable grounds to expect Funchess to play well and prove to be an asset to our team.