Yes.

https://theathletic.com/865237/2019/...lack-of-moves/

Not gonna lie, this was a pretty bad take.

Well, lets put on our logic hats for a minute. Which is better: A 2-year deal worth more money, or a 1-year deal worth less money? Take your time.

If the 2-year deal is with an equal or superior quarterback that would be the better deal. Lets say the Saints made the offer. That seems great. However, if it is with a bad team with QB issues, it may end up being the last contract he signs.

Nope, you're not moving the goal posts on this one. You characterized his options as Colts for one year or CFL and doubled-down saying "this isn't a joke at all."

Just say, "I was wrong on this one" and move on. Lacking the humility to admit when you're wrong is a significant character flaw.

It was pretty clearly sarcasm.

Yes, he was being sarcastic, but the underlying premise of what he was saying - that Funchess had no other suitors and that a one year deal means that he had no leverage - is just wrong and naïve.

That was sarcasm, of course it was a joke, who would think that was literally what they said and did. And I admit I am wrong all the time.

But the question was whether Funchess had leverage. If the 2-year contract was superior in money from an equal or superior team, why not take it? You gain leverage from interest and offers. Tyrell Williams has three team interested in him, all pretty good from what I read yesterday and it should result in a decent contract. This doesn't look like Funchess had many options to me and we were the best one. I don't think he had much if any leverage. The 10 million isn't great from our end, but we have so much cap space it really doesn't matter because we aren't going to try and use it this year.

The one thing I did think about was perhaps he gave the 13 with incentives as a gesture of good will. Saying if he does well the Colts will be willing to talk a multi-year deal. But that is pure conjecture.

My comment that you guys didn’t seem to like is that I see Funchess as a place holder for Cain or a draft pick. Your draft pick argument doesn’t change that. I 100% understand the possible benefits of the one year contract, but I don’t believe Ballard solved the long term WR2 issue with the signing. And I doubt he intended to. That’s what I disagree with. If he had attempted to solve any of the other roster holes with a different signing then I wouldn’t care as much. But it appears he is doing largely what I expected and what he’s said he is going to do - kick the can down the road until he solves it with a draft pick.

I simply don’t like the super conservative approach to team building. I haven’t said it won’t work, I’ve said it’s unnecessarily slow and that I don’t believe you can build a sustained dynasty in the modern NFL that way. Which is what Ballard seems to talk about and what everyone that subscribes to his methods seem to envision. I would much rather the team have a few down years between some higher peaks than I would have the sustained “great” success of the Peyton era Colts. As a fan I’d gladly trade a few 12 win seasons for another title or two. And I firmly believe that was in the teams grasp had they taken a different approach. The Ted Thompson and Rodgers led Packers is another example of that kind of waste IMO.

There are plenty of things that I like about Ballard and I do believe he is building a team for success. But his method is not the only method to do that and I just don’t believe in being as slow and methodical as he is. I see it as wasteful considering the gift he has in Luck and the resources that are available to him.

Now that doesn’t mean I advocate being reckless, which is what everyone who disagrees comes back with.

I think that is a big part of the problem I see on the internet. Not as much here. There's this idea that the only two options are to either avoid FA like the plague or spend like the Redskins. That doesn't even fit what Ballard has done in FA the two prior years. Ballard has signed some low and mid-level FAs, he doesn't avoid it like many of his supporters pretend. So it's not accurate at all.

I think there are places where Ballard could've been more aggressive. And I don't think this Funchess contract is very good. But when I look at the individuals that are getting paid this year so far I don't really see any players that look like huge misses. There are still some names at DL and DB that could be positive signings.

Basically I think freaking out on either side is dumb, with the hero worship side being a little dumber.

**cough** Dam **cough*