Quote:
Originally Posted by IndyNorm
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).