Colts Franchise Tag Freeney

[dryheat44]

Re: Polian agrees that the Colts are screwed: A theory

I pretty much agree. The only reason I can add for him doing the exclusive is that he took a calculated risk that by not letting Freeney talk to others he would avoid a poison pill offer driving up Freeney's total price on a long term deal. The problem with that is teams are going to bid up on those hitting the market very quickly at the opening of FA so I don't see it paying off especially since Freeney wants to be the highest paid. Also it really won't stop his agent from feeling out teams for what they would pay for him

If I was the Colts and somebody wanted to give me two #1's for him I'd have his bags packed for him.

Yep. It really doesn't make sense. There are very few players in the NFL I wouldn't trade for 2 #1 picks and oodles of cap space. And very, very few non-quarterbacks.

 

[Rob0729]

Here's my biggest problem with that argument.

2007 $109,000,000 $7,000,000 6.86%
2006 $102,000,000 $16,500,000 19.30%
2005 $85,500,000 $4,918,000 6.10%
2004 $80,582,000 $5,575,000 7.43%
2003 $75,007,000 $3,907,000 5.50%
2002 $71,100,000 $3,700,000 5.49%
2001 $67,400,000 $5,228,000 8.41%
2000 $62,172,000 $3,819,000 6.54%
1999 $58,353,000 $5,965,000 11.39%
1998 $52,388,000 $10,938,000 26.39%
1997 $41,450,000 $673,000 1.65%
1996 $40,777,000 $3,677,000 9.91%
1995 $37,100,000 $2,500,000 7.23%
1994 $34,600,000

Before 2006 1998 was the year of the largest increase in the cap.

What happened in 1998. The NFL signed a 8-year TV deal.
http://www.jacksonville.com/tu-online/stories/020898/1c1freea.html
I happen to think that it is reasonable for those in the NFL to think in 2004 with a new TV deal that there would be another large increase in 2006 as there was in 1998. History repeated itself.

So what if no one in the NFL probably thought in 2004 that the cap would get to 102 million in 2006. IMO, it would have been reasonable to think that it would get to the high 90s and all those who said that the Colts were lucky that the cap went to $102 million have yet to show that the Colts would have entered cap hell if the cap was in the high 90s.

The thing is that the broadcast rights jumped exponentially in 1998. Fox broke the bank in 1993 and paid at the time that $395 million a year for the NFC rights, ABC paid $230 million, NBC paid $217 million, and ESPN and TNT paid a total of $255 million for the Sunday Night games. The total compensation was $1.1 billion a year.

In 1998, Fox paid $550 million a year, ABC paid $550 million a year, CBS paid $500 million a year, and ESPN paid $600 million a year under the new contract for a total of $$2.2 billion a year. So the TV revenues doubled.

In 2006, the new TV deals have CBS paying $622 million a year, Fox paying $712 million a year, ESPN paying $1.1 billion a year to get Monday Night Football, and NBC paying $650 billion year for a total of $3.1 billon. So the increase on this contract was slightly less than the deal in 1998. So no one should have expected more than a one or two year massive increase in the cap.

If ESPN didn't overpay to get Monday Night Football (and the subsequently screwed by the NFL), the increase would not be that great at all. The annual fees for for Monday night football doubled or increased by $550 million a year. The increase for the other three network broadcasts only increased by $350 million a year combined.

So Polian shouldn't have had the expectations that the TV deals were going to increase exponentially. If it wasn't for ESPN overbidding for a product that they got a bait and switch, the new TV deal wouldn't have affected the cap all that much.

 

[Peytonsbetter]

Thanks for responding. But I beg to differ on the skills of Freeney. He's never done a bull rush in his life. Speed isn't a move, although he's fast. Freeney, on every play, takes two quick steps to the outside, then either continues upfield to try to get around the outside, or spins back to the inside. I didn't even see him doubled much this year, because, IMO, offensive tackles figured out they could ride him upfield and guard against the spin.

Freeney isn't good against the run. He's not as bad as most people make him out to be, but he can't be considered anything better than average. He makes his share of tackles in the backfield on his way to the quarterback, and he's quick enough to chase runners down, but on the line he's meat.

Freeney needs to keep evolving his game in order to maintain success. His numbers should be improving since the Colts got Mathis on the other end, but they haven't been. I don't think we can chalk up his on-field decline entirely, or even mainly, to injury. I really think opposing offenses have figured out how to make him a non-factor.

All that being said, the Colts are the Champs, so obviously they have a system that works. However, it seems to be a case of being happy to stand pat instead of improve. IMO, using Freeney's money to sign a rock-solid linebacker and a legit starting corner would be the way to go. Heck, you can sign Tully Banta-Cain and stick him on the edge and he can give you 80% of Freeney for 20% of the cost.

Freeneys never done a bull rush in his life? Hahaha, ask Jonathon Ogden about that. He apparently thought the same thing and, as a result, he's still got Dwight's cleat marks on his chest. That was in the season opener last year-in the playoff game this year, Ogden got help on nearly every pass play.

Freeney's biggest asset is his non-stop motor. The guy NEVER gives up on a play and plays every down at 200 percent. We HAD to resign him.

 

[dryheat44]

Freeneys never done a bull rush in his life? Hahaha, ask Jonathon Ogden about that. He apparently thought the same thing and, as a result, he's still got Dwight's cleat marks on his chest. That was in the season opener last year-in the playoff game this year, Ogden got help on nearly every pass play.

Freeney's biggest asset is his non-stop motor. The guy NEVER gives up on a play and plays every down at 200 percent. We HAD to resign him.

Did you have to re-sign him because it's in the best interest of the Colts success, or did you have to re-sign him because he's a fan favorite? If you believe it's the former, than we disagree. Which is fine. I still have a hard time believing that a Colts fan who can emotionally detatch himself would believe that the amount of money going towards Freeney wouldn't be better served upgrading the linebacker and cornerback situations. Pass rushers are nice, but downgrading from a (numbers theoretical) 12 sack a year guy to an 8 sack a year guy is worth it if you can strengthen the middle of the defense. The middle of the D is much more important than the edges, especially in the Tampa-2.

I might be the biggest Troy Brown fan in the world, but the Patriots certainly don't have to re-sign him. Or anybody, really, other than Brady and Seymour.

 

[everlong]

I might be the biggest Troy Brown fan in the world, but the Patriots certainly don't have to re-sign him. Or anybody, really, other than Brady and Seymour.

Vince Wilfork would be pretty tough to not sign. The NT in our 3-4 is huge.

 

[coltsfan]

Re: Polian agrees that the Colts are screwed: A theory

So Polian put the exclusive tag on Freeney instead of the standard non-exclusive tag.

That presumptively costs him around $1M in cap space.

I agree with Polian that it is plausible that another team will offer two number one draft picks plus a good financial package for Freeney.

What surprises me is that Polian thinks that getting two picks for Freeney is a bad thing.

Polian is basically saying: Freeney's services in 2007 are worth more than $9.5M plus TWO first round draft picks.

I think that this is a borderline insane assessment, yet I also think that Polian is a smart guy.

How can we reconcile the two?


MAYBE Polian agrees that the Colts are facing imminent death by salary cap.

The two #1 picks might be in the 2008 and 2009 drafts.

If Polian has already reached the conclusion that the Colts window of competitiveness is about to close, then those future draft picks will do him little good.

I don't agree that it is a borderline insane assessment. Freeney is a difference maker, while the chances that you can find a difference maker at the bottom of the first round is not high. It's as simple as that. Before last year, Freeney was one of the top 20 players in the league. You do what it takes to keep a player like that.

 

[coltsfan]

Freeney needs to keep evolving his game in order to maintain success. His numbers should be improving since the Colts got Mathis on the other end, but they haven't been. I don't think we can chalk up his on-field decline entirely, or even mainly, to injury. I really think opposing offenses have figured out how to make him a non-factor.

All that being said, the Colts are the Champs, so obviously they have a system that works. However, it seems to be a case of being happy to stand pat instead of improve. IMO, using Freeney's money to sign a rock-solid linebacker and a legit starting corner would be the way to go. Heck, you can sign Tully Banta-Cain and stick him on the edge and he can give you 80% of Freeney for 20% of the cost.

Hmm, so teams couldn't figure him out for four entire seasons, but suddenly the switch flipped in the fifth year? I don't agree, but you are entitled to your opinion. I don't think it takes until a guy is in his fifth year for him to be figured out. More like one season. I think it was his physical maladies, just as it was for Richard Seymour not playing as well this year.

Agree, that's a valid point on standing pat. I actually hope they do that, in terms of not re-signing Cato June. I think he's a vastly overrated LB, and they can easily upgrade in run defense there through the draft or with Freddie Keiaho. I am hoping that they let all of these free agents go so they will save money in order to re-sign guys like Sanders and Clark in the future. They will attempt to improve through the draft and the return of injured players like Reagor.

The biggest loss the Colts will have is Nick Harper, but the Colts have drafted three corners high in the last two drafts, so they will let him go. But if the Colts were to sign a CB as you suggest, I would just re-sign Harper.

As for Cain, I was impressed with his play this year and didn't see his benching coming. I'm not sure that it helped the Pats b/c Alexander certainly didn't play well against the Colts, but Belichick knows more about defense than I do.

 

[DaBruinz]

He gets a bad rap for his run defense. He can play the run extremely well, but he just isn't asked to do it. Before this season, you almost never saw teams run to the left against the Colts b/c he can take guys on at the line b/c he's so strong (also b/c the rest of the run defense was so weak, that there's no reason to attack him!)

Umm.. this is utter baloney. Most teams ran at Freeney because they knew he was WEAK against the run. The Pats were doing it for years.

 

[DaBruinz]

Here's my biggest problem with that argument.

2007 $109,000,000 $7,000,000 6.86%
2006 $102,000,000 $16,500,000 19.30%
2005 $85,500,000 $4,918,000 6.10%
2004 $80,582,000 $5,575,000 7.43%
2003 $75,007,000 $3,907,000 5.50%
2002 $71,100,000 $3,700,000 5.49%
2001 $67,400,000 $5,228,000 8.41%
2000 $62,172,000 $3,819,000 6.54%
1999 $58,353,000 $5,965,000 11.39%
1998 $52,388,000 $10,938,000 26.39%
1997 $41,450,000 $673,000 1.65%
1996 $40,777,000 $3,677,000 9.91%
1995 $37,100,000 $2,500,000 7.23%
1994 $34,600,000

Before 2006 1998 was the year of the largest increase in the cap.

What happened in 1998. The NFL signed a 8-year TV deal.
http://www.jacksonville.com/tu-online/stories/020898/1c1freea.html
I happen to think that it is reasonable for those in the NFL to think in 2004 with a new TV deal that there would be another large increase in 2006 as there was in 1998. History repeated itself.

So what if no one in the NFL probably thought in 2004 that the cap would get to 102 million in 2006. IMO, it would have been reasonable to think that it would get to the high 90s and all those who said that the Colts were lucky that the cap went to $102 million have yet to show that the Colts would have entered cap hell if the cap was in the high 90s.

Except that in 2004, there wasn't as much talk regarding the TV deals and no one was sure what they'd be. The TV deals weren't signed until late 2005 and early 2006. It was only in 2005 that the rumors of the cap breaking the $100 million barrier started coming out.

 

[DaBruinz]

The thing is that the broadcast rights jumped exponentially in 1998. Fox broke the bank in 1993 and paid at the time that $395 million a year for the NFC rights, ABC paid $230 million, NBC paid $217 million, and ESPN and TNT paid a total of $255 million for the Sunday Night games. The total compensation was $1.1 billion a year.

In 1998, Fox paid $550 million a year, ABC paid $550 million a year, CBS paid $500 million a year, and ESPN paid $600 million a year under the new contract for a total of $$2.2 billion a year. So the TV revenues doubled.

In 2006, the new TV deals have CBS paying $622 million a year, Fox paying $712 million a year, ESPN paying $1.1 billion a year to get Monday Night Football, and NBC paying $650 billion year for a total of $3.1 billon. So the increase on this contract was slightly less than the deal in 1998. So no one should have expected more than a one or two year massive increase in the cap.

If ESPN didn't overpay to get Monday Night Football (and the subsequently screwed by the NFL), the increase would not be that great at all. The annual fees for for Monday night football doubled or increased by $550 million a year. The increase for the other three network broadcasts only increased by $350 million a year combined.

So Polian shouldn't have had the expectations that the TV deals were going to increase exponentially. If it wasn't for ESPN overbidding for a product that they got a bait and switch, the new TV deal wouldn't have affected the cap all that much.

Good recap. However you missed DirecTV going from paying $350 million (1998 deal) to paying $700 million (2006 deal).

 

[coltsfan]

Umm.. this is utter baloney. Most teams ran at Freeney because they knew he was WEAK against the run. The Pats were doing it for years.

No, they didn't. The Pats and other teams have always attacked the Colts straight up the gut in the running game. The Colts have never had a nose tackle who could play the run well until Simon and McFarland. They had Triplett playing in there before and he couldn't anchor at all against double teams. Before this year, teams didn't try very often to run outside the tackles against the Colts. No need to do that if you can just blow them off the ball inside.

 

[solman]

Re: Polian agrees that the Colts are screwed: A theory

I don't agree that it is a borderline insane assessment. Freeney is a difference maker, while the chances that you can find a difference maker at the bottom of the first round is not high. It's as simple as that. Before last year, Freeney was one of the top 20 players in the league. You do what it takes to keep a player like that.

Here is a list of the last eight first round draft picks for the Colts:

2006 30 Joseph Addai RB Louisiana State
2005 29 Marlin Jackson DB Michigan
2003 24 Dallas Clark TE Iowa
2002 11 Dwight Freeney DE Syracuse
2001 30 Reggie Wayne WR Miami (FL)
2000 28 Rob Morris LB Brigham Young
1999 4 Edgerrin James RB Miami (FL)
1998 1 Peyton Manning QB Tennessee

If you could either have:

PACKAGE 1:
A: The first 5-6 years of the career of two random players from the list above at prices that correspond to the pick.
B: $9.5M in cash and cap space

OR

PACKAGE 2:
A: The 2007 season of Dwight Freeney

would you seriously consider package 2?

 

[dryheat44]

Re: Polian agrees that the Colts are screwed: A theory

PACKAGE 2:
B: The 2007 season of Dwight Freeney

would you seriously consider package 2?

Even if they manage an extension, it still doesn't make dollars and sense. I believe Freeney will be 27 when the season starts? So your getting his 27-30 years at huge frontloaded dollars for years when a speed rusher figures to lose his speed, but his cap number makes him virtually un-cuttable instead of two #1 picks and four years of cap availability.

This just smacks of an emotional investment. We can't lose Freeney, he's the heart and soul of this club and provides great intangibles.

 

[coltsfan]

Re: Polian agrees that the Colts are screwed: A theory

Here is a list of the last eight first round draft picks for the Colts:

2006 30 Joseph Addai RB Louisiana State
2005 29 Marlin Jackson DB Michigan
2003 24 Dallas Clark TE Iowa
2002 11 Dwight Freeney DE Syracuse
2001 30 Reggie Wayne WR Miami (FL)
2000 28 Rob Morris LB Brigham Young
1999 4 Edgerrin James RB Miami (FL)
1998 1 Peyton Manning QB Tennessee

If you could either have:

PACKAGE 1:
A: The first 5-6 years of the career of two random players from the list above at prices that correspond to the pick.
B: $9.5M in cash and cap space

OR

PACKAGE 2:
A: The 2007 season of Dwight Freeney

would you seriously consider package 2?

Good point. I agree that I would take Package 1 if the players are two of the three of Clark, Wayne, or Addai. The two defensive players, no. But for the Colts' situation, where they are better on offense than defense and this is their best player on defense, I have no problem with the move. Pass rushers are also harder to find than TEs, WRs, or RBs. Just look at how high they go in the draft each year.

Also how do we know that his salary is going to be so much higher with this exclusive franchise tag than it would be had they just put the regular tag on him? I don't see the DEs in free agency this year setting new salary records. Kerney may break into the top five, but he won't be setting any records.

 

[coltsfan]

Re: Polian agrees that the Colts are screwed: A theory

Even if they manage an extension, it still doesn't make dollars and sense. I believe Freeney will be 27 when the season starts? So your getting his 27-30 years at huge frontloaded dollars for years when a speed rusher figures to lose his speed, but his cap number makes him virtually un-cuttable instead of two #1 picks and four years of cap availability.

This just smacks of an emotional investment. We can't lose Freeney, he's the heart and soul of this club and provides great intangibles.

If he were 30, I would agree. But, as you said, he's 27. We differ on our opinion as I don't think you worry about giving a longterm contract to a guy who is 27.

 

[DaBruinz]

No, they didn't. The Pats and other teams have always attacked the Colts straight up the gut in the running game. The Colts have never had a nose tackle who could play the run well until Simon and McFarland. They had Triplett playing in there before and he couldn't anchor at all against double teams. Before this year, teams didn't try very often to run outside the tackles against the Colts. No need to do that if you can just blow them off the ball inside.

*ROFLMAO* You clearly didn't watch the games in 2003 and 2004. The Pats went right at Freeney.

BTW, since you don't seem to understand the concept of "UP THE MIDDLE" tht term implies running on either side of center. Between the tackles, implies any of the lanes between the tackles, of which there are 4. Then you have outside the tackles.

Running directly at Freeney isn't necessarily running outside the tackles.

 

[coltsfan]

*ROFLMAO* You clearly didn't watch the games in 2003 and 2004. The Pats went right at Freeney.

BTW, since you don't seem to understand the concept of "UP THE MIDDLE" tht term implies running on either side of center. Between the tackles, implies any of the lanes between the tackles, of which there are 4. Then you have outside the tackles.

Running directly at Freeney isn't necessarily running outside the tackles.

Watch the playoff game in 2003. The Patriots consistently moved the chains play after play with Antowain Smith at running back running straight up the middle, knocking the nose guard off the ball.

I understand the difference. I also understand that the responsibility that a DE has in the Colts' scheme and the Patriots' (and other team's) scheme is different. Freeney is asked to rush the QB, so if a team runs a draw play between the tackles I don't expect him to make the play. If a team runs inside the tackles against the Pats, Seymour or Warren will have more of a chance to make the play because they are playing head up. I'm not saying that Freeney's run defense skills is similar to guys like that, but I'm disputing that he has been a liability in any way.

Believe me, I watch probably 15 out of 16 Colts' games per year, in comparison to most guys on here who probably see 4-5. Freeney has been the least of the Colts' problems in run defense. Poor defensive tackle play has usually been the culprit, while poor linebacker play was a problem more than ever this year.

 

[solman]

Re: Polian agrees that the Colts are screwed: A theory

Also how do we know that his salary is going to be so much higher with this exclusive franchise tag than it would be had they just put the regular tag on him?

We don't actually know. I've been assuming that its a bit under $1M extra, but we simply have to wait and see.

 

[coltsfan]

Re: Polian agrees that the Colts are screwed: A theory

We don't actually know. I've been assuming that its a bit under $1M extra, but we simply have to wait and see.

Yeah, the only thing I can see that would effect it like that is if the Panthers give Julius Peppers an extension. But I'm not sure how much that would change it b/c I know that he's already making a lot, and an extension probably wouldn't be done before the draft anyway (Isn't that when the new salaries would have to be in effect?). The other high priced DEs like Strahan, Abraham, Taylor, Mario Williams, etc. are all set with their contracts as far as I know.

 

[RyanTheColtsFan]

Re: Polian agrees that the Colts are screwed: A theory

Good point. I agree that I would take Package 1 if the players are two of the three of Clark, Wayne, or Addai. The two defensive players, no. But for the Colts' situation, where they are better on offense than defense and this is their best player on defense, I have no problem with the move. Pass rushers are also harder to find than TEs, WRs, or RBs. Just look at how high they go in the draft each year.

Also how do we know that his salary is going to be so much higher with this exclusive franchise tag than it would be had they just put the regular tag on him? I don't see the DEs in free agency this year setting new salary records. Kerney may break into the top five, but he won't be setting any records.

Best player on defense? Im pretty sure once Bob Sanders got healthy, the defense won the Super Bowl.