Colts Extend Brissett

[John from Riverside]

2 minutes ago, Doc said:

 

No one knows when Luck was destined to retire.  Only Luck himself.  Again I have never seen a player retire just 2 weeks before the season started, over an injury that will heal in a few months.

I don’t know doc

i never saw a player retire at halftime before last year

 

 

[Mr. WEO]

1 minute ago, Doc said:

 

No one knows when Luck was destined to retire.  Only Luck himself.  Again I have never seen a player retire just 2 weeks before the season started, over an injury that will heal in a few months.

 

 

That may be true doc.  But it's completely beside the point.  You said they knew or should have known he was retiring not 2 weeks, but 6 months?  18 months?...ago?

 

Come on doc, back it up.  Should be easy for you.  Share the "insight" that led you to post that.

[Doc]

Just now, John from Riverside said:

I don’t know doc

i never saw a player retire at halftime before last year

 

True.  That wasn't right either.

[Mr. WEO]

1 minute ago, Doc Brown said:

It makes sense as they obviously have a lot of faith in him.  If he has a great year they don't have to franchise tag him and will save about 10 million bucks next year.  He's still in the lower half of the league in average starter money.  They're only tied to him for two years if they want to draft a rookie to play behind him next year or wait until 2020.

 

 

It's only obvious to most....not all.

[Charles Romes]

I can’t believe they paid that much.  Could have gotten him for the lowest tier starter number of 10M.  Fitz gets 5.5.  Tyrod got about 15 but that was after putting up great ball security stats.  

[BITE ME]

1 hour ago, Kirby Jackson said:

So just to be clear Peterman and Kizer are decent backups saddled with tough situations but Brissett is terrible?

 

 

 

What part of neither is an NFL starter did you not get.  Brissett is terrible.  That is why he was a backup. He is a GREAT backup.  A TERRIBLE starter.

Edited September 3, 2019 by FUTURIST

[Doc]

Just now, Mr. WEO said:

That may be true doc.  But it's completely beside the point.  You said they knew or should have known he was retiring not 2 weeks, but 6 months?  18 months?...ago?

 

Come on doc, back it up.  Should be easy for you.  Share the "insight" that led you to post that.

 

I never said they should have known.  This is on Luck.  The point is players retire when they have an injury that will expose them to life-altering injury (like Wood's neck injury) or long-lasting problems (Morse and concussions, which is another discussion).  The calf strain would have healed.  He just didn't feel like playing anymore and I doubt that was something that just occurred to him.

4 minutes ago, Charles Romes said:

I can’t believe they paid that much.  Could have gotten him for the lowest tier starter number of 10M.  Fitz gets 5.5.  Tyrod got about 15 but that was after putting up great ball security stats.  

 

They had $50M in cap room.  I wonder if it was an "80% of the cap" thing? 

[Kirby Jackson]

11 minutes ago, FUTURIST said:

 

What part of neither is an NFL starter did you not get.  Brissett is terrible.  That is why he was a backup. 

Neither is a NFL backup either. All that we can go by are your words. You said, “Kizer and Peterman are not that bad.” You also said, “His backup will replace him around game 4. He is terrible.” That was in reference to Brissett.

 

Based on ACTUAL participation in a NFL game those are not reasonable conclusions. Peterman<Kizer<<<<<<<<<Brissett 

Edited September 3, 2019 by Kirby Jackson

[Mr. WEO]

Just now, Doc said:

 

I never said they should have known.  This is on Luck.  The point is players retire when they have an injury that will expose them to life-altering injury (like Wood's neck injury) or long-lasting problems (Morse and concussions, which is another discussion).  The calf strain would have healed.  He just didn't feel like playing anymore and I doubt that was something that just occurred to him.

 

 

Yes, we all understand that Luck decided at some point that he didn't want to play any more.  Thanks for the heads up on that one doc.

 

But......You said they should have signed Foles.  Then you just claimed he was done as soon as his just completed comeback, playoff winning season concluded.

 

You said that Brissett was "no one's" plan, including the Colts.  This despite the facts that he took every starter snap this off/preseason, they brought no one else in to compete with him and....they just, for no reason at all, singed him to a 2 year extension that will pay him over 3 times per year what he was due this year!  But he wasn't "their plan" LOL

 

These are things you said doc.

[NoSaint]

3 hours ago, EmotionallyUnstable said:

https://mobile.twitter.com/RapSheet/status/1168635665036271618?ref_src=twsrc%5Egoogle%7Ctwcamp%5Eserp%7Ctwgr%5Etweet

 

(Sorry, idk how to embed a tweet from my phone) 

 

20 mil Guaranteed ...Seems like the just enjoy handing out money unnecessarily 

 

This will be a bad contract that haunts 

[Doc]

6 minutes ago, Mr. WEO said:

Yes, we all understand that Luck decided at some point that he didn't want to play any more.  Thanks for the heads up on that one doc.

 

But......You said they should have signed Foles.  Then you just claimed he was done as soon as his just completed comeback, playoff winning season concluded.

 

You said that Brissett was "no one's" plan, including the Colts.  This despite the facts that he took every starter snap this off/preseason, they brought no one else in to compete with him and....they just, for no reason at all, singed him to a 2 year extension that will pay him over 3 times per year what he was due this year!  But he wasn't "their plan" LOL

 

These are things you said doc.

 

Oy.  I said that if he told them earlier, they could have done something else instead of having to go with Brissett. 

[Mr. WEO]

Just now, Doc said:

 

Oy.  I said that if he told them earlier, they could have done something else instead of having to go with Brissett. 

 

 

lol no you didn't.

 

No one runs from his own posts like you doc.  Always the flippiest of floppers.

 

Always a pleasure...

 

 

[Doc]

56 minutes ago, Mr. WEO said:

lol no you didn't.

 

No one runs from his own posts like you doc.  Always the flippiest of floppers.

 

Always a pleasure...

 

Yeah. I did.  This whole thing started when you took umbrage with me saying that Luck's timing was poor because this was a decision that was a long time coming and he should have informed the Colts a lot sooner so that they could have had a better plan than Brissett. 

Edited September 3, 2019 by Doc

[BITE ME]

10 hours ago, Kirby Jackson said:

Neither is a NFL backup either. All that we can go by are your words. You said, “Kizer and Peterman are not that bad.” You also said, “His backup will replace him around game 4. He is terrible.” That was in reference to Brissett.

 

Based on ACTUAL participation in a NFL game those are not reasonable conclusions. Peterman<Kizer<<<<<<<<<Brissett 

 

Wrong. I will take Kizer and Peterman at their salaries over the a $30M Brissett.  Kizer and Peterman are perfect for what they are signed for. Run the scout team. Come in in blowout games.  Brissett is terrible.  He is not much better than Kizer. He is the 3rd best QB in Indy.  Chad Kelly is better. Brissett  Brissett was 4-12 as a starter in 2017. He is a career backup. Peterman is a pick off machine.  Brissett is a fumbling machine.

Edited September 3, 2019 by FUTURIST

[Mr. WEO]

9 hours ago, Doc said:

 

Yeah. I did.  This whole thing started when you took umbrage with me saying that Luck's timing was poor because this was a decision that was a long time coming and he should have informed the Colts a lot sooner so that they could have had a better plan than Brissett. 

 

You keep pushing back what you are convinced was Luck's date he decided to retire.  First it was before Foles was signed.  Now it's.....2 years ago.  Of course you are making this all up.  Whether it was "calf pain" or not, doesn't matter.  He was tired of always being in pain, he said.  He got married, had money in the bank, a new pain pops up.  He tries to work through it.  He decides he doesn't want to.  Boom.

 

After the Colts beat the Titans to make the playoffs, there was this (USAT):

 

"As for Luck, the rebuilt quarterback who’s been forced to restart his career, he’s allowed in recent weeks how “fulfilling” this season has been for him. He never balked early in the year, vowing that he believed in Reich, believed in what this team was building. The results will come, he promised.

He was right. Sixteen games into the comeback, and still more football to play.

“I’m glad I get to play the greatest team game in the world,” Luck said, “in the greatest locker room in the world.”

With that, the quarterback exited the same interview room he'd been so battered in three years ago beaming. His family was waiting. It was time to celebrate".

To you, that's code for:  "I'm seriously considering retirement".

 

Simply put, there's no evidence that Luck had made his final decision sooner than he did.  Certainly not before he got married.  None.

 

Also, the Colts plan B (which you called "a theory", LOL) was and clearly is Brissett.  Why you continue to dispute that..... 

 

 

 

 

[Kirby Jackson]

24 minutes ago, FUTURIST said:

 

Wrong. I will take Kizer and Peterman at their salaries over the a $30M Brissett.  Kizer and Peterman are perfect for what they are signed for. Run the scout team. Come in in blowout games.  Brissett is terrible.  He is not much better than Kizer. He is the 3rd best QB in Indy.  Chad Kelly is better. Brissett  Brissett was 4-12 as a starter in 2017. He is a career backup. Peterman is a pick off machine.  Brissett is a fumbling machine.

Brissett was 4-11 not 4-12. He also threw for 3,100 yards with 13 TDs (he rushed for 4 more) to 7 INTs. He has a career passer rating of 81.6. He is what he is. He is Tyrod, Keenum, Tannehill, Fitz and every other guy that was/is a bridge starter or high end backup. 

 

Peterman is statistically the WORST QB EVER with multiple starts. Kizer is the 2nd lowest rated QB since entering the league (ahead of only Peterman). Those guys aren’t “perfect to run the scout team.” They are scrubs that don’t belong on an NFL roster.

[bigK14094]

13 hours ago, FUTURIST said:

The Bills backup is better than the Colts starter.  That is how you know the Bills are headed somewhere.  Bills have depth everywhere. ?

I am hoping the bills backup isn't better than the Bills starter.

[BITE ME]

1 hour ago, Kirby Jackson said:

Brissett was 4-11 not 4-12.

Great. That makes all the difference in the world. Terrible vs Not as Terrible.

[DCOrange]

I think Brissett will play well statistically and the Colts will be in the hunt for the AFC South title.

[BITE ME]

16 hours ago, Kirby Jackson said:

So just to be clear Peterman and Kizer are decent backups saddled with tough situations but Brissett is terrible?

 

 

 

Peterman and Kizer are Terrible STARTERS.  Brissett is a Terrible STARTER. Brisset is a good backup. You don't give good backups 15M a year.  

 

Hoyer is making 12M for 3 years.  Brissett is making 30M for 2 years.  Hoyer is just as good if not better than Brissett.  This is not rocket science. When Hoyer takes his spot this will all make sense, if it doesn't already. There was no reason to give Brissett a starting QB contract based off his past performances. He is a backup. He should have just been forced to play under his contract until he proved (maybe through 5 games) he can start.  He will be on the bench after the bye when they are 0-5. If they are lucky they will be 1-4. He is not a good staritng QB because he is not a starting QB. Period. The Colts MUST draft a QB or get a REAL QB in free agency. They are not winning with these two guys. No reason to pay either of them more than $4M a year.

Edited September 3, 2019 by FUTURIST

[Kirby Jackson]

11 minutes ago, FUTURIST said:

 

Peterman and Kizer are Terrible STARTERS.  Brissett is a Terrible STARTER. Brisset is a good backup. You don't give good backups 15M a year.  

 

Hoyer is making 12M for 3 years.  Brissett is making 30M for 2 years.  Hoyer is just as good if not better than Brissett.  This is not rocket science. When Hoyer takes his spot this will all make sense, if it doesn't already. There was no reason to give Brissett a starting QB contract based off his past performances. He is a backup. He should have just been forced to play under his contract until he proved (maybe through 8 games) he can start.  He will be on the bench by week 5. He is not a good staring QB because he is not a starting QB. Period. The Colts MUST draft a QB or get a REAL QB in free agency. They are not winning with these two guys. No reason to pay either of them more than $4M a year.

No offense, but anyone that thinks Peterman and Kizer aren’t terrible is going to have a tough time talking QBs around here. They are the worst 2 QBs in the league.

 

Brissett is a young QB that has shown some promise. The Colts paid him bridge QB money to see if he can be the guy. They have the most cap space in the league so they aren’t in any trouble because of it. It’s the same thing that the Jags did with Bortles last year (and he had a much longer resume of poor play).  The Colts are also trying to portray stability as they still need to recruit. Paying Brissett the going rate for a bridge QB is a good start. This is a weird hill to die on.

[BITE ME]

11 minutes ago, Kirby Jackson said:

No offense, but anyone that thinks Peterman and Kizer aren’t terrible is going to have a tough time talking QBs around here. They are the worst 2 QBs in the league.

 

Brissett is a young QB that has shown some promise. The Colts paid him bridge QB money to see if he can be the guy. They have the most cap space in the league so they aren’t in any trouble because of it. It’s the same thing that the Jags did with Bortles last year (and he had a much longer resume of poor play).  The Colts are also trying to portray stability as they still need to recruit. Paying Brissett the going rate for a bridge QB is a good start. This is a weird hill to die on.

 

They are a 3rd string QB and a 3rd string QB on the IR. Who cares if they are the worst in the league. They are supposed to be, and they make no money.  Brissett is TERRIBLE. He was a backup for a reason. He will be 0-5 or 1-4 at best at their bye.  There was no reason to give him a 30M 2 year contract.  No reason at all. He is going to be bench at the bye and cut at the end of the year.  Anybody can see this coming. He could have done the same thing under his old contract.

 

2 minutes ago, FUTURIST said:

 

 

Edited September 3, 2019 by FUTURIST

[Kirby Jackson]

2 minutes ago, FUTURIST said:

 

They are a 3rd string QB and a 3rd string QB on the IR. Who cares if they are the worst in the league. They are supposed to be, and they make no money.  Brissett is TERRIBLE. He was a backup for a reason. He will be 0-5 or 1-4 at best at their bye.  There was no reason to give him a 30M 2 year contract.  No reason at all.

 

 

I’d be happy to wager on that if you are interested? Over/under 1.5 wins at the Colts bye

 

FWIW, I bet the Colts under 7.5 wins. I’m betting on them not being very good but Brissett is WAY better than you are giving him credit for. He’s right there with current starters like Winston, Mariota, Keenum, Flacco, etc... He’s not some scrub that is going to lose his job to Brian Hoyer!! 

[BITE ME]

8 minutes ago, Kirby Jackson said:

I’d be happy to wager on that if you are interested? Over/under 1.5 wins at the Colts bye

 

FWIW, I bet the Colts under 7.5 wins. I’m betting on them not being very good but Brissett is WAY better than you are giving him credit for. He’s right there with current starters like Winston, Mariota, Keenum, Flacco, etc... He’s not some scrub that is going to lose his job to Brian Hoyer!! 

 

If you think he is on the level with Flacco you are insane.  The point is they did not have to pay Brissett. He was under contract. When he reverts back to being a backup after the bye, he will be earning starting money.  Just stupid.

 

Week 1 @ Chargers. LOSS

Week 2 @Titans LOSS

Week 3 Falcons LOSS

Week 4 Raiders WIN (although 60-40)

Week 5 @Chiefs LOSS

 

1-4 or 0-5. Guaranteed.

 

They will then lose their next three against Broncos, Texans, and Steelers.

 

They are staring 1-7 or 0-8 in the face. There was no need to give Brissett a new contract.

Edited September 3, 2019 by FUTURIST

[dave mcbride]

13 minutes ago, FUTURIST said:

 

They are a 3rd string QB and a 3rd string QB on the IR. Who cares if they are the worst in the league. They are supposed to be, and they make no money.  Brissett is TERRIBLE. He was a backup for a reason. He will be 0-5 or 1-4 at best at their bye.  There was no reason to give him a 30M 2 year contract.  No reason at all. He is going to be bench at the bye and cut at the end of the year.  Anybody can see this coming. He could have done the same thing under his old contract.

 

 

The overall Indy roster is INFINITELY better than it was in 2017, and I also think Brissett has probably grown as a player. He's really not THAT bad. The 2017 offensive talent was lousy, and it's simply better now. That said, their early schedule is brutal: at SD, at TN, vs. ATL, vs. Oakland (that's a win), and at KC. They're going to be 2-3 at best.  

5 minutes ago, FUTURIST said:

 

If you think he is on the level with Flacco you are insane.  The point is they did not have to pay Brissett. He was under contract. When he reverts back to being a backup after the bye, he will be earning starting money.  Just stupid.

 

Week 1 @ Chargers. LOSS

Week 2 @Titans LOSS

Week 3 Falcons LOSS

Week 4 Raiders WIN (although 60-40)

Week 5 @Chiefs LOSS

 

1-4 or 0-5. Guaranteed.

 

They will then lose their next three against Broncos, Texans, and Steelers.

 

They are staring 1-7 or 0-8 in the face. There was no need to give Brissett a new contract.

This is crazy talk. They have a really good roster top to bottom. 

[BITE ME]

7 minutes ago, dave mcbride said:

The overall Indy roster is INFINITELY better than it was in 2017, and I also think Brissett has probably grown as a player. He's really not THAT bad. The 2017 offensive talent was lousy, and it's simply better now. That said, their early schedule is brutal: at SD, at TN, vs. ATL, vs. Oakland (that's a win), and at KC. They're going to be 2-3 at best.  

This is crazy talk. They have a really good roster top to bottom. 

 

Crazy talk. They are going to be 1-4.  Then 1-7. Exactly what games are they going to win.  What was the point giving a new contract to a guy who could have started under his regular contract and then earned a new one by performance.  He is not a franchise QB. 

Edited September 3, 2019 by FUTURIST

[dave mcbride]

5 minutes ago, FUTURIST said:

 

Crazy talk. They are going to be 1-4.  Then 1-7. Exactly what games are they going to win.  What was the point giving a new contract to a guy who could have started under his regular contract and then earned a new one by performance.  He is not a franchise QB. 

Last year, they were 10th in defensive DVOA, 10th in points allowed, and 11th in yards allowed. And they played better on D as the season progressed. Even more important, they signed Justin Houston, who when healthy is one of the best pass rushers in the league. He is healthy now. Eberflus is a good coordinator too. Teams with top-level defenses don't start out 1-7.  Defense is by definition equally as important as offense.

Edited September 3, 2019 by dave mcbride

[BuffaloBillsGospel]

I thought it was a smart move, this contract makes him the 19th highest paid QB in the league which is about right around where he should be, he was also on the last year of his contract so if he doesn't do well then they can draft a QB, if not then they draft a QB next season and let them battle it out for next season. There is also the possibility he could be good/great or a franchise guy you never know, it's really a win-win for them imo.

[Big C]

Everybody hating on Brissett should read Warren Sharp's breakdown of their 2017 season. Colts took a lead into the 4th quarter in 9 games and only won 2 of those games due to overly conservative coaching: https://www.sharpfootballanalysis.com/analysis/the-unbelievable-story-of-the-2017-colts/

 

Brissett under Reich with camp under his belt has a chance to be good this year. Not to mention he is only commanding $15 million/year. That's nothing for your starting QB and if he doesn't work for them they aren't committed longer than next year.

Edited September 3, 2019 by Big C

[AlCowlingsTaxiService]

Brissett isn't horrible ... and realistically, what other options did the Colts have?  Besides, 15 mil/season isn't at all outrageous in the world of starting NFL quarterbacks.  This 'aint your grandpappies NFL anymore

[BigDingus]

Brissett really isn't bad at all. He's a pretty solid backup, and can be a serviceable starter.

[Doc]

5 hours ago, Mr. WEO said:

 

You keep pushing back what you are convinced was Luck's date he decided to retire.  First it was before Foles was signed.  Now it's.....2 years ago.  Of course you are making this all up.  Whether it was "calf pain" or not, doesn't matter.  He was tired of always being in pain, he said.  He got married, had money in the bank, a new pain pops up.  He tries to work through it.  He decides he doesn't want to.  Boom.

 

After the Colts beat the Titans to make the playoffs, there was this (USAT):

 

"As for Luck, the rebuilt quarterback who’s been forced to restart his career, he’s allowed in recent weeks how “fulfilling” this season has been for him. He never balked early in the year, vowing that he believed in Reich, believed in what this team was building. The results will come, he promised.

He was right. Sixteen games into the comeback, and still more football to play.

“I’m glad I get to play the greatest team game in the world,” Luck said, “in the greatest locker room in the world.”

With that, the quarterback exited the same interview room he'd been so battered in three years ago beaming. His family was waiting. It was time to celebrate".

To you, that's code for:  "I'm seriously considering retirement".

 

Simply put, there's no evidence that Luck had made his final decision sooner than he did.  Certainly not before he got married.  None.

 

Also, the Colts plan B (which you called "a theory", LOL) was and clearly is Brissett.  Why you continue to dispute that..... 

 

I  could care less what Luck said.  If the prospect of rehabbing for a couple more months was enough to force him to retire, he's been checked-out for awhile now.  Which again goes back to the bad timing of his announcement leaving the Colts with Brissett, a guy who at best will be a bridge to another QB next year or the year after, if not being replaced by Hoyer somewhere around mid-season.

[Mr. WEO]

1 hour ago, Doc said:

 

I  could care less what Luck said.  If the prospect of rehabbing for a couple more months was enough to force him to retire, he's been checked-out for awhile now.  Which again goes back to the bad timing of his announcement leaving the Colts with Brissett, a guy who at best will be a bridge to another QB next year or the year after, if not being replaced by Hoyer somewhere around mid-season.

 

Ok here’s a simple question for you:  let’s say he knew 4 months ago, in  May.  Or 5 months ago.  Or way back in March,  while marrying his sweetie,  when the calf issue began.....What would the Colts have done had he told them months ago (even knowing there’s no reason he himself actually knew he was done back then)?

 

other than beg him to reconsider and hold off on a final decision, of course....

[BITE ME]

20 hours ago, EmotionallyUnstable said:

 

Thats exactly right. They paid him prematurely IMO. However their cap situation allows them to do that, IIRC. 

 

I think it may very well turn out to be a premature mistake. But given their current cap situation, it’s a potential mistake that may be worth some risk. I suppose they’d rather be sure they can keep him if all goes well this year. If he bombs, they can have their back up QB and still have the money available to get a starter elsewhere 

 

Good point, I just wonder why you don't wait until they play 5 games and get to the bye.  If he performs, you pay him.  If he doesn't you just play out the season. That team is not going anywhere, and he isn't commanding more than he got even if the team is 5-0.  They now have the nightmare scenario of having to look like idiots if they start 1-4 or even 0-5 and have to replace him.  Good for him though.  If people are going to pay you, take it. 

[JPP]

20 hours ago, StHustle said:

Next year they will have to pay Chad Kelly starters money.

Thats if he doesnt get arrested doing something stupid again

[Doc]

57 minutes ago, Mr. WEO said:

Ok here’s a simple question for you:  let’s say he knew 4 months ago, in  May.  Or 5 months ago.  Or way back in March,  while marrying his sweetie,  when the calf issue began.....What would the Colts have done had he told them months ago (even knowing there’s no reason he himself actually knew he was done back then)?

 

other than beg him to reconsider and hold off on a final decision, of course....

 

If he had told them back in March?  What do you think they would have done?  Again Brissett is no one's Plan A.

[Doc]

 

The only real question now is: do they tank this year for Herbert or Tua or wait until next year for the generational talent in Lawrence, as is their wont?

Edited September 3, 2019 by Doc

[JESSEFEFFER]

The crappy career w/l record and lack of dynamic playmaking do not inspire confidence but I think there is a good chance that Brissett in year 4, under Frank Reich's coaching staff, looks way better than previous versions. 

[Doc]

20 minutes ago, JESSEFEFFER said:

The crappy career w/l record and lack of dynamic playmaking do not inspire confidence but I think there is a good chance that Brissett in year 4, under Frank Reich's coaching staff, looks way better than previous versions. 

 

Enough for them to keep him as the starter and/or not regret giving him that much money?

[JESSEFEFFER]

He would have been a free agent after this year with the potential that they could head into an uncertain 2020 offseason.  This is a Rob Johnson/Ryan Fitzpatrick sort of deal that does not keep them from moving on if they see fit.  Reich has been talking him up all summer, calling him a top 20 QB.  There is a legit scenario where this works out well for them but I would not say it's more than 50/50.

 

 

7 minutes ago, Doc said:

 

Enough for them to keep him as the starter and/or not regret giving him that much money?