PDA

View Full Version : Colts sign Brandon Stokely to 5 year extension.


Bowser
12-19-2004, 09:58 AM
Allright, I won't even pretend to understand the cap, but how in the hell do the Colts pull this out? Peyton with his 34 mil, Harrison gets his contract, now Stokely (I didn't see the numbers on what he received). I'm guessing they will get James resigned as well. These are great moves. Yes, they really are letting their defense flop in the wind, but until some team figures out how to stop this offense, why not?

Now, the inevitable question..........why in the hell can't the Chiefs front office (Carl) get deals done that make sense. I'm not even talking about the quality of player that Carl signs or re-signs (and this past offseason has been unquestionably Carl's worst, but that would take up a whole other thread!). Us being 6 million under the cap and hearing Vermeil talk about IR money (WTF?) makes this frustrating as hell. I know we resigned pretty much all of our free agents.......Obviously, they thought Gunther could make chicken salad out of chicken shit.

I don't know what to think. Frustration in the utmost. After watching these moves, somebody needs to take responsibility. But we all know that won't happen.

Rant over. What does everybody else think?

LiL stumppy
12-19-2004, 10:05 AM
I belive they will have to get of a few guys on offence.Maybe even Reggy Wayne.

ZootedGranny
12-19-2004, 10:07 AM
I think Carl is actually alright in this aspect (resigning his own). At the end of last season, we found out that Carl had been in contract talks with several players for several weeks, working on getting them back before the season ended.

Obviously I had a problem with bringing back most of these defensive players, but the only real worry I had was the resigning of Dunn. He came back, but it looked iffy for a couple of weeks.

Two years ago, he gave Waters and Hall better and longer contracts, which I think has been one of his best moves in a long while. It was before Hall had become an outstanding return man, and Waters had just started to flash top level talent. By now he's got them locked up for a few more years where had he not done those deals, they'd be commanding much more money. That's not to say Waters and Hall won't ask for more money down the line, but they're locked up.

Free agency wise, don't get me started.

Bowser
12-19-2004, 10:18 AM
I think Carl is actually alright in this aspect (resigning his own). At the end of last season, we found out that Carl had been in contract talks with several players for several weeks, working on getting them back before the season ended.

Obviously I had a problem with bringing back most of these defensive players, but the only real worry I had was the resigning of Dunn. He came back, but it looked iffy for a couple of weeks.

Two years ago, he gave Waters and Hall better and longer contracts, which I think has been one of his best moves in a long while. It was before Hall had become an outstanding return man, and Waters had just started to flash top level talent. By now he's got them locked up for a few more years where had he not done those deals, they'd be commanding much more money. That's not to say Waters and Hall won't ask for more money down the line, but they're locked up.

Free agency wise, don't get me started.

Good points. Then the question is why do we keep our scouting department?

4th and Long
12-19-2004, 10:23 AM
Under the new collective bargaining agreement, don't the salary cap numbers go up next year? :shrug:

bricks
12-19-2004, 11:26 AM
4th and long,

Nice pic there on your sig :drool:

whoman69
12-19-2004, 11:27 AM
The reason they can do this is because they don't have to really get under the cap for next year until after March 1. They really will have to give up some things on D or get some more cheap rookies in there.

4th and Long
12-19-2004, 11:45 AM
4th and long,

Nice pic there on your sig :drool:
:D