Freeney signs $72 million deal with Colts

[Bill Swerski]

Freeney had a whopping 3.5 sacks last year, and the majority of that in 1 game......

 

That's 5.5 sacks, not 3.5.

 

While at work on Saturday, I listened to some idiot argue this point to John Clayton on the radio. Unfortunately, Clayton never mentioned the fact that Freeney was playing hurt for a good portion of last season or pointed out Freeney's stats over the previous four years.

 

Even if they over-paid for a one-dimensional player, it was still a good signing for the Colts. An elite pass-rusher is necessary in the soft Cover 2 defenses that drop the LBs back into coverage and rely almost exclusively on the Front 4 to pressure the QB.

[Belushi]

Easy to say he was overpaid, but if the Colts didn't pay him someone else would have. And who would they have used to replace him? Tough to find guys of his calibre who can consistently pressure the opposing QB. They lost too many other pieces in free agency to let Freeney go too.

[Ruffian]

He's the most important defensive player on that team, bar none. Do I think they reached with the contract? Yes. But is he worth keeping? Absolutely. My feeling on Freeney is that he is as dangerous a pass rusher as there is in the league, and he makes up for a weaker LB core with his ability to pressure QBs. Freeney changes pass drops and progressions--it's that simple. He is the biggest defensive name on the roster, has been tough for quite some time, and helped your team win a Superbowl. After taking good care of the offensive side of the ball, it was time to pay the defense (and I don't want to hear about the rush numbers. This league is about playoffs and championships, and they won the biggest game of the season) too. Give him the money.

Edited July 16, 2007 by Ruffian

[kingfish247]

A strong argument can be made that Sanders is the most important defensive player on the team. He missed most of the season but made it back for the playoffs which is right about the time Indy actually started stopping opposing offenses.

 

Freeney may have struggled with injuries but Indy's front 7 was embarrassed last year on multiple occasions... from allowing a gimpy Ron Dayne to look like an All-Pro (Week 16) to allowing A-Train look like a serviceable RB again (Week 10). I think NFL stat people are still trying to calculate all of the Jags' rushing yards... like calculating to ever more decimal places of PI.

 

Teams learned real fast that all they had to do was double Freeney and their DTs and LBs can be manhandled.

 

While it's hard to say they overpaid, especially now that teams have more cap room, it's inconceivable that Freeney makes more money on a per year basis over the life of his contract than Brees or Bulger. He's undoubtedly the best of Indy's front 7 but that front 7 was abysmal last year. Tell me the best player on one of the better D's over the past few years got Freeney's contract and I'd be much more open to the idea of that big of a contract for that defensive player.

Edited July 16, 2007 by kingfish247

[Bill Swerski]

A strong argument can be made that Sanders is the most important defensive player on the team. He missed most of the season but made it back for the playoffs which is right about the time Indy actually started stopping opposing offenses.

 

Agreed, although it doesn't take an elite defense to stop the Chiefs and Ravens offenses. And Rex Grossman did more for the Colts D than the Colts themselves in the SB. The Colts defense got exposed big-time against the Pats in the AFC Championship Game.

 

Teams learned real fast that all they had to do was double Freeney and their DTs and LBs can be manhandled.

 

Opposing offenses have been double-teaming Freeney for years now... and manhandling their DTs and LBs. Mathis' sack numbers are a reflection of that extra attention to Freeney. The only time that I've seen Freeney NOT double-teamed was the first 2/3 of last year when he was injured enough that he could be covered one-on-one. They double-teamed Booger instead. When Freeney was healthy again in the playoffs, offenses went back to double-teaming Freeney and that allowed Booger to step up and make some plays.

[Ruffian]

I still believe that Freeney is the more important, though you make a solid argument that Sanders' return was a HUGH gain for the defense. I also concur with you that Brees and Bulger deserve more money (and Bulger may be getting more very soon) but comparing older QB contracts to a 2007 DE cotract may not be a fair assessment. I would not have paid Freeney quite that much (as I have said in older postings) but I do believe he is deserving of BIG money. I also believe that Freeney, when healthy, is more of an impact player than anyone else at that position save Julius Peppers. Those double and triple teams that he faces have not always been enough to prevent him from sacks against teams that didn't have to throw to score (see Colts Run defense). Freeney averages 11.3 sacks per season and has 56.5 sacks to his credit. Peppers, who is at 53.5, had his best year last year. Both have been excellent pass rushers, though I give the nod to Peppers at the position due to his coverage abilites and athleticism.

Carolina, whose rush defense was significantly better than Indy's, faced 28.1 rushing attempts per game. They gave up 108.6 yards per game on average. By comparison, Indy faced 32. 4 attempts per game and allowed 173.0 yards per game on average. Indy faced fewer passing attempts (25.9 per game ave. to Carolina's 31.2 per game ave.) and had fewer team sacks than Carolina (25 to 41). My feeling on this is that Indy's best player (Freeney) saw his numbers go down as a result of the success that teams had on the ground against the Colts D, which meant that he would not have the number of chances to do what he does best (pressure and sack QBs). Because Carolina's run defense was decent, Peppers had more chances to for sacks and hurries. Beyond that, Carolina's lineback corps is much better than Indy's 2006 version. If the Colts can improve the run defense this season, Freeney will wreak havoc again. Keep in mind too that the 2005 Colts D was much better before the departure of a few starters.

Edited July 16, 2007 by Ruffian

[CaptainHook]

all very good points. especially about ludicrously trying to compare Freeney's contract to Bulger or Brees. Brees was very much an unknown quantity coming off shoulder surgery, and how long ago did Bulger sign his contract? And he's been inured a lot too. Plus the salary cap goes way up each year. it's not even a fair comparison. Once Peppers and some other DE's contracts come up, and they break the bank, Freeney's deal will look more like a bargain.

 

Lions just signed some DT I've never heard of to a $49 million contract, making him the highest paid DT in the league. It's soon will be the norm.