OCTOBER 4: ESPN’s Stephen Holder notes that, to no surprise, Taylor’s teammates are excited about his presumed return to action in Week 5. The 24-year-old’s relationship with the Colts seems to be “headed in the right direction,” Holder writes, adding that Taylor’s mindset regarding his situation in Indianapolis has “improved significantly.” That points to an audition period in 2023 taking place, the potential trade effects of which will be worth watching closely.
Taylor was listed as a full participant in Wednesday’s practice, though it was merely a walkthrough. Still, all signs continue to point to his 2023 debut happening on Sunday as the next phase of his Colts tenure takes shape.
OCTOBER 2: After two months of trade rumors, Jonathan Taylor remains on the Colts. While the prospect of trade is not believed to be shut down, the team is indeed opening the running back’s practice window.
A Sunday report indicated this move was coming, and Shane Steichen confirmed Taylor is slated to return to practice Wednesday. Taylor has resided on Indianapolis’ reserve/PUP list; he will now have a 21-day window to return. Questions remain about Taylor’s desire to play for the Colts again, and the trade deadline looms Oct. 31. For now, however, the Colts will move him closer toward playing for them in 2023.
Steichen also did not rule out Taylor from making his debut Sunday against the Titans, Fox 59’s Mike Chappell adds. Taylor requested a trade in July, amid a clash with owner Jim Irsay, and likely attempted to use his ankle issue as a way to avoid a return to the Colts. The 2021 rushing champ is believed to have been healthy for a bit now; Irsay proclaimed him ready to go back in mid-July. But a stretch of turbulence between Taylor and the team engulfed Steichen’s first summer on the job. It will certainly be pivotal if/when Taylor addresses his situation this week.
After Irsay flatly stated Taylor would not be traded back in July, the Colts did end up engaging with teams ahead of the August deadline to finalize 53-man rosters and set injured lists. The Dolphins and Packers discussed Taylor with the Colts, with other teams rumored as interested to a lesser degree. Rumors have emerged about the Colts’ lack of desire to truly move the contract-year back, a development foreshadowed by Jaylen Waddle coming up in Dolphins talks. The Taylor market never appeared robust, and it has cooled from the August point.
The Colts are believed to have dropped their asking price for the fourth-year RB. No team has fetched a first-rounder for a running back since the Colts sent the Browns one for Trent Richardson 10 years ago, and Indy is now open to accepting a Round 2 choice here. As of last week, Taylor also remained at odds with the Colts. Of course, if Indianapolis does not make a deal, Taylor’s options are limited.
Once Taylor returns to practice, the Colts will have 21 days to activate him from the PUP list. If the team does not do so, Taylor’s season is done. A player not on an injured list exaggerating an injury to force a trade is not unprecedented; Jalen Ramsey did so in 2019, when the Jaguars collected two first-rounders from the Rams. But some finality to Taylor’s 2023 saga looks to be coming. Steichen said (via the Indianapolis Star’s Joel Erickson) he has stayed in contact with Taylor during his time on the PUP list.
It is also uncertain if Irsay and GM Chris Ballard are on the same page regarding a potential trade. If the Colts do not trade Taylor, they would still have the option of franchise-tagging him in 2024. This year’s franchise tag deadline accelerated Taylor’s standoff with the Colts, with three running backs (Saquon Barkley, Josh Jacobs, Tony Pollard) playing on the tag. And the grim prospect of Taylor playing out his rookie deal and then being cuffed still looms. Though, the Colts will need to decide how much longer they want to endure this situation. How Taylor reacclimates under a new coaching staff could be important as he rejoins his teammates at workouts.
Winning the 2021 rushing title by more than 500 yards, Taylor missed six games due to an ankle injury — his first notable malady during his college or pro careers — last season and underwent what was labeled a minimally invasive surgery in January. It is expected the Wisconsin product is good to go. If Taylor is truly on track to play in Colts games, he would presumably reclaim the starter role ahead of Zack Moss, who has operated as such for the past three weeks. The 2022 trade acquisition has played at least 75% of the Colts’ offensive snaps in each of his three games since returning from a broken arm.
Being put on ‘display’ so teams can see the quality and functionality of the product to entice the marketability.
If your GM doesn’t know what Taylor brings to the table after 41 game starts…maybe you should be thinking about replacing that GM.
The GM there is Irsay, right??
Dolphins will be out now. But the packers could
Be more inclined. Their team is good but lacking. AJ dillon isn’t it. Aaron jones is always hurt. Taylor went to Wisconsin good pr move you did right by him. Aaron jones can take on more of a third down role which he is exceptional at.
Doesn’t matter who you throw out there. Packers should be all I’m on Collins to that o line. They don’t look so hot up front
Will he be practicing with the Bucs
If you’re shopping a disgruntled employee then it’s likely no one will pay premium rates. Mid round pick or wait until he’s a FA…..although Irsay could muddle that with ‘tags’ and other childish crap.
Using the franchise tag would be childish?
I feel like the childish one here may be the grown man faking an injury to try to get his way. But maybe that’s just me.
Who can verify he faked injury. JT stated he was healthy and not injured. His stint on the pup designation isn’t relegated by the player but the team.
The ‘completion’ of contract terms should go both ways – player honors their part and team honors theirs to the length at signing but that’s not the case as teams regularly dump players in the midst of contract.
Don’t forget about ‘dead money’ on teams books for players guaranteed monies…..just because you’re cut doesn’t mean they write you a check to cover all ‘guarantees’ —- they continue to pay but at teams schedule depending on contract narrative and then there’s ‘void years’ which teams pay out after you’re gone…..
Players, like most people, want a chunk of monies NOW that they can spend or invest. It amounts to who controls the when and how of monies paid.
It doesn’t appear you understand void years. In most cases, the team is not paying a player during void years. It is a salary cap maneuver. It is prorating a portion of a player’s signing bonus (which the player has already been paid) to a future year. The player received their money – they are not waiting for it. It is just a trick to lower the team’s cap number by pushing cap money into later years and kicking the can down the road.
Which is what I tried to convey
I’ve never understood how being paid in the top 5 of your position is a crappy deal. If tagged the following season, it’s a 20-30% raise. Sign me up.
Short term is great, but one injury and your career may be over. The issue with the tag is that the contract a player signed is complete, you proved you are valuable, but now the team gets to keep you an extra year or more when you could have potentially earned a larger commitment that likely includes more dollars, years, or both if every team were allowed to compete for your services.
Guaranteed money is the entire game for an agent and player.
It maximizes your earnings over time.
We see every year on every team cutting players in the midst of their contracts. Take the guaranteed cash when you can.
Personally, I think Kirk Cousins mastered the contract game. 2 tags from DC, then short fully guaranteed contracts w/ Minny. Yes, QB is different than RB, but Kirk was comfortable doing shorter deals where the rest of the players want ‘long term secruity’. I bet 95% of NFL contracts are never fulfilled.
You are right about being cut in the middle of a contract – but its not the whole story.
All bonus are paid when they are cut, they only save salary. So cutting someone say 1 year into a 4 year deal may actually cost you more. There are equations behind the scenes.
Signing a long term deal with guaranteed money is always preferable to a tag.
Cousins did well for sure, but its an outlier. And he plays QB.
Sure. If a player signs a 4 year deal for $50m & guaranteed $30m. The $30m is paid no matter when he is cut.
But the RB’s aren’t getting those deals now, understandably too. JT medically sat for 4 weeks, Barkley is on the sidelines for 3 weeks. J Jacobs won’t be the rushing leader this year (certainly looks that way). Saints went 2-1 w/ Kamara suspended, E Ekler is hurt….Those are many of the RB’s complaining about deals this offseason. They need to get the cash on any contract.
I don’t think it’s realistic to expect a RB to take a pounding for 17 games and many teams understand this and are using the committee approach in the backfield. I think these guys should only be on a rookie contract for 2 years before they can test the market and even then they won’t be pulling down the big bucks that some WRs get.
Jacobs didn’t participate in the preseason. NYG is already bad, but worse without Barkley. Saints won with their D, but their offense is clearly missing Kamara. I doubt if Taylor is actually hurt or if that’s a smokescreen by the team. WRs, QBs, and all other positions get injured too. Should those positions not ask for big contracts?
Im not sure you even understand what your own point is.
Why are you bringing up QB contracts like they are the same?
I’m not even sure why you post dumb things, but you do.
Don’t you find it just a bit odd that a few rbs all were injured early in the season and with similar ailments?
Makes me wonder 2 points – collusion or a product of the playing surfaces
Alot of players have been injured, RBs too. Nick Chubb’s injury wasn’t from collusion or playing surfaces. After week 1 the IR lists got pretty long. That was a bit odd.
He’s not even close to top 5. Prior to this year, he’s only made @ $2.8M. This year’s he’s making a little over $4M.
Arty was referring to the franchise tag.
On RB’s you and I agree 100 percent!
The franchise tag fell for this group in the last ten years. That is a canary in the coal mine for the position.
I hate it for them, but at the same time – I DONT WANT my team to sign a RB to a long term contract.
The very best 99 percent of RBs can hope for is a bridge deal that covers two franchise tags. Even then only the first year is likely guaranteed. It probably is a one year – and we’ll see about year 2 deal. That is essentially just one tag, with a team option. (Maybe slightly more, but not much)
When I was growing up, it was the glory position. I hate it, but that production is replaceable.
Heard by an ex player – RBs salaries are one tier above special team level.
If being paid $11m a year is bad business, then learn to punt, kick, or be a long snapper.
Wow, that is a really dumb take.
It’s not easily replaceable. Minnesota, Baltimore, and Cleveland are learning that lesson right now. GB needs to upgrade badly. If you have a top level QB, you don’t need a great running game. If you want playmakers, you have to pay them.
I love this take because it purposefully ignores all the evidence supporting the claim, in favor of a few hand picked examples heavy with recent bias.
Do you mean hand picked examples showing evidence supporting my claim? The evidence is there every Sunday to watch. Maybe your evidence isn’t as good as you think it is. Ever been in a locker room? When you have playmakers on an NFL team, you keep them. Thats a good take…
I cant tell you how happy I am that you are not my teams GM.
Its not like we have 20 years of data or anything, right?
Its not like people who are paid to do this for a living notice a trend. OLine and system > running back talent.
If you build your team around a running game, you are already fighting uphill.
But you already know all of this , you just choose to ignore it willfully.
Reading is a skill. I said if you have playmakers, you keep them (like 3 times). But you’d actually have to play sports to know that.
The RB position has changed players are faster and stronger now. More players are capable thus making rbs more replaceable. Coaches realize having two Rbs that are capable is better then one. Not every rb can be Adrian Peterson
Or D Henry. Both are HoF’ers in my opinion.
Rumors abound that RBs will be phased out altogether. Any thoughts on how offenses would adapt.
Yay, let’s all celebrate a guy showing up to do his job!! There should be some way to put these clowns who want to sit out because they don’t feel loved in a minimum wage job for a month, then see if they appreciate getting to play football for a living .
Is that an egg?