On Wednesday, Colts owner Jim Irsay sparked debate over the running back market by making erroneous accusations of buyer’s remorse and bad-faith bargaining. Irsay was quick to clarify on Thursday that he wasn’t referring to Jonathan Taylor, the team’s star tailback at the moment.
According to Irsay, the remark wasn’t truly intended at Jonathan, according to Stephen Holder of ESPN.com. “We haven’t traded contract numbers or anything similar with each other. So it’s not like that is now happening. I believe that last season was difficult for us. did not have many victories. We’re really dependent on Jonathan to work with [quarterback] Anthony Richardson to try and pull off this year, which is about coming together and having a tremendous year.
Even though Taylor has only one season left before becoming eligible for free agency, Irsay said in his statements on Thursday that the franchise has not extended Taylor a second contract offer.
Irsay declared, “We adore Jonathan, and we need Jonathan. “We hope that Jonathan has an excellent year and that we have a successful year as a team before finalizing the terms of his future deal. The hope is for that. We have nothing but praise for him as a person and a sportsman. Just the timing. You receive payment when the time is right for it.
But it’s now that he should be paid. If the Colts so desire, they can franchise-tag him in 2024. After six seasons, they can try it again in 2025 and let him go.
Irsay appears to contest the Colts’ decision to follow that course of action.
Irsay said to Holder, “We’ve always compensated our players. We have always supported giving our main players second contracts. And that’s how we’ve achieved success over the past twenty or twenty-five years. That hasn’t changed, so.
Edgerrin James, a running back, would undoubtedly disagree. He had to complete his rookie contract. He was tagged once, played while tagged, and then signed with another team as a free agent.
Taylor looks to be the target of the Colts’ crouching because they can. They have sole authority over his contract for four years, plus an additional two years if they so want, according to the labor agreement. Additionally, they are never required to offer him a long-term contract.
He should have held out because of this, to be honest. After three years of service, elite running backs must find a means to press the issue before the team simply rides out the player’s best remaining seasons on an annual basis.