News Archives

Indianapolis Colts Agree to Terms with Former New York Giants’ RB Ahmad Bradshaw

June 11th, 2013 at 1:48 PM
By Paul Tierney

It's been a foregone conclusion for quite some time that the New York Giants were in no way interested in brining back running back Ahmad Bradshaw in 2013. However, now it's an absolute certainty. Adam Schefter of ESPN is reporting today that after days of negotiations, the Indianapolis Colts have signed Ahmad Bradshaw. Bradshaw has received a one-year contract with a signing bonus of $250,000, a base salary of $1.1 million along with a $650,000 roster bonus that is pro-rated based upon how many games Bradshaw plays in.

Bradshaw arrived in New York in 2007 as a seventh-round draft selection, and went on to help Big Blue win two Super Bowl titles over the New England Patriots in 2007 and 2011. In Super Bowl XLVII, Bradshaw scored the game winning touchdown with just over 50 seconds left in the fourth quarter to give the Giants their second Lombardi Trophy in five seasons.

However, a series of serious foot injuries caused Bradshaw to miss 12 games over his six year career, as well as play through significant pain on a fairly regular basis. With 2012 first-round pick David Wilson on the roster, the Giants opted to cut Bradshaw loose this offseason and recoup $2.75 million of salary cap space.

In free agency, Bradshaw took his time to sign with a team. He drew  sincere interest from the Pittsburgh Steelers, Denver Broncos as well as the New England Patriots. 

Perhaps fittingly, Bradshaw will return to MetLife Stadium to face the Giants in Week 2 of the preseason, when Big Blue faces off against the Colts. 

Giants 101 would like to thank Ahmad Bradshaw for his six-years of hard work, dedication and leadership that he has provided to the Giants organization, and we would like to wish him good health and the best of luck in his future endeavors.


Tags: Adam Schefter, Ahmad Bradshaw, ESPN, Football, Indianapolis, Indianapolis Colts, New York, New York Giants, NFL

24 Responses to “Indianapolis Colts Agree to Terms with Former New York Giants’ RB Ahmad Bradshaw”

  1.  JimStoll says:

    good luck ahmad

  2.  F0XLIN says:

    Good for him, if he can keep his feet healthy he’ll be a nice complement to Ballard and add some more Vet presence

  3.  GOAT56 says:


    GOAT56 says:
    June 11, 2013 at 1:36 PM
    Sorry, can’t see a healthy Austin not making the roster. He’s much closer to a near lock than a long shot. Look at JR’s history. What healthy second round pick has JR gotten rid of after 2 years? We can keep 5 DTs. There’s no need to keep both Patterson and Rodgers after drafting Hankins.

    JimStoll says:
    June 11, 2013 at 1:51 PM
    the odds are with him as a 2d rounder
    the only JR draft picks who have survived 2 years or less are Greg Jones, Chad Jones, Dillard, Petrus, Dodge, Woodson, Bowmar, Wright, Woodson, Henderson, Alford and Johnson

    that’s 12 out of 46. not a one of them was a 2d round pick

  4.  GOAT56 says:

    Interesting. I think he was signed as much for his leadership and toughness as his play on the field. He can help them if he’s the same RB as last year. But I continue to think one of these years Bradshaw is just going to completely lose it due to the combination of foot aliments plus the wear and tear he’s endured. Good luck to him though.

  5.  GIANTT says:

    Good luck Braddy ! The Giants certainly got their moneys worth . I just hope that he can perform without causing harm to himself for a year or two out of the NFC .

  6.  GOAT56 says:

    Patricia Traina
    16 minutes ago
    Here’s a littel nugget I found to be interesting…
    In speaking with DTs Johnathan Hankins + Marvin Austin, both have praised Shaun Rogers for being a mentor and big brother to them as far as helping them better understand the program. That’s a huge feather in Rogers’ cap.

  7.  norm says:



    here we go again…

    To recap my previous 1,793,286 posts on this topic:

    Austin’s complete lack of production thus far in the NFL is irrelevant.

    The fact that he may, in fact, be less talented than every one of the three vet DTs who were brought into camp on one-year, non-guaranteed contracts is also irrelevant.

    The only things relevant to determining Austin’s fate this year are (1) he was a former second round pick who is still on his rookie deal; and (2) he’s played a grand total of 103 snaps in the NFL and has not been given – in the parlance of Reese – “his chance to fail.”

    Y’all can keep prattling on & on about how awful Austin looked in every one of those 103 snaps and how Patterson on his worst day is light years beyond Austin on his best. But until Jerry Reese actually shows a willingness to cut a healthy player drafted in Rds 1-3 prior to the end of his rookie deal, the consensus opinion on Austin’s talent (which I largely agree with) means jack sh!t.

    Giving young, highly drafted players their “chance to fail” (i.e. letting them play out their rookie deal) is one of the bedrock principles of this organization under Reese and Accorsi. We saw it with Sinorice Moss (who most here insisted was on the bubble, year after year). We saw it again with Ramses Barden (who most here insisted was on the bubble, year after year). And then again with Travis Beckum (who most here insisted was on the bubble, year after year). Now most here are insisting that Austin is on the bubble; that he’s a “longshot to make the roster”; that recent history means nothing ; that Austin’s case is somehow different; and that the Giants GM is lying when he says “Young players must be given their chance to fail.”

    Yeah, right. Whatever.

    As I’ve posted already: I am so sure about this that I’ve gone full-Fassell. I have pushed all my chips to the middle of the table and will exile myself from this site permanently if Austin is cut for reasons other than health.

    Don’t get your hopes up; it ain’t happening.

  8.  fanfor55years says:

    Nice for Bradshaw and for the Colts. Makes sense for both sides, and happy to see him get some real money for at least one more year. And very happy he didn’t wind up on the Patriots, ’cause as much as I like AB it would be impossible to root for him if he was on that team. As sweet as the two rings have been, they were made sweeter by who we beat.

    •  jfunk says:

      Agreed entirely.

      I still get giddy thinking about 42. I fear that game may have spoiled any future games for the rest of my life.

      To have denied that team 19-0, and in such dramatic fashion. Is a better game possible?

  9.  fanfor55years says:

    The reason I wish norm would stay away from self-exile is that he is allowing one piece of history (they don’t cut high draft picks) to overwhelm some other information. I readily admit I don’t know what will happen, but I know these things:

    1) Joseph, Hankins and Jenkins are locks on this roster, barring injury;

    2) The Giants’ run defense was abominable in 2012;

    3) Tom Coughlin is all about stopping the run as the primary job from which all else flows on defense;

    4) Drafting Hankins high was certainly no endorsement of Joseph or Austin;

    5) There looks to be enough potential at defensive end (Moore, Ojomo, Tracy and Trattou) that the likelihood of carrying more than 4 defensive tackles has dimmed, especially because Tuck CAN move inside in certain situations;

    6) Rogers, Patterson and Kuhn are ALL better run-stoppers than Austin and at least one, and more than likely two, are going to prove healthy enough to play in 2013; and

    7) The drafting of Hankins and Moore probably changed the view of the team about where to carry players with “potential”, and creates a lot of pressure on those players who are not yet proven to “show” early or become a lot less likely to retain a roster spot.

    GOAT keeps saying they will carry five defensive tackles. If you count one on the PUP list or the practice team then I agree. If it’s on the roster I think it unlikely. Joseph and Hankins will be considered run-stoppers (and Hankins IS going to play). Jenkins is a bit of a two-way guy but should be paired with one of the run-stoppers and considered a guy who must get to the quarterback or at least collapse the pocket. So you would think they’ll want another pass-rusher. That’s in Austin’s favor. But if Tuck can be used for that on a lot of third-and-longs that pass-rusher becomes a bit less critical and Coughlin’s desire to stop the run becomes even more controlling. And if you want a run-stopper then Rogers and Patterson are your guys (if they stay healthy).

    I’ll say right now that if Austin doesn’t start doing something special in camp and in the early preseason games, and if the other tackles stay healthy, I think he’s gone. I’d take every tackle they have ahead of him, and draft slot be damned, the coaches will probably see it the same way. Now, maybe this knee procedure is a prelude to being PUP’ed so they can retain him for this year without suffering with him on the field. But there’s no way they are going to tolerate the kind of play he’s put out there so far. Based upon what we’ve seen he’s probably sixth on the depth chart among the veterans, and of course Hankins now gets slotted above him too. I think he has a real uphill battle ahead of him.

    •  GOAT56 says:

      To address the run defense we have added Jenkins, Hankins and Patterson or Rodgers. That seems like plenty to me

      I think drafting Hankins was more about no endorsement for Patterson or Rodgers. We need youth at DT regardless of Joseph and Austin.

      Austin’s role should have nothing to do with run stopping.

      I think we carry 5 DTs not including PUP because we have so much age and uncertainty at the DT position. One part of the not keep Austin equation many are forgetting is 2014. Austin is under contract 2 more years. Patterson, Rodgers and even Joseph are free agents. Jenkins is no 2014 roster lock. We need to keep a player than can help in 2014. Having a guy with age in Jenkins and two guys with major injury concerns in Patterson and Rodgers are reasons to keep numbers. Plus it seems like we want to play less DEs at DT. Maybe on some 3rd downs but less than in the past. Jenkins and Austin both should be good enough pass rushers to allow this.

      I think Austin has to show something not be special. The only place I differ form Norm is that I think if Austin stinks he could not make it because we do have other options. But if he’s pretty good and Rodgers or Patterson are slightly better why keep another vet? That’s basically a run stopper at that? With 5 DTs we can keep 3 run stuffer types.

      In addition, I think we keep DL with 5 DTs and 5 DEs. In part because guys like Kiwi, Moore and Tracy can play LB. So I think we keep only 6 true LBs and 5 is not out of the question. Plus a guy like Cooper playing LB on 3rd downs.

  10.  wrdag says:

    I still believe that AB who would be a perfect back-up for us. He is not on the team for the simple reason that TC can not be trusted to treat a “vet” player” like AB as a true back-up. JR knows that AB would receive too many carries as he did last year at the expense of Wilson. Another example of the long list of personnel moves that belies the power struggle between a GM who deals with a coach he never hired. Despite the success of the team its still dsyfunctional at many levels. The blame for this sits at the feet of the owners not the coach or GM. It will never truly be JR’s team until TC retires and JR hires his own coach and has veto power on playing time.

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.

Login with: