With receiver Alec Pierce expected to miss at least several weeks after aggravating his surgically repaired heel, the Colts need help at the position.
They’ve gotten it, in the form of veteran receiver Darius Slayton. Via multiple reports, Slayton has agreed to terms with the Colts.
Earlier this month, the Giants cut Slayton. He was in the second year of a three-year, $36 million contract. The Giants owe him $9.75 million fully guaranteed in 2026. They’ll get an offset for whatever he makes from the Colts.
Slayton spent seven years with the Giants. He has 296 career catches for 4,435 yards and 22 touchdowns.
The Colts have Pierce, Keenan Allen, Laquon Treadwell, Josh Downs, Ashton Dulin, and Deion Burks on the roster at the receiver position. Pierce likely will be put on injured reserve, which will create the roster spot for Slayton.
As the Colts try to turn around a season that has started with two straight losses (and now nine in a row), they’ll be missing one of their highest-paid players, for multiple weeks.
Via Ian Rapoport of NFL Network, Pierce aggravated his heel injury during Sunday night’s loss to the Chiefs. Pierce had surgery on the heel in the offseason.
Pierce will “attempt to rehab” the injury in lieu of surgery. He is expected to miss “several weeks.” If all goes well, Rapoport says, Pierce “could return midseason.”
In the offseason, Pierce signed a four-year contract with a base value of $28.5 million per year — well below the market value of more than $42 million. He caught four passes for 61 yards in a 41-23 loss to the Ravens in Week 1, and one pass for 11 yards against the Chiefs in Week 2.
The Colts, at 0-2, are in a three-way tie with the Texans and Titans in the AFC South.
At this point, it’s still unclear how much time Alec Pierce will miss after departing last night’s loss to the Chiefs.
Pierce hopped off the field after aggravating the heel he had surgically repaired during the offseason.
Via James Boyd of TheAthletic.com, head coach Shane Steichen said in his Monday news conference that the team is “still gathering information” on Pierce. Steichen added he doesn’t know if Pierce will be able to play Week 3 against the Texans. Steichen did not have any additional information.
But Jeremy Fowler of ESPN reports that Pierce is seeking a second opinion on his heel.
Pierce was on the field for just 17 snaps before he had to exit Sunday’s game. He caught one pass for 11 yards.
So far in 2026, Pierce has registered five receptions for 72 yards.
After the conclusion of the 2025 season in January, Colts owner Carlie Irsay-Gordon made it clear that General Manager Chris Ballard and head coach Shane Steichen had to put a better product on the field in 2026.
“We have been very clear with Chris and Shane that giving them another opportunity means that the sense of urgency for them to deliver and perform has never been higher,” Irsay-Gordon said at her press conference after announcing that Ballard and Steichen would both return.
But with Sunday’s overtime loss to Kansas City, Indianapolis has now lost nine consecutive games dating back to Week 12 of last season. The team finished 8-9 after starting 8-2 and has now dropped the first two this season.
A lot has happened along the way — including starting quarterback Daniel Jones going down with a torn Achilles. But in a results-oriented business, Indianapolis has not been good enough.
At the end of his postgame press conference on Sunday night, Steichen was asked what he tells the team after nine consecutive losses.
“I tell them to keep your freaking heads up, dude,” Steichen said. “It is a long season ahead of us. We are battling like crazy. That’s the message. We have to continue to grow and learn. There is a lot of football left. Like I said last week, we are right there. We have to find a way to win at the end. That was one of those games.
“It is a freaking hard-ass league, and you have got to find a way to win these tight games.”
The Colts will be back at home next weekend to face a division rival, the 0-2 Texans.
The NFL centralized replay review in order to ensure that a consistent standard will apply when a second look is being taken at rulings on the field. And the consistent standard is, or should be, that the available evidence makes it “clear and obvious” that the officials got it wrong in real time.
Sometimes, that standard applies. Sometimes, it doesn’t.
When it comes to the play that gave the Colts a chance to beat the Chiefs in overtime, it didn’t.
It wasn’t clear and obvious that the officials made a mistake when ruling that Colts receiver Laquon Treadwell had caught the ball, landed on a knee/leg without being touched, and fumbled. The key question was whether Treadwell was down by contact. Which required a frame-by-frame review as to whether he had been touched by Chiefs cornerback L’Jarius Sneed after Treadwell satisfied the multi-step process of making the catch.
It was not clear and obvious that Sneed had touched Treadwell after Treadwell had completed the act of catching the ball. The fact that nearly three minutes passed from the announcement by referee Craig Wrolstad of the ruling on the field and the issuance of the final verdict shows that it was not clear and obvious.
The standard often has been summed up like this — the ruling on the field should be overturned by replay only if 50 drunks in a bar would have agreed that a mistake had been made.
Here’s what is clear and obvious: Whoever made the decision in New York re-officiated the play from scratch, straining to conclude that Sneed was still contacting Treadwell after Treadwell had secured possession of the ball.
The league got lucky that the Colts opted not to attack the end zone after getting an unwarranted reprieve. Ultimately, the league got lucky that the Chiefs won the game. If they had lost, it would have been a much bigger deal.
It should still be a big deal, because it exposes the presence of a flaw in the replay machinery. The standard is “clear and obvious.” It was not “clear and obvious” that the ruling on the field was incorrect. The game should have been over.
And here’s the next-level take. Given the persistent belief in some circles that the league and the officials favor the Chiefs, did the person who made the final decision on replay review (whoever it was) err on the side of making a finding that runs counter to the narrative, if only to avoid a Monday news cycle that would have included more than a few people spouting off the theory that, yet again, the NFL had found a way to help the Chiefs?
Regardless of how it happened and why it happened and who specifically was responsible for it happening, the league in this instance did not honor the standard that is supposed to apply to replay review. The ruling on the field did not amount to a “clear and obvious” mistake. The game should have ended with the ruling that Treadwell had made the catch and fumbled the ball.
