NewColtsFan

This week I also learned that before he became the DL coach at Pitt, Partridge was the DL coach at Wisconsin. There he did a nice job with a young man who turned into JJ Watt. That got my attention right away.

Me too. I hope he can get the whole group much better. I’d love to be the fly on the wall in his office!

No, he doesn’t. He’s very, very reluctant to say much of anything. I don’t know if he’s been burned badly by media so he doesn’t trust them or if it’s something else? He’ll be interesting to follow if only to see if he gets any better over time.

I easily could be wrong, but I think it’s this coming week.

Opinion after opinion after opinion after opinion. And SURPRISE! They’re almost all anti-Ballard. And you’re entitled to all of those opinions, every one of them. But until you offer some facts then opinions are all you have. Good luck,

Charlie Partridge says hello! There's a reason the Colts brought him in. To make all the D-lineman better. I look forward to seeing what he can do.

Well Doug…. The joke is on me! I spent an hour writing that post, and when I pressed submit the Colts.com website froze up. I thought the post was never sent. Then tonight, I opened your response and I find that you indeed received it. Weird. Odd. Oh well. I’m going to let this stand alone. I’ll respond to the bulk of your post over the weekend, and then we can wind this down.

I think Danders would have to do a lot more to fall out of the first round next year. I’m not a fan, I think his father is terrible for college football, but he hasn’t done enough yet to fall out if the first round. But it’s worth watching and paying attention to for the next year.

If you believe PFF, Paye has not peaked. Gotten better every year. And if you believe Ballard, Paye hasn’t peaked. He spoke glowingly of Paye BEFORE he officially picked up the option. Otherwise the view on Paye is only your opinion.

Huh? You think 4 DE’s is enough? The Colts often have 6. He’s coming off his best year. He has position versatility. I seriously doubt this is the end of Dayo.

Doug…. I’ve just read your latest two posts. And as has been the recent trend, I don’t understand your logic. So I’ve got a long post to respond to your long post. So let me ask you an important question: Have you noticed in the last month or so that I am responding to your posts very slowly? I’m taking 8, 10, even 12 hours to respond. I’m doing it deliberately. I don’t want us to be going back and forth and back and forth while we’re both awake. I’m trying to slow the pace of communication so things don’t get heated. So I’m not trying to pick a fight, I’m trying to AVOID a fight. As to your two posts…. I think your memory is playing tricks with you. Ballard said “let’s take the wide receiver” this draft for Mitchell. His quote in 2022 after the Colts had no pick in the first round was this…. “Tomorrow, wide receiver, tight end, tackle, and safety or corner.” What did Ballard do? He took those 4 positions in that order. But not until he had traded DOWN from 35 to 53 for Pierce. That was Reich’s personal pick. Ballard was confident the players would be there and they were. Not possible if everyone has same info as you assert. Do you remember the 2019 draft when Ballard took Rock, Benagu, Campbell, and Okereke on Day 2, that was the first year of the popular video series and the most memorable sound was Frank going around the war room high fiving everyone yelling “Four for Four! Four for Four!” Those were the guys Frank wanted, those were the guys Ballard got him. Not possible if every team sees things the same. The story of the 21 draft was the Colts picking 21. And Ballard telling the scouts he had a good feeling that Paye, who the Colts ranked 10th on their board, would fall to the Colts. And he did. Ballard thought Dayo would fall to pick 54, and he said he likely would’ve taken Dayo at 21 if Paye had been taken. Ballard was right again. And again, not possible if everyone sees things the same. Historically speaking…. In 2012, Seattle had Russell Wilson ranked THIRD on their board. But they waited to draft him at pick 75 because they thought at 5’10” and 5/8ths, RW would still be there. And he was. That wouldn’t be possible if everyone had mostly similar rankings as you believe. As for Reimann: picked 77. You talk about his value as a left tackle. Yet he lasted to pick 77. Any other team could’ve taken him before the Colts did. They didn’t. Yet you think it has nothing to do with his age. I don’t understand the logic you use to reject the age argument. I don’t see an alternative view that makes sense. All of these are examples of teams seeing the same thing differently. They value things differently. When asked recently, Steichen said he valued quickness in a wide receiver. For other teams they might value speed, or precision route running. Every team has its own identity based on what they value. GMs are different. Head coaches are different. Scouts are different. They are NOT working with the same information. Every team has their own Big Board and the differences are big, not small. 32 teams, 32 very very different looking boards. I’m 67. I have literally studied the draft for more than 50 years. The draft has always been a passion of mine, even before I became a TV sports producer at age 23. I’m not making this up. This post could be longer, but I think it’s gone long enough. There was much to talk about. Thanks for reading.

Thanks John. This is really good work. Top notch. And you may want to bookmark it so you can retrieve it whenever you want. This is the type of content you can re-post twice a year or as need be. Thanks again!

Looks like I’m WRONG again! And I’m perfectly fine with it.

Consensus? Huh? I have no idea what that means? I offered MY opinion. That’s all. But I can’t keep up with you. You just wrote a very long post about how 32 teams have very similar looking Big Boards. If I had $1 for every time in 13 years I’ve posted that there are 32 teams and 32 completely different looking big boards, I’d be filthy RICH!! In any given year 32 teams may all agree on the top player, but that the further you get away from the first pick the big boards look very very different. The exact opposite of what you speculated. I didn’t agree with one sentence of what you posted here. You’re entitled to whatever opinion you want but it’s not supported by anything. I’ve pretty much disagreed with everything you’ve written since the draft started. But that works to your advantage. I couldn’t possibly point out all the flaws, so I’ll try to be selective. Here’s one argument you’ve repeated the last two years. That Ballard lucked into getting both Woods and Raimann and that he wasn’t even smart enough to realize that Raimann was the better player. What gets me is that I’ve explained the reasoning to you multiple times and I’ve read other posters explain it to you multiple times. And we all say the same thing: That Ballard calculated correctly that because Raimann was 24 and would turn 25 during the season, he stood a better chance of lasting to pick 77 while Woods was taken at 73. But you keep posting the negative Ballard viewpoint as if NO ONE has explained it to you. I think it’s both insulting and rude. It’s what you do when you can’t handle an argument, you just avoid it. Ballard was smart and right and not only do you not acknowledge it, you try to belittle him every time. There is sooo much more I could discuss with you but this post is enough. I’ll be curious if you’ll even respond.

For those still wondering about Latu instead of Dallas Turner I’d offer this. Latu: 6’5” and 260 Turner: 6’4” and 245 The Colts already have a player Turners size, Ebukam. The extra inch and especially the extra 15 pounds for Latu are important for the Colts no matter who the DC is long term.