Are Moncreif's days in Indy numbered?

[lester]

14 minutes ago, Lucky Colts Fan said:

But I've done 100-hour work-weeks before, and there are only 168 hours in a week.  You barely have time to sleep, eat, shower, even think.  You get burnt out pretty quickly, at least I did. 

 

If you love what you do, then its not work. Truly.

 

In other words, entrepreneurs are people who work 80 hour weeks to avoid a 40-hour work week...

[lollygagger8]

3 hours ago, DougDew said:

Just curious of an assessment of Grigson's OL talent prowess is stuck in 2013 or if you or anybody updated it for the AC resigning, and drafting Mewhort, Kelly, Haeg, and Clark, and a nice backup in Good.  

 

Not talking about when to address the OL.....but identifying OL talent.

 

Just wondering why I should have faith in Ballard's WR talent evaluation based upon the little information I have, which suggests its not great.

 

 

What about Grigson's other OL prowess: 

 

Grigs FA's on O-Line that I can remember off the top of my head.....: 

Winston Justice 

Samson Satele 

Todd Herremans 

Donald Thomas 

Gosder Cherilus 

Mike McGlynn

 

 

 

[Andrew Luck fan club]

If he doesn't ball out next year he won't be re-signed, unless it's a cheap team friendly deal. Definitely overhyped on these forums.  

[DougDew]

28 minutes ago, Steamboat_Shaun said:

 

 Yes to the bolded part, but you also have to remember he wasn't the GM in KC.

I know perfectly well he wasn't GM.....yet many give him credit for finding talent for KCs defense,

 

but not being the guy who couldn't find WR talent.

 

Seems like selective facts being used out of convenience.

[aaron11]

moncrief is not indispensable. 

 

he has averaged less than 500 yards a season.  if he gets hurt or doesnt produce again he's probably gone

 

hopefully aiken does push him, and we have to choose between two guys that we know can produce

 

 

[DougDew]

4 minutes ago, lollygagger8 said:

 

What about Grigson's other OL prowess: 

 

Grigs FA's on O-Line that I can remember off the top of my head.....: 

Winston Justice 

Samson Satele 

Todd Herremans 

Donald Thomas 

Gosder Cherilus 

Mike McGlynn

 

 

 

Really?  You judge a GM based upon his intended stop-gap players being no better than stop-gaps?  What next, they need turn water into wine? 

 

The only contract that reflected an investment in a player beyond one or two years was Cherilus, and he was good, just injured.  Heck, even rookies get a three year contract, so that tells you something about what Grigson thought of those players when they were signed.

 

 

C'mon, the entire board must know by now that the OL was not the reason Grigson got fired.  He got fired for choosing DA over Doyle, when anybody who saw the five catches Doyle made that year knew he was as good or better than DA.

[Steamboat_Shaun]

9 minutes ago, DougDew said:

Really?  You judge a GM based upon his intended stop-gap players being no better than stop-gaps?  What next, they need turn water into wine? 

 

The only contract that reflected an investment in a player beyond one or two years was Cherilus, and he was good, just injured.  Heck, even rookies get a three year contract, so that tells you something about what Grigson thought of those players when they were signed.

 

 

C'mon, the entire board must know by now that the OL was not the reason Grigson got fired.  He got fired for choosing DA over Doyle, when anybody who saw the five catches Doyle made that year knew he was as good or better than DA.

 

I tend to believe Grigson was fired because he was an absolutely insufferable person to work with. Not because of the poor roster, not because of OL issues, but simply because he treated everyone around him terribly.

[indyagent17]

Moncrief has physical talents that cannot be replaced easily. He has the ability to be a #1 receiver and plays hard too. I like him on our WR group and I would be disappointed should he leave 

[slimebag]

Moncrief has had 13 tds the last two seasons(25 games played), and has been trending up in my opinion. In comparison to Jeffrey, since his name has come up a few times, who has had 6 tds in that time frame(21 games played) and is trending down(also imo). I don't know why I bother reading these topics sometimes. Luck looked for him quite a bit in the red zone. My only complaint was some dropped passes last year, but that seemed to be a problem for everyone on the team.

[Steamboat_Shaun]

21 minutes ago, DougDew said:

I know perfectly well he wasn't GM.....yet many give him credit for finding talent for KCs defense,

 

but not being the guy who couldn't find WR talent.

 

Seems like selective facts being used out of convenience.

 

Their WR depth chart right now is Jeremy Maclin, Tyreek Hill, and De'Anthony Thomas, so a free agent from Reid's days in Philly, a 4th rounder, and a 5th rounder. It's not that they can't "find WR talent," they simply don't prioritize it. A big part of that is Alex Smith, they know his limitations and aren't going to bother surrounding him with a bunch of shiny new WRs when they're not even really an aerial offense.

[aaron11]

lots of mixed opinions on this guy lol

[jet1968]

Moncrief needs to step it up. He is not TY Hilton and can be replaced.

[DougDew]

20 minutes ago, Steamboat_Shaun said:

 

Their WR depth chart right now is Jeremy Maclin, Tyreek Hill, and De'Anthony Thomas, so a free agent from Reid's days in Philly, a 4th rounder, and a 5th rounder. It's not that they can't "find WR talent," they simply don't prioritize it. A big part of that is Alex Smith, they know his limitations and aren't going to bother surrounding him with a bunch of shiny new WRs when they're not even really an aerial offense.

So what you're saying is that since KC doesn't bother trying to find superior WR talent, we should still assume that Ballard has the capability to do so.

 

I don't know why some would make that assumption, other than it fits an already formed opinion.

[richard pallo]

CB tried to sign Jeffrey and he did sign Aiken.  Who spot was Jeffrey supposed to replace Moncrief or Dorsett?

[Steamboat_Shaun]

27 minutes ago, DougDew said:

So what you're saying is that since KC doesn't bother trying to find superior WR talent, we should still assume that Ballard has the capability to do so.

 

I don't know why some would make that assumption, other than it fits an already formed opinion.

 

That's not what I said at all. What I'm saying is that WR isn't that big of a need as it stands right now, so I'm not all that concerned about his ability to bring in WR talent, we have way bigger fish to fry. Combine that with the fact that Luck makes most WRs look pretty good, and I'm even less concerned about it.

[Valpo2004]

16 hours ago, LJpalmbeacher said:

 

Maybe Ballard doesn't want to take a chance he doesn't have a breakout season AND wants a pick in this draft.

 

Remember if you stay quiet in FA you can get a comp pick for him.  

[VaAllDay757]

Folks talking about rodgers or dorsett but really moncrief needs to be the main one to be focus he hasn't had 1,000 yard season yet and he still plays with short arms from time to time he really needs to show off this season if he wants to stay in indy he's great in the redzone but I know he's more capable than that

[shasta519]

2 hours ago, DougDew said:

Really?  You judge a GM based upon his intended stop-gap players being no better than stop-gaps?  What next, they need turn water into wine? 

 

The only contract that reflected an investment in a player beyond one or two years was Cherilus, and he was good, just injured.  Heck, even rookies get a three year contract, so that tells you something about what Grigson thought of those players when they were signed.

 

 

C'mon, the entire board must know by now that the OL was not the reason Grigson got fired.  He got fired for choosing DA over Doyle, when anybody who saw the five catches Doyle made that year knew he was as good or better than DA.

 

Haha. I just assumed it was because he cut Dion Lewis.

[NewColtsFan]

2 hours ago, DougDew said:

Really?  You judge a GM based upon his intended stop-gap players being no better than stop-gaps?  What next, they need turn water into wine? 

 

The only contract that reflected an investment in a player beyond one or two years was Cherilus, and he was good, just injured.  Heck, even rookies get a three year contract, so that tells you something about what Grigson thought of those players when they were signed.

 

 

C'mon, the entire board must know by now that the OL was not the reason Grigson got fired.  He got fired for choosing DA over Doyle, when anybody who saw the five catches Doyle made that year knew he was as good or better than DA.

 

Apologies to all,  this is going to be a long post.    I'm trying to address a long list of issues here so there's no way around it.

 

Doug.....     the is NOT the first time you've posted this.    And I've never seen a single other poster embrace this viewpoint.       As far as I can tell,  you're alone on this.     And I think for good reason.      There is zero proof that Grigson was fired over Allen/Doyle.     If that was the case, he'd have been fired the Monday after the season ended, if not sooner.     But he was fired 3 weeks later.     That completely undercuts your position.

 

GM's don't get fired over Doyle ending up the starter instead of Allen.   Especially since Doyle is a plus in the Grigson column.    Honestly,  the issue of Allen/Doyle I would doubt would make the top-20 reasons,  but I'll give you at least 10 reasons, if not more,  why Grigson was fired and none of them have anything to do with Allen/Doyle.

 

GM's get fired over Big Picture issues....

 

1.    Back to back 8-8 seasons.     You are what you record says you are and Irsay found 8-8 (x2) to be unacceptable.

 

2.    An inability for Grigson to get along with his HC,  his coaching staff and his players.   The revelation that Irsay had to bring in a marriage counselor to try and get the two men to work better together is, honestly,  humiliating for the franchise.    Who does that?     Plus,  Irsay chose the HC over the GM,  that's not typically how it works.

 

3.   4 and a half years to get the OL anything close to being right.   It wasn't until week 9 or 10 last year that the line finally started to look like a line.

 

4.   4  1/2 years of Luck either leading the league, or being in the top-3  in getting sacked, or getting hit, or getting pressured.   Grigson famously had a note on his desk since Day 1.   "Job one is to protect 12."    And he didn't do it.     Not for a lack of effort,  but he failed never the less.

 

5.   Allowing the defense to get so old and so slow and so unskilled.   The Colts were 30th last year,  and I think I've read in the 5-years of Grigson/Pagano,  the Colts were 20th or worse, 4 times.

 

6.   2 and a half years of Pep Hamilton.     He was never as bad as his critics claimed,  but he wasn't good enough and it took entirely too long to make a change.

 

7.    Way, way too many misses in the draft.   Too many to list here, we all know the names.

 

8.    Way, way too many misses in Free Agency,    Too many names to list here,  we all know the names.

 

9.   4 straight years of getting WR3 wrong.   Avery,  DHB,  Nicks,  Johnson.

 

10.  5 straight years of getting CB2 wrong.     Vonte Davis is good,  but the rest.....   well....

 

11.  3 straight years of getting RB1 wrong.

 

12.  5 straight years of not much pass rush beyond Robert Mathis.

 

 

Are you beginning to see the difference in the issues I listed as opposed to the one issue you listed?     They don't compare.     Personnel decisions are subjective.     Rarely is an NFL GM fired over one decision unless it's at the most important --- QB.      But you're going to make mistakes,  it happens to every decision maker,  even Bill Belichick.      But you make too many mistakes,  THEN you lose your job.      But one decision on a mid-priced player is never the reason a GM loses his job.     It just doesn't work that way.

 

Sorry this went so long.....    there was much to say....

 

[shasta519]

2 hours ago, Steamboat_Shaun said:

 

Their WR depth chart right now is Jeremy Maclin, Tyreek Hill, and De'Anthony Thomas, so a free agent from Reid's days in Philly, a 4th rounder, and a 5th rounder. It's not that they can't "find WR talent," they simply don't prioritize it. A big part of that is Alex Smith, they know his limitations and aren't going to bother surrounding him with a bunch of shiny new WRs when they're not even really an aerial offense.

 

I wouldn't necessarily say they don't prioritize it. Since 2013 (when Ballard got there), they gave Bowe a huge extension and then a couple years later signed Maclin as a FA to a big contract. They drafted WRs in round 3, 4 and 5. They also drafted Kelce in round 2 to be a focal point of their offense.

 

 

[Finball]

50 minutes ago, shastamasta said:

 

I wouldn't necessarily say they don't prioritize it. Since 2013 (when Ballard got there), they gave Bowe a huge extension and then a couple years later signed Maclin as a FA to a big contract. They drafted WRs in round 3, 4 and 5. They also drafted Kelce in round 2 to be a focal point of their offense.

 

 

 

Bowe extension and drafting Kelce (first pick in the 3rd round, 2nd was traded for Alex Smith) happened before Ballard was hired by KC.

[shasta519]

12 minutes ago, Finball said:

 

Bowe extension and drafting Kelce (first pick in the 3rd round, 2nd was traded for Alex Smith) happened before Ballard was hired by KC.

 

Thanks...you are right. He wasn't hired until May. I just assumed he was brought in before the new league started.

 

I guess I (and many other people) need to stop including KC's 2013 offseason (FA and draft) as part of his resume then.

[shasta519]

54 minutes ago, NewColtsFan said:

 

Apologies to all,  this is going to be a long post.    I'm trying to address a long list of issues here so there's no way around it.

 

Doug.....     the is NOT the first time you've posted this.    And I've never seen a single other poster embrace this viewpoint.       As far as I can tell,  you're alone on this.     And I think for good reason.      There is zero proof that Grigson was fired over Allen/Doyle.     If that was the case, he'd have been fired the Monday after the season ended, if not sooner.     But he was fired 3 weeks later.     That completely undercuts your position.

 

GM's don't get fired over Doyle ending up the starter instead of Allen.   Especially since Doyle is a plus in the Grigson column.    Honestly,  the issue of Allen/Doyle I would doubt would make the top-20 reasons,  but I'll give you at least 10 reasons, if not more,  why Grigson was fired and none of them have anything to do with Allen/Doyle.

 

GM's get fired over Big Picture issues....

 

1.    Back to back 8-8 seasons.     You are what you record says you are and Irsay found 8-8 (x2) to be unacceptable.

 

2.    An inability for Grigson to get along with his HC,  his coaching staff and his players.   The revelation that Irsay had to bring in a marriage counselor to try and get the two men to work better together is, honestly,  humiliating for the franchise.    Who does that?     Plus,  Irsay chose the HC over the GM,  that's not typically how it works.

 

3.   4 and a half years to get the OL anything close to being right.   It wasn't until week 9 or 10 last year that the line finally started to look like a line.

 

4.   4  1/2 years of Luck either leading the league, or being in the top-3  in getting sacked, or getting hit, or getting pressured.   Grigson famously had a note on his desk since Day 1.   "Job one is to protect 12."    And he didn't do it.     Not for a lack of effort,  but he failed never the less.

 

5.   Allowing the defense to get so old and so slow and so unskilled.   The Colts were 30th last year,  and I think I've read in the 5-years of Grigson/Pagano,  the Colts were 20th or worse, 4 times.

 

6.   2 and a half years of Pep Hamilton.     He was never as bad as his critics claimed,  but he wasn't good enough and it took entirely too long to make a change.

 

7.    Way, way too many misses in the draft.   Too many to list here, we all know the names.

 

8.    Way, way too many misses in Free Agency,    Too many names to list here,  we all know the names.

 

9.   4 straight years of getting WR3 wrong.   Avery,  DHB,  Nicks,  Johnson.

 

10.  5 straight years of getting CB2 wrong.     Vonte Davis is good,  but the rest.....   well....

 

11.  3 straight years of getting RB1 wrong.

 

12.  5 straight years of not much pass rush beyond Robert Mathis.

 

 

Are you beginning to see the difference in the issues I listed as opposed to the one issue you listed?     They don't compare.     Personnel decisions are subjective.     Rarely is an NFL GM fired over one decision unless it's at the most important --- QB.      But you're going to make mistakes,  it happens to every decision maker,  even Bill Belichick.      But you make too many mistakes,  THEN you lose your job.      But one decision on a mid-priced player is never the reason a GM loses his job.     It just doesn't work that way.

 

Sorry this went so long.....    there was much to say....

 

 

I took it as sarcasm. Was it not sarcasm?

[RomanianColtsFan]

I hope not, Moncrief is better than all receivers on the roster, except Hilton. He is also the youngest, they need to be patient with him.

[NewColtsFan]

1 hour ago, shastamasta said:

 

I took it as sarcasm. Was it not sarcasm?

 

It might be,  you never can tell these days.....

 

But, as I noted,  this is not the first time Doug has made this argument and he's never claimed it was sarcasm before....   

 

And I always recommend to any poster,  if you're going to be sarcastic,  try to find an emoji that supports what you're saying.....     because sarcasm often doesn't come across well on an internet fan message board.    It doesn't always translate well....

 

If Doug was being sarcastic,  I'd assume he'd tell me that publicly or privately....    one way or the other....

 

[Superman]

19 hours ago, LJpalmbeacher said:

 

Moncreif doesn't play to his size, or at least Ballard may not think so.

 

15 hours ago, Indy1996 said:

Um he plays physical unlike Moncrief and 1 big thing Moncrief cant stay healthy 

 

What are you guys talking about?

[Superman]

1 hour ago, shastamasta said:

 

I took it as sarcasm. Was it not sarcasm?

 

Sadly, no.

[Superman]

5 hours ago, Steamboat_Shaun said:

 

 Yes to the bolded part, but you also have to remember he wasn't the GM in KC.

 

Well, I agree with Doug on this limited angle. We can't give Ballard credit for the good stuff in KC and refuse to give him any blame for the bad stuff.

 

Broader picture, I don't think KC's issues at receiver are related to any of the personnel they've brought in. I think they tried to go patchwork at the position, and suffered some injuries, and they have a QB that is overly cautious with the football, especially on outside throws.

 

If we assume that Ballard's duties including influencing their draft board and their free agency moves, then he was involved in the Maclin signing (which isn't a bad signing, and most likely was something Andy Reid desperately wanted), he was involved in drafting Chris Conley in the third round (decent, not great), and Demarcus Robinson and Tyreek Hill (we know he was involved in Hill's due diligence off the field, we don't know how much he was involved in the talent evaluation). 

 

So even if I were to give Ballard 100% credit or blame on their wide receiver decision making over the last three years, I don't find fault with it. The worst thing you can say is Maclin regressed in Year 2. 

[LJpalmbeacher2]

4 minutes ago, Superman said:

 

 

What are you guys talking about?

What are you talking about?

I like moncreif, I hope he's hear for years. But I wouldn't describe him as a physical inside receiver. His game is not like Julio's, or Irvin, Greene..etc....

Jeffrey, who Ballard went after, is physical and commands mucho $$. If Ballard signed him he wouldn't have been any less than a #2 here. If Ballard was happy with the wr corp, do you think Ballard would have tried to sign one of the most expensive receivers in football?? Especially with us being so cost conscious??

 

For those who may not have noticed, there's a theme. Jeffrey & Aiken are type of wr he was looking for. If he thought Moncreif/Dorsett/Rogers were similar he wouldn't have been in the running of signing a $14mil per year wr....imho.

[Superman]

8 minutes ago, LJpalmbeacher said:

What are you talking about?

I like moncreif, I hope he's hear for years. But I wouldn't describe him as a physical inside receiver. His game is not like Julio's, or Irvin, Greene..etc....

Jeffrey, who Ballard went after, is physical and commands mucho $$. If Ballard signed him he wouldn't have been any less than a #2 here. If Ballard was happy with the wr corp, do you think Ballard would have tried to sign one of the most expensive receivers in football?? Especially with us being so cost conscious??

 

For those who may not have noticed, there's a theme. Jeffrey & Aiken are type of wr he was looking for. If he thought Moncreif/Dorsett/Rogers were similar he wouldn't have been in the running of signing a $14mil per year wr....imho.

 

I think Moncrief is plenty physical. He has a big catch radius that he is still learning to use, but he's already shown great improvement. He uses his body well in the middle of the field and in the red zone / end zone. He's a great blocker. 

 

Aiken is not more physical than Moncrief, and doesn't belong in the same sentence as Alshon Jeffery (who I don't think the Colts were seriously interested in). He's not as athletic as Moncrief (or as skilled, IMO). I think Aiken was signed because the staff wants another young receiver like Moncrief for a reasonable price, not in an effort to replace or marginalize him. If Aiken marginalizes anyone, it's Dorsett.

 

And just like Aiken doesn't belong in the same sentence as Jeffery, Moncrief doesn't compare to Dorsett and Rogers, in terms of style of play and physical ability. 

[TheRustonRifle#7]

Player "A": 27 years old with 5 years in the league:

51 games/20 started- 128 receptions (1,539 yds) for a 12.0 yd per avg- 9 TD's.

 

Player "B": 23 years old with 3 years in the league:

41 games/19 started- 126 receptions (1,484 yds) for a 11.8 yd per avg.- 16 TD's.

 

Player "C": 24 years old with 2 years in the league:

26 games played/7 started- 51 receptions (753 yds) for a 14.8 yd per avg- 3 TD's.

 

Who are they?

[DougDew]

3 hours ago, NewColtsFan said:

 

Apologies to all,  this is going to be a long post.    I'm trying to address a long list of issues here so there's no way around it.

 

Doug.....     the is NOT the first time you've posted this.    And I've never seen a single other poster embrace this viewpoint.       As far as I can tell,  you're alone on this.     And I think for good reason.      There is zero proof that Grigson was fired over Allen/Doyle.     If that was the case, he'd have been fired the Monday after the season ended, if not sooner.     But he was fired 3 weeks later.     That completely undercuts your position.

 

GM's don't get fired over Doyle ending up the starter instead of Allen.   Especially since Doyle is a plus in the Grigson column.    Honestly,  the issue of Allen/Doyle I would doubt would make the top-20 reasons,  but I'll give you at least 10 reasons, if not more,  why Grigson was fired and none of them have anything to do with Allen/Doyle.

 

GM's get fired over Big Picture issues....

 

1.    Back to back 8-8 seasons.     You are what you record says you are and Irsay found 8-8 (x2) to be unacceptable.

 

2.    An inability for Grigson to get along with his HC,  his coaching staff and his players.   The revelation that Irsay had to bring in a marriage counselor to try and get the two men to work better together is, honestly,  humiliating for the franchise.    Who does that?     Plus,  Irsay chose the HC over the GM,  that's not typically how it works.

 

3.   4 and a half years to get the OL anything close to being right.   It wasn't until week 9 or 10 last year that the line finally started to look like a line.

 

4.   4  1/2 years of Luck either leading the league, or being in the top-3  in getting sacked, or getting hit, or getting pressured.   Grigson famously had a note on his desk since Day 1.   "Job one is to protect 12."    And he didn't do it.     Not for a lack of effort,  but he failed never the less.

 

5.   Allowing the defense to get so old and so slow and so unskilled.   The Colts were 30th last year,  and I think I've read in the 5-years of Grigson/Pagano,  the Colts were 20th or worse, 4 times.

 

6.   2 and a half years of Pep Hamilton.     He was never as bad as his critics claimed,  but he wasn't good enough and it took entirely too long to make a change.

 

7.    Way, way too many misses in the draft.   Too many to list here, we all know the names.

 

8.    Way, way too many misses in Free Agency,    Too many names to list here,  we all know the names.

 

9.   4 straight years of getting WR3 wrong.   Avery,  DHB,  Nicks,  Johnson.

 

10.  5 straight years of getting CB2 wrong.     Vonte Davis is good,  but the rest.....   well....

 

11.  3 straight years of getting RB1 wrong.

 

12.  5 straight years of not much pass rush beyond Robert Mathis.

 

 

Are you beginning to see the difference in the issues I listed as opposed to the one issue you listed?     They don't compare.     Personnel decisions are subjective.     Rarely is an NFL GM fired over one decision unless it's at the most important --- QB.      But you're going to make mistakes,  it happens to every decision maker,  even Bill Belichick.      But you make too many mistakes,  THEN you lose your job.      But one decision on a mid-priced player is never the reason a GM loses his job.     It just doesn't work that way.

 

Sorry this went so long.....    there was much to say....

 

 I don't understand.  Could you elaborate?

 

 

 

[rock8591]

34 minutes ago, TheRustonRifle#7 said:

Player "A": 27 years old with 5 years in the league:

51 games/20 started- 128 receptions (1,539 yds) for a 12.0 yd per avg- 9 TD's.

 

Player "B": 23 years old with 3 years in the league:

41 games/19 started- 126 receptions (1,484 yds) for a 11.8 yd per avg.- 16 TD's.

 

Player "C": 24 years old with 2 years in the league:

26 games played/7 started- 51 receptions (753 yds) for a 14.8 yd per avg- 3 TD's.

 

Who are they?

 

Imwas going to guess Allen Doyle Swoope but that isn't it.

[TheRustonRifle#7]

Just now, rock8591 said:

 

Imwas going to guess Allen Doyle Swoope but that isn't it.

 

All are current Colts and I will break it down further....

 

Player "A" will be 28 at the end of May and has 209 career targets.

 

Player "B" will be 24 in early August and has 210 career targets.

 

Player "C" will be 25 in early January 2018 and has 98 career targets.

 

Who are they?

[rock8591]

 Got it now. Aiken, Moncrief, Dorsett.

 

Had no clue  Moncrief was that young...only 20 when drafted.

[TheRustonRifle#7]

1 minute ago, rock8591 said:

 Got it now. Aiken, Moncrief, Dorsett.

 

Had no clue  Moncrief was that young...only 20 when drafted.

Yes Sir!

[Indy1996]

3 hours ago, Superman said:

 

Well, I agree with Doug on this limited angle. We can't give Ballard credit for the good stuff in KC and refuse to give him any blame for the bad stuff.

 

Broader picture, I don't think KC's issues at receiver are related to any of the personnel they've brought in. I think they tried to go patchwork at the position, and suffered some injuries, and they have a QB that is overly cautious with the football, especially on outside throws.

 

If we assume that Ballard's duties including influencing their draft board and their free agency moves, then he was involved in the Maclin signing (which isn't a bad signing, and most likely was something Andy Reid desperately wanted), he was involved in drafting Chris Conley in the third round (decent, not great), and Demarcus Robinson and Tyreek Hill (we know he was involved in Hill's due diligence off the field, we don't know how much he was involved in the talent evaluation). 

 

So even if I were to give Ballard 100% credit or blame on their wide receiver decision making over the last three years, I don't find fault with it. The worst thing you can say is Maclin regressed in Year 2. 

Do you even know what he did in his carrer cuz you seem to + about ballard when he is helping us like ugh

[MackAttack]

Just now, Boomstick1 said:

Injuries have nagged him, he's a #1 WR imo

nahh. Ty is definitely a #1 though

[lollygagger8]

18 hours ago, DougDew said:

Really?  You judge a GM based upon his intended stop-gap players being no better than stop-gaps?  What next, they need turn water into wine? 

 

The only contract that reflected an investment in a player beyond one or two years was Cherilus, and he was good, just injured.  Heck, even rookies get a three year contract, so that tells you something about what Grigson thought of those players when they were signed.

 

 

C'mon, the entire board must know by now that the OL was not the reason Grigson got fired.  He got fired for choosing DA over Doyle, when anybody who saw the five catches Doyle made that year knew he was as good or better than DA.

[DougDew]

42 minutes ago, lollygagger8 said:

 

Well, let me clarify.  Grigson signed Avery, Nicks, AJ, DaJerk Rogers, Brazil, Griff, and drafted Moncrief and Dorsett.  Fleener failed to live up to expectations.

 

He resigned DA, who has been traded, but didn't extend Doyle.

 

After 5 years, he only spent one first round draft choice on a WR (in a pass happy offense) and generally failed to adequately address the receiving corps except for TY.  In five years, he added one...one.....receiver who we can say definitively is reliably good.

 

I doubt that he got fired for resigning AC and drafting Mewhort, Kelly, Haeg, Clark, and Good, and making these good decisions about the Oline.