Stephen Holder interview with Jim Irsay

[bababooey]

47 minutes ago, aaron11 said:

ballard said they are going strictly bpa.  we cant pigeon hole a position here

 

http://www.cbssports.com/nfl/news/colts-gm-ballard-on-the-draft-we-will-take-the-best-player/

Let's hope it's a combo of BPA and position of glaring need so we don't end up with another Dorsett while Brown and Collins are available.

[Steamboat_Shaun]

1 minute ago, Majin Vegeta said:

I'm all for getting a RB this draft, just not in the early rounds. 

 

All I know is I've seen enough Josh Robinsons to know I'd rather have a Joe Mixon.

[shasta519]

18 hours ago, Steamboat_Shaun said:

 

I'd 100% fully support this draft haul.

 

I concur. Any draft haul that includes Bucky Hodges without sacrificing other needs gets my nod of approval.

[Andrew Luck fan club]

2 minutes ago, Steamboat_Shaun said:

 

All I know is I've seen enough Josh Robinsons to know I'd rather have a Joe Mixon.

To be fair, we have a different guy picking this year. And it is a deep RB class. 

[BigQandTheManiac]

I sure as hell hope they mean trading down in the 2nd or later rounds. At 15th overall you needa stay PUT. If Foster or Reddick is there at 15th you take em.

[shasta519]

17 hours ago, NewColtsFan said:

 

I don't know what you read in those tweets that gave you the impression that Pagano is a lame duck coach.

 

His comments struck me as quite the opposite.    I thought Irsay did a nice job of cooling the seat the Pagano sits  on,   NOT making it hotter...

 

 

You see it just like I do. It's going to be very easy now for Ballard (and Irsay) to justify keeping Pagano.

[Steamboat_Shaun]

Just now, Majin Vegeta said:

To be fair, we have a different guy picking this year. And it is a deep RB class. 

 

I question how deep it actually is though, after the top 5 guys, the dropoff is pretty significant. If we grab a guy in the 5th and he ends up being a great RB, great, but assuming it's a given just because we have a new GM is pie-in-the-sky to me.

[OffensivelyPC]

19 hours ago, NewColtsFan said:

 Well,  now that the Owner has said this,  perhaps more of us can finally be on the same page.

Don't hold your breath.

[shasta519]

19 minutes ago, Steamboat_Shaun said:

 

I question how deep it actually is though, after the top 5 guys, the dropoff is pretty significant. If we grab a guy in the 5th and he ends up being a great RB, great, but assuming it's a given just because we have a new GM is pie-in-the-sky to me.

 

It's not as deep as some say...but that was true once Chubb and Freeman decided to stay. Still, the likelihood of getting a legit RB1 is there...and there is no shortage of complimentary RBs available.

 

I just hope Ballard has a different philosophy than Grigs, who, when faced with a deep RB class in 2015, passed on drafting any of the good prospects (Coleman, David Johnson, Ajayi) because he thought he could still get one even later...and then when solid RB prospects fell in the 2016 draft...he passed over all of them to sign an UDFA. I just hope Ballard places a bit more emphasis on getting a talented RB. 

[MarquisJ]

Im probably one of the few that actually would like dalvin at 15.. i rather do that then just draft any pass rusher not named garrett, solomon, Barnett, or kid from temple at 15 just because its a need, you don't draft like that. some of these pass rushers they are projecting to us to me are just not worth a 15 especially with this draft being so deep defensively. I forget the year but when we beat the bengals (not saying much) in the playoffs we were running the ball well with BOOM Herron and looked very dominate offensively with a mediocre defense. imagine with a real dominant back with andrew luck and our weapons already..long story short TAKE BPA!! even if it's a running back 

[BProland85]

42 minutes ago, Steamboat_Shaun said:

 

All I know is I've seen enough Josh Robinsons to know I'd rather have a Joe Mixon.

 

I agree I'd just rather use a 1st and 2nd round pick on defense. If Mixon is there in the 3rd I'd be on board with drafting him if Ballard thinks he's matured.

[BProland85]

37 minutes ago, Luck12-to-Hilton13 said:

I sure as hell hope they mean trading down in the 2nd or later rounds. At 15th overall you needa stay PUT. If Foster or Reddick is there at 15th you take em.

 

If Ballard and Irsay are targeting a pass rusher early, which is what we are hearing, they could easily trade down to the late 1st and still get Charles Harris or Takk McKinley while also adding a 2nd and possibly more.

[richard pallo]

8 minutes ago, MarquisJ said:

Im probably one of the few that actually would like dalvin at 15.. i rather do that then just draft any pass rusher not named garrett, solomon, Barnett, or kid from temple at 15 just because its a need, you don't draft like that. some of these pass rushers they are projecting to us to me are just not worth a 15 especially with this draft being so deep defensively. I forget the year but when we beat the bengals (not saying much) in the playoffs we were running the ball well with BOOM Herron and looked very dominate offensively with a mediocre defense. imagine with a real dominant back with andrew luck and our weapons already..long story short TAKE BPA!! even if it's a running back 

I agree BPA when we pick.  By the way Pagano just said getting a RB in this draft is "Paramount".  That sounds like a priority to me. We will see how Ballard addresses the question later today.  The fact that Jim mentioned the position in his interview tells me it is a position that is front and center in their minds.  I think our 1st. pick is wide open especially if we trade down.  

[Horse Shoe Heaven]

17 hours ago, #12. said:

 

Here's my point.  If you're only looking for progress from a coach in year 6, something I'm not sure I've ever heard before, what does that say?  It says you know you hired the wrong guy.  It struck me as an odd thing to even say.  

 

Doesn't matter, it's just owner speak.  Chuck, as I'm sure he knows, is coaching for his job.

It means you hired a coach with no head coaching experience!

[ColtsBlueFL]

2 hours ago, aaron11 said:

ballard said they are going strictly bpa.  we cant pigeon hole a position here

 

http://www.cbssports.com/nfl/news/colts-gm-ballard-on-the-draft-we-will-take-the-best-player/

 

I agree with bpa mindset as well.  OTOH, I do know that bias (intended or not) plays into how a person (scout, coach, GM, media, fans, etc...) grades a player.  Thus if in the back of your mind you feel a position is well stacked with starter and up and coming youngsters, you may tend to grade those players at that position lower than you would if it were a high need. It's human nature, even if totally unintended.

 

Granted , this is Against the scouting creed!  Never let need dictate you grade of a player.  We're human, we carry bias, and therefore it is demonstrated to some degree in our preference. Another thing to consider, Coaches know skill sets better than fans, and schemes better than fans.  So when they grade a guy, he might get a higher slot because he fits the scheme better, or demonstrates skills and techniques that apply to the scheme better.  This alteration of the grade is legitimate to me.

 

So I think Ballard will take honest scout grades, watch for himself and alter them based upon skill set/technique and scheme fit for the Colts coaches.  If Ballard does it really right, need (or lack thereof) doesn't affect grade or vertical/horizontal boards.  Thus when two players grade the same, then Need comes into play and he gets the nod over the other.

 

I have a feeling this is pretty much how Ballard will try to structure the board for draft day.

[ColtsBlueFL]

18 minutes ago, Horse Shoe Heaven said:

18 hours ago, #12. said:

 

Here's my point.  If you're only looking for progress from a coach in year 6, something I'm not sure I've ever heard before, what does that say?  It says you know you hired the wrong guy.  It struck me as an odd thing to even say.  

 

Doesn't matter, it's just owner speak.  Chuck, as I'm sure he knows, is coaching for his job.

It means you hired a coach with no head coaching experience!

 

All coaches had no head coaching experience at some point... until they did.  ;-)

[Steamboat_Shaun]

1 minute ago, ColtsBlueFL said:

 

All coaches had no head coaching experience at some point... until they did.  ;-)

 

Very true. If you hire a head coach that has head coaching experience, that means he was fired from somewhere else for underachieving. Pick your poison.

[Superman]

8 hours ago, LockeDown said:

This is a good and fair post.  

 

However, why is it virtually the same cast of characters who are always there in the playoffs every year and they unsurprisingly are the teams with good front offices and the elite QBs?  By the way, we Were a member of that group until our elite QB was injured.   While I think you make a valid point, it just seems elite QBs, good FOs and good defenses matter more in this league.  Besides, I don't see many great coaches in the league and I dont see many good coaches who consistently win despite average teams.  Example, Carolina.  Super Bowl one year, toilet bowl the next.  Same coach.  Different defense.  I'm not saying we can't do better than  Pagano, but a really good defense would have kept us in the AFC championship game vs NE, but a better coach with the same team would have made very little difference.  Jmo. 

 

Good front office equals good roster, and a good QB means you'll have a chance in most of your games. I would say the same about the coaching staff.

 

We didn't have a good roster in 2016. I think we did a bunch of silly stuff on offense, and I think we had a couple of bad gameplans on defense. We still finished 8-8, mostly because the QB had a pretty good year. I think good coaching leads to a win in Detroit, probably a sweep against Houston, a better game against Jacksonville, and a better shot at coming back in Oakland. 

 

So, two out of three, especially in a weak division, should equal playoffs. We have a good QB, but not a good roster, and in 2016, not good coaching (I think Pagano and staff did a better coaching job in 2015). 

[Horse Shoe Heaven]

8 hours ago, AustexColt said:

One big lesson that Pagano needs to learn is to be more like Bellichek. Bellichek is actively involved in preparing, analyzing during the game and adjusting throughout the game. Pagano is a good motivator/communicator but he needs to sharpen his analytical skills. Bellichek is the opposite. His analytical skills are off the chart with limited communication skill. Players and his coaches respect Bellichek because he is the PROFESSOR. Hope Pagano/his coaching staff can turn the corner this year, if not this might be their last year.

This is true!! 

[Horse Shoe Heaven]

4 hours ago, MTC said:

I'm a fan of trading back. This draft is deep with a lot of talent. 

I am cool with trading back just not that far if we can get say another 2nd or 3rd round pick!

[ColtsBlueFL]

2 hours ago, Coltfreak said:

You asked what changed from the the team that was so successful.   New DC adn new OC were changes. 

Wasn't blaming Pagano, just saying that it will take a while to get a new system down.

 

The team was built for Pep's offense....  I didnt  like Chud trying to run his offense with a team not built for it.  Not to say it wont work with the right personnel in the future,   just a complete different philosophy than Pep.

And there was probably some changes with the new DC.

 

Again not blaming, just saying those were changes

 

Ahhhh... I think the offense was actually built for Bruce Arians.  and Chudzinski is another branch off the Coryell tree just like Arians.  Pep had to alter his West Coast offense into the "No Coast" offense in the interim.  And he lost game play calling flow many times.

[krunk]

1 hour ago, richard pallo said:

I agree BPA when we pick.  By the way Pagano just said getting a RB in this draft is "Paramount".  That sounds like a priority to me. We will see how Ballard addresses the question later today.  The fact that Jim mentioned the position in his interview tells me it is a position that is front and center in their minds.  I think our 1st. pick is wide open especially if we trade down.  

I'm just glad Grigs is not here this time around to select the RB.    I rarely liked any of his running back choices other than V. Ballard.

 

 

[bababooey]

4 minutes ago, krunk said:

I'm just glad Grigs is not here this time around to select the RB.    I rarely liked any of his running back choices other than V. Ballard.

 

 

I also liked Ahmad Bradshaw, Frank Gore, Robert Turbin, Tyler Varga, and, at the time, Trent Richardson in the wake of Ballard's torn achilles.

[krunk]

1 minute ago, bababooey said:

I also liked Ahmad Bradshaw, Frank Gore, Robert Turbin, Tyler Varga, and, at the time, Trent Richardson in the wake of Ballard's torn achilles.

Bradshaw I was okay with.   Liked Varga some, but he was never looked at as a starter and of course the concussion ruined everything.

[NewColtsFan]

3 hours ago, BProland85 said:

 

If Ballard and Irsay are targeting a pass rusher early, which is what we are hearing, they could easily trade down to the late 1st and still get Charles Harris or Takk McKinley while also adding a 2nd and possibly more.

 

Remember,  trade down too far and other teams will wind up taking the player you want right before you do.

 

That happens....

 

[Coltfreak]

1 hour ago, ColtsBlueFL said:

 

Ahhhh... I think the offense was actually built for Bruce Arians.  and Chudzinski is another branch off the Coryell tree just like Arians.  Pep had to alter his West Coast offense into the "No Coast" offense in the interim.  And he lost game play calling flow many times.

He was 22-10 two seasons with a healthy Luck.....   And 4-8 with a beat up Luck or a backup.  

Chud is 13-11.... 8-8 with a healthy Luck and better oline and  5-3 with hurt Luck and backups with the bad oline

 

 

[BProland85]

33 minutes ago, NewColtsFan said:

 

Remember,  trade down too far and other teams will wind up taking the player you want right before you do.

 

That happens....

 

 

Thats where you look at the needs of the teams in front of you to determine how far you can trade back while still getting one of your targeted pass rushers. 

[Andrew Luck fan club]

Hmmmmm

[Steamboat_Shaun]

13 minutes ago, Majin Vegeta said:

Hmmmmm

 

Even more "hmmm" material...

 

 

[DougDew]

20 minutes ago, Majin Vegeta said:

Hmmmmm

RG.  Haeg and Good are backups, but public statements like this could be to help push them to get even better.

[NewColtsFan]

36 minutes ago, BProland85 said:

 

Thats where you look at the needs of the teams in front of you to determine how far you can trade back while still getting one of your targeted pass rushers. 

 

Remember.....   in R1,  most teams are drafting BPA and not just for need.

 

And since you were the one who talked about trading back far enough to get a 2nd round pick (maybe more?)  I thought a moment of reality would be important.     To get the kind of draft pick(s) you want,  the Colts would have to trade back of far you can't just judge the needs of teams in front of you.    There's too many teams, and some of those teams might just make trades.      There are lots and lots of moving parts to all this....

 

[Andrew Luck fan club]

18 minutes ago, DougDew said:

RG.  Haeg and Good are backups, but public statements like this could be to help push them to get even better.

I think Good is a backup but I think Haeg can be a starter in this league. 

[richard pallo]

1 hour ago, Majin Vegeta said:

I think Good is a backup but I think Haeg can be a starter in this league. 

I don't think Haag is strong enough.  But he is a nice rotational backup like Reitz.  Clark looks more promising as a RT so I think drafting a G is on the table or a tackle and moving him to G.  Ballard has me convinced the 1st. pick is wide open.  Especially if we trade down.  No reaching for any need position. 

[richard pallo]

2 hours ago, Steamboat_Shaun said:

 

Even more "hmmm" material...

 

 

These quotes could easily point to us drafting an OL or RB in the 1st. round.   He sounds like BPA to me. 

[krunk]

4 minutes ago, richard pallo said:

I don't think Haag is strong enough.  But he is a nice rotational backup like Reitz.  Clark looks more promising as a RT so I think drafting a G is on the table or a tackle and moving him to G.  Ballard has me convinced the 1st. pick is wide open.  Especially if we trade down.  No reaching for any need position. 

I think Haeg can handle it.  I expect he'll get stronger during this offseason along with whatever pointers he picked up when he was playing.  I don't think he'll still have that same collegiate strength that he came in the league with.   I'm not against bringing in other OL to compete though.   But I do think Haeg can start. JMO

[Andrew Luck fan club]

7 minutes ago, richard pallo said:

These quotes could easily point to us drafting an OL or RB in the 1st. round.   He sounds like BPA to me. 

It's clear we're not taking a RB in the first. Accept it. 

[richard pallo]

2 minutes ago, krunk said:

I think Haeg can handle it.  I expect he'll get stronger during this offseason along with whatever pointers he picked up when he was playing.  I don't think he'll still have that same collegiate strength that he came in the league with.   I'm not against bringing in other OL to compete though.   But I do think Haeg can start. JMO

I hope you're right because I do like Haag a lot.  If Ballard doesn't think the starting 5 is "definitely" not on the roster then he is looking for an upgrade somewhere. 

[richard pallo]

3 minutes ago, Majin Vegeta said:

It's clear we're not taking a RB in the first. Accept it. 

After all these comments today and you think it's clear we're not taking a RB in the 1st.   The only thing that's clear is we have no idea and they have no idea what position they are taking 1st. 

[dgambill]

14 hours ago, NewColtsFan said:

 

One other thing....

 

I'm not married to Pagano.     If we can hire a better coach,  I'm all for it.     I've just cautioned people here for a long time that hiring a better coach is much easier said than done.     Hiring a very good coach in any sport is one of the hardest thing to do.

 

The year Pagano was hired, I think there were 8 head coaches hired.     Only Pagano is still with their team.    All those other teams were as optimistic as the Colts were 5 years ago.     But getting the right guy is hard.    You could fire Pagano and easily end up with worse.

 

Yes...we should be very careful. Last time we fired staff we got rid of a HOF GM and a good coach and got stuck with Pagano and Grigson.....just saying it can always get worse. While I like Pagano as a man I'm definitely not sure he is an upgrade from Caldwell. I do think with a better roster he isn't going to hold us back...but I don't get that impression that he has learned to make adjustments in game and game plan such that we exploit our advantages over our opponents...as evident by our slow starts and poor performances against elite teams. We've basically beat up against the AFC South and cellar dwellers during his tenure with an upset here and there....and 2012 we were coached by Bruce Arians for the most part so I don't really count Chuck in all that. I'm not sure a better option is available so I'm not ready to move on but I don't necessarily think he is the answer to our future.

[NewColtsFan]

4 minutes ago, dgambill said:

Yes...we should be very careful. Last time we fired staff we got rid of a HOF GM and a good coach and got stuck with Pagano and Grigson.....just saying it can always get worse. While I like Pagano as a man I'm definitely not sure he is an upgrade from Caldwell. I do think with a better roster he isn't going to hold us back...but I don't get that impression that he has learned to make adjustments in game and game plan such that we exploit our advantages over our opponents...as evident by our slow starts and poor performances against elite teams. We've basically beat up against the AFC South and cellar dwellers during his tenure with an upset here and there....and 2012 we were coached by Bruce Arians for the most part so I don't really count Chuck in all that. I'm not sure a better option is available so I'm not ready to move on but I don't necessarily think he is the answer to our future.

 

The reason I credit Pagano in 2012, is because the team posted the same 11-5 record in 2013 and 2014 without Arians as the OC and with Pep in that job.      How did that happen?

 

That tells me that if Chuck was the HC in 2012 with Arians by his side as always intended,  we'd have gone the same 11-5.     I don't think there's any reason NOT to think that.      Arians would've been there,  the offense would've been just as good.     Chuck proved what he could do in 13 and 14.    So, in my mind,  he gets full credit for 12.     

 

He set the foundation for the team,  and Arians followed the plan.