lester

What if there are three playmakers left on the board who he wants equally and a team only two spots back offers to trade up. Do you take it?

That is a really interesting analogy. Thanks for posting it like that.

Usually. Yes. I agree. That is for sure how Ballard operates (and it is the reason this team is usually in a good position in regards to cap space). But but but... They did this now for a reason. There will be some benefit they felt they needed to secure. I'm very curious to learn what that might be. This is fun!

As anyone here who has ever run a significant organization will attest, he is doing it the way he thinks is best; and is likely doing it the way he was hired to do it. Irsay chose a person with Ballard's approach for a reason - none of this is a secret to the ownership. If his way works, everyone will forget their frustration. Everyone. Many will even pretend they were never against his method in the first place. If his way doesn't work, he'll be out of a job. I think (its fairly obvious) that he knows this. He is not going to change just to keep his job - he likely, clearly, believes he is doing his job the way he is supposed to do it.

Yeah, but did Manning help stranded motorists on 465? Well, did he? </grin>

The last two seasons worth of leadership moves could be as simple as a desire by the regime for consistency. Anyone here ever try to fix a business that was under-performing? You don't cut the whole thing to pieces all at once. That is counter productive. The leaders knew which of the big things they wanted to tackle last year. Now they have new challenges to solve for this year. Solve those, then decide if another change makes the machine work better. There are posters who may disagree with what I am trying to describe. I know from my career in business that doing it all at once makes the process seem faster (action!) but does not mean the changes are necessarily the right changes; and speed does not ensure the change is in the right direction. Ever notice how some teams blow it all up every couple years? Again and again? That is what I am describing.

I feel very confident that the Colts have their eye on someone. They are sitting on that extra for a reason. It will get spent.

Where; and how (I dare ask) did we come by that very good coach and the potential stud of a QB?

That won't be a surprise. I believe that is and has been the plan along. They will choose young playmakers to pair with Richardson. -- and -- I don't think Ballard is done with Free Agency either. I predict that we will have a complete defense before going into the draft. He is sitting on about ~$20m in cap space for a reason.

We don't know that. We only know the other teams have signed more players and more 'popular' players than we, the Colts, have. We cannot know, nobody can know, if they are now better teams for it. That is Chris Ballard's point. It is a point he has made consistently. It is a core team building belief that he is very open about. That is: Adding a bunch of really good players, some in and some just past their primes, for more money than their existing team was willing to pay them; does not make them a sure thing (and he adds, they are usually not worth it). The teams who win Free Agency are almost never the teams that win the post season. Chris Ballard believes and Bill Polian believed (so that makes me have faith that Jim Irsay also believes) that true, sustainable, repeatable, predictable, and long term success only comes from adding in the draft and coaching them well. Then reward them and keep them. I think he will add a piece or two yet, but he is not going to (now or ever) build this team with famous players from other teams.

Let's play a game. Who said this: “Free agency in and of itself is an overpayment situation. That said, if your own players are quality players and you believe they can help you win then it’s better off to pay them because they’re as good or better as you can find in the market and you know them better than you know a player from another team. You’re paying a premium, but you put it into a player you know and believe in. He has no adjustments coming into your system. It’s pretty seamless. When you have good players, when you’ve drafted well, it follows that the more you can keep the better off you are. That’s the right way to go rather than trying to get someone else’s players.“

This is me. I kinda prefer the strategy of team building more than the games themselves. Of course I watch them all and enjoy watching them; but I pay special attention to the intricacies of the NFL as an organization (specifically, the Colts) far more than the action. Maybe its just me applying the lessons from my MBA for good instead of evil. I take pleasure in understanding the personnel moves, why the moves were made, the consequences of moves that were missed, and how those moves will impact the product on Sundays. It is truly what makes the NFL the most fascinating sports franchise of them all.

In that case, here is a pic of one or your birds. #SmallWorld

"When I tweeted I was told the two sides were progressing towards a contract being done. They hit a bump, and if they can't get over it that's the reason the deal doesn't happen. I still think they find a way but it's a waiting game right now. The NFL offseason is wild, things can change in a blink of an eye, which tells you how confident I was yesterday to put that out at all."