Jump to content

All Activity

This stream auto-updates     

  1. Past hour
  2. LOL. His first year with Pagano, and Grigson's roster. He turned it over completely in 3 offseasons. His drafting has been stellar. His free agent pickups have been safe and solid. He had a slipup with the coaching fiasco, but recovered with what will go down as the best move of his career in hiring Reich and keeping Eberflus as DC. I think 100% that this roster could win many games with Brissett under center which is far different from the first time he was put out there with a crap o-line and bad coaching staff. I also think this front office could make the necessary moves to find a franchise qb. I think Luck is what is necessary to get this team to several superbowls, but I don't think he is the end all. Bill Bellichick thinks the same about Tom Brady. He will be around well after Brady's gone and still winning a lot of football games.
  3. we would obviously have another gm. you guys are asking a hypothetical on what we would do if ballard was gone along with everyone he brought in, and i cant assume we have decent players in their place? i think ballard would have a hard time replacing luck if he were the one to leave, and ballards one year without luck didnt go well luck was able to carry bad teams, coaching and front offices to the playoffs
  4. i agree, Ben was elite in his prime and could have gone far with this roster built to pass to lots of different receivers i dont think we have enough running game or defense to win one with RW. Foles had one of the most well rounded teams in recent memory when he won. i think he would be a good fit here though, especially with Reich its probably a borderline playoff team with eli, the division would close
  5. I'm saying a draft pick like the players given in my examples when they won their SB. Not currently today. I think Ballard could build an elite team around a drafted QB of their caliber, and that's why I lean towards Ballard in this debate. I believe we can win a SB with an average to above-average QB more likely than Luck carrying a mediocre team to a SB win.
  6. "Luck and co." What company are you referring to? The company that Ballard turned over and built in three offseasons? Yeah they'd do just fine if another gm came in and rode their coattails. Are you referring to the coaching staff as well? Yeah... Ballard hired them too. The scouting department? Yeah, Ed Dodds, Rex Hogan, Brian Decked... all Ballard guys. Sorry, but Luck failed to win big games with the last GM. If he can win with this one, it's because Ballard put together an actual team, front office and coaching staff to win.
  7. If we had Big Ben in his prime I think we could win the SB with the team we have now, those others not sure. Wilson had one of the best defenses of all-time when he won it all, Foles had a great all-around team period. Eli even in his prime wouldn't win a SB with what we have now, defense isn't good enough.
  8. i dont think his first draft was that great, it was ok but not special. i liked what they did this year, but they are not exactly the safest prospects. you are calling ballard a great GM now, when hes had one good year... grigson had a good year too we will need a very QB and GM to win a super bowl, i happen to think the gm is easier to find
  9. I do not think anyone will be better or accomplish more than Brady, Montana, or Peyton but outside of that Luck could end up top 5 of all-time with huge numbers, a ring or 2 and a couple of MVP's.
  10. I think the difference and a top ten QB eventually from the draft isn't the difference between a SB with Ballard as GM. I saw a post from you talking about poor QB's winning a SB, I have a different question. Could we win with a Big Ben, Eli, Russell Wilson, Nick Foles type if Ballard was the GM and we didn't have Luck? That's the tier that would be obtainable with a draft pick IMO. With the team we have now around him, I think so. The alternative is a 30 year old Luck with a completely random team (nothing from Ballard), and a random GM and coach, where we hope Luck can carry the team again and his career clock is half over. I'd go with Ballard.
  11. Today
  12. If the Chiefs lose Hill, they will still be tough to beat but that is a blow to their offense make no mistake about that. They become more beatable.
  13. You can't get rid of Ballard and keep all his roster construction though. Decent GM's are probably harder to find than you think. Even we managed to miss on one poorly before Ballard.
  14. I do not, however, the Chiefs have arguably the best QB in the game in Mahomes. They have Kelce and Watkins still, and by drafting a Tyreek Hill clone in Hardman, he can at least somewhat replace him in the deep pass game, and the punt and kick return game. I do agree it's a downgrade, but they get the same type of player as Hill in Hardman, which will minimize the downgrade on the offense.
  15. I guess it depends on whether or not you believe Luck is a once in a lifetime generational player, as in capable of being a top 5 QB of all-time like Manning is. I do but those that don't would vote Ballard. Having a great GM is huge I agree with you there, I know that being a Cubs fan but once in a lifetime players are really rare. Great GM's can build teams and keep teams good for years but you need special players to be great and I think Luck is special. Take the Cubs for example, they lose Arrieta and Chapman and weren't near as dominant as in 2016. Bryant was injured last year and their offense wasn't the same either.
  16. i was going by if we had to get rid of one and keep one now. i would keep luck over ballard and it would not be a hard choice for me its not that hard to find a decent GM
  17. You think hill's production can be replaced that easily? Hill is argubly the best WR in the game
  18. I remember reading that article, but Hill has yet to be suspended or put on the Commish's exempt list yet, so I'm waiting for that to be confirmed before downgrading the Chiefs record and playoff spot.
  19. Except we wouldn't have Luck and company without Ballard, we'd have Luck and whatever team the new GM built from after Grigson got fired. So the 2017-2019 fa and draft classes would essentially be random based on the GM's preferences and the team and even the coach would be completely different around Luck. Think about that.
  20. Quote from CBS Sports, article listed below quote: “The Chiefs announced Thursday that Hill has been banned indefinitely from all team activities after an audio recording surfaced in which the receiver's fiancee accused him of abusing their three-year-old son, Adam Teicher of ESPN.com reports. ‘We were deeply disturbed by what we heard [on the recorded conversation],’ general manager Brett Veach said. ‘We were deeply concerned. Now obviously we have great concern for [Hill's fiancee] Crystal [Espinal]. We are greatly concerned for Tyreek. But our main focus, our main concern, is with the young child.’” https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.cbssports.com/fantasy/football/news/chiefs-tyreek-hill-banned-indefinitely-from-team/amp/
  21. "backing into a title", no such thing happened. The SB isn't the only game played. We had to go through Ray Lewis and Ed Reed at Baltimore, Brady and BB in the AFC Title Game to win that SB. That Bears team demolished Drew Brees and the Saints in the NFC Title Game 39-14. People can bag on Rex Grossman all they want but we beat some very good teams/borderline great teams to win that SB. All I know is Bill Polian is in the Hall of Fame so to say he wasn't great is absurd IMO, but that is my opinion. Yet Manning was more important to the Colts.
  22. Polian was a bit above average general manager IMO. Manning and company could have had multiple titles if not for Polian ignoring the lines and defense instead of backing into a title against a Rex Grossman led team in SB XLI.
  23. Honestly, looking back, I think Polian was an average GM, and nowhere near Ballard's level. He drafted a lot of offense around Peyton and neglected the defense (which is why Peyton couldn't win more than 1 SB). He had no real plan except winning (like Grigson), and the only real difference between Polian and Grigson was that Polian hit on more draft picks. They both had a franchise QB handed to them. As far as Ballard goes, he's done more as a GM in 3 years building this team than Polian did his entire career with the Colts as our GM. If anything, Polian cost the Colts many SB's with Manning with his offense-first philosophy.
  24. He probably will, but it's unclear how long with Goddell as Commish, and the Chiefs were ready with Hardman to draft his replacement. I don't think it'll affect them too much with Mahomes at QB.
  25. Right, & much like the recent trend of companies diversifying portfolios buying into the fine art market, it's an investment...
  26. Here is a question for everyone that voted Ballard, who was more important to the Colts franchise, Bill Polian or Peyton Manning? Polian is in the Hall of Fame. It was Manning and not even close IMO.
  27. Having a great Pres of Ops/GM is huge don't get me wrong. The Cubs stunk it up before Theo came in and what Belichick does year in and year out is impressive. Having said that players win championships. Without a couple of starting ace pitchers or a franchise QB, the chances of winning a championship are slim. Any competent GM (meaning good, not great) can get good players to build a team. Grigson sucked so now Ballard is a God compared to him.
  1. Load more activity
  • Create New...