ColtStrong2013
-
Posts
4,140 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
7
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Gallery
Events
Blogs
Posts posted by ColtStrong2013
-
-
1 minute ago, Restinpeacesweetchloe said:
Listening to a podcast and a great point was made. When is the process more important than results. The process is. Not working. You can’t trust the process when there have been zero results. It’s time to stop with the patience excuse. Wins and losses are the only thing that matters.
You mentioned earlier you think it’s a good roster, aside from secondary help. You’ve also said that you think AR and JT will have success running the ball, but teams won’t be able to stack the box due to AR’s arm. You have stated that you think the receivers can elevate their production with a qb like AR. If the secondary is improved (both in additions and more development with young guys) and those things come true, leading to success this fall… will you still say the process hasn’t worked?-
2
-
-
40 minutes ago, Restinpeacesweetchloe said:
There is a lot of bullying that goes on here
-
19 minutes ago, Solid84 said:
And to the bolded - he doesn't know guys he drafts either and most of the guys coming on the market in FA for the first time are guys they've scouted in college anyway.
he knows them better than free agents, even if they scouted them in college. Guys coming out of college can change their behavior once the money hits, even in a rookie contract.
That concept is more about retaining guys you draft, that you come to know very well over the course of 4 years within your organization. It’s viewed as far less risk to sign those guys than someone you know little about. For example- resigning JT versus letting him go, starting over and possibly spending big on a receiver. They know JT and his influence on the locker room. They know his work ethic. They know if they don’t reward the best guy on the team, after preaching for years that’s what you do, and go out and spend on a free agent no one internally knows, it could backfire in the locker room big time.
-
1
-
-
Just now, jvan1973 said:
I guess. Doug has some interesting takes. Not all of which I disagree with, but he thinks I bully him somehow. I'm not sure how
you aren’t a bully, you’re just part of the wolf pack now.
Insert “howl and growling noises”
-
Just now, DougDew said:
Do you happen to have any warts or moles anywhere? Just asking.
I have been characterized as one giant hemorrhoid since 7th grade physical education class. -
12 minutes ago, DougDew said:
yes, I think the wolves are just picking on her
-
1
-
-
29 minutes ago, Restinpeacesweetchloe said:
What have the last 8 years got him. Don’t you think when your approach isn’t working you should at least tweet your approach. Ballard has not and he has a losing record. He would of been fired 2 or 3 years ago if he was a GM on any other team.
what is fascinating is that you will say this in one breath, and then once you’ve settled into the lack of oxygen you had to recover from and calmed your nerves, you will say something like, “the roster isn’t bad… just need one more playmaker.” Or something regarding getting the draft right etc.my point is, it’s exhausting…
-
2
-
-
Just now, jvan1973 said:
Yes. gms should tweet out things like that.
-
Just now, jvan1973 said:
What proof is there that the other teams in the division have been great in the last 8 years? Ballard built a team that missed the playoffs by one game with a backup qb.
And after making the “tweaks” that Chloe claims were never made in 8 years…-
1
-
-
Just now, Restinpeacesweetchloe said:
What have the last 8 years got him. Don’t you think when your approach isn’t working you should at least tweet your approach. Ballard has not and he has a losing record. He would of been fired 2 or 3 years ago if he was a GM on any other team.
we know Chloe… he doesn’t care. -
4 minutes ago, Superman said:
it does rub me the wrong way when people say stuff like they don't care about improving the team. They have a different vision than you prefer, that doesn't mean they don't care. To me, that's nonsense.
Amen.
As if Chris Ballard didn’t dedicate his entire career to professional football to get, maybe in high likelihood, one shot at being a General Manager of a multi-billion dollar professional franchise… Only to not care about trying to make them successful. And by successful, I mean a championship caliber team year in and out. And as if there aren’t 31 other General Manager’s who dedicated the same time to do the exact same. Not to mention the hundreds of lower level executives that are busting their butts the same way Chris and the 31 other GM’s did, just to have that one shot at not trying or caring to improve the franchise that pays them millions of dollars a year, altering their families lives forever. 😂
Just now, jvan1973 said:"Laugh emoji"
“Another laugh emoji. But with tears.” -
10 minutes ago, Solid84 said:
I think that's a good indicator. I do think that winning solves everything in a sport like football. Soothes the fans and the media. Calms the waters so to speak. I get what you're saying, and it may well be what the Irsays want right now, I just think it's the wrong approach.
I think "trying" is a very bad way of meassuring how successful a GM is. I think a lot of owners agree, because the average GM tenure is about 5 years I believe.
The Texans/Stroud thing is difficult to comment on, because we don't know what the Texans knew. Did they have reason to believe Young was the Panthers' guy and decided to stay put? Did they just decide to pick whoever was there and lucked out with Stroud? Was Reich the reason Young looked bad his rookie season? How would Stroud and AR have looked with the Panthers and Reich?
My point on the Irsay’s is with Jim’s health, they may feel they have no choice but to be patient and hope this plan works. Do they have time to tear it down and rebuild? Does Jim Irsay even want to be part of that with serious health concerns? Or does he truly want to witness a contender, and knows with maybe only a handful of years left, this is the best chance for that? I think it’s the only chance given a timeframe of a 2-4 year window. That’s my opinion. that’s not saying he’s not going to be around by that period of time, but maybe he’s preparing for that…Trying is an interesting thing regarding GM’s. There are lot of risk takers out there, for the exact reason you just showed- average is roughly 5 years? That’s not much time. Ballard, by all accounts is one of the most organized executives in the league. From my management experience, it’s hard to argue with someone that can show you their exact plan in full detail, where the hiccups were, what they could have done differently, how they viewed risk of certain decision making, etc. Without knowing for a fact, I would say that Chris Ballard has detailed documentation on every move, every conversation, every action and issue that has happened over the past 8 years. He might even have enough to paint a really negative picture in a lawsuit in court against the organization. Who knows. If he’s been squeaky clean as an executive and has documentation, that’s either a great asset or a horrible liability against an organization, depending on how you treat them.
I won’t talk much about the Texans. I realize I opened the door, and now I’m walking out of it. lol. You can keep it open, but I’m not coming back in…
-
1
-
-
1 minute ago, Solid84 said:
Red: Isn't this the whole basis of how to build the team though? If this stay the same how will the team change for the better?
Green: You think we've changed focus? I still think it's trenches first and even to the point some positions get neglected. There's been loads of discussion on here about maybe drafting a CB in the 1st and I just don't see Ballard doing it. If we do acutally draft a WR in the 1st I guess it could point to a change of philosophy.
Blue: I hope we don't start throwing money on every big name FA on the market. I do wish Ballard would start bringing in more solid, young players in FA who we could build around. I don't think using solely the draft is ever going to get us there, because there's always going to be misses. You need to cover those misses with solid FA talent in my opinion.
Red- it is the whole basis, and like I said in the aspect of free agency, it’s because I don’t see the Colts being that active in free agency. Regardless of who is gm. It was tried under Grigson, and did not work. It’s clearly been a struggle to attract bigger names under Ballard. (Ie- Hunter this year)Green- Yes I think it’s changed in hiring Steichen, drafting a qb top 5 for the first time in Ballard’s career and having success with players like Raimann and Downs. He was willing to take some lumps at left tackle to develop Raimann. Of course the concept is still in the trenches. I don’t think people realize how many successful teams has that same mentality, the difference has been more hits at key positions and especially qb. Chiefs, eagles certainly come to mind on the focus on trenches.
Blue- I’m not sure we’ll ever “build around” free agents. That goes under the same sentiment that I expressed above. Free agency will be used to complement the roster and fill needs. He hasn’t done poorly at that- (Houston, Gilmore, Autry, Ebukam). His mentality of not knowing players in free agency, versus the guys that grow from within resonates with me. The Texans don’t know what kind of worker/teammate they are getting in Diggs. They just know his production and are willing to ignore the noise in hopes it elevates them to a championship contender. Not to say it cannot… But it’s just not what Ballard believes in, and especially to build around. He’s made it clear who he building around the past 12 months…
-
5 minutes ago, Solid84 said:
That's fine. I don't have a problem with a healthy discussion about football.
So, when is a GM right? Every time they make a decision? When they win? Is it enough to just "try" and that makes them right?
I agree with stating opinions as facts is off by the way.
By most indicators of fans when they are contenders. I’ve long argued that the Irsay’s might see it differently. With Jim’s health, they might value having calm reasonable voices internally to the approach of the organization as a whole. I would argue that Ballard’s ability to keep the media toned down is a huge plus. Especially with the gravity of the news that has circulated with the boss, Andrew luck’s retirement, coaching changes, etc. Team seems to be doing well to keep the fans spending money at the games.
I dont think trying makes anyone right. I think a lot of luck does. Did Houston drafting Stroud at 3 make them right, or was it more luck that the panthers who jumped them didn’t? Would they have the same success with the little man?
-
1 minute ago, Solid84 said:
I hear you, I just disagree with staying with the same.
Also I'm not saying we should just tear it down. Think of it as a reallocation of ressources. I think we have A LOT of money tied up in positions/players that don't really move the needle for us. I mean, after signing the rookies this offseason how far are we actually from bumping the cap? A team bumping the cap needs to be READY or very close to it, in my opinion, otherwise there's a misallocation of ressources somewhere.
I get it. And I think where I disagree most is that you say we are staying the same. Yes in the sense that the concept of drafting, retaining and finding value in free agency. Disagreed in the positional focus in the draft. We’ve had some hits at key positions. I’m willing to wait for those positions to develop a little more before deciding on the fate of the guy that clearly got a reset and changed that mentality some. In terms of hitting free agency, I just don’t see it ever happening here. It never was a thing, except for a few years of trying to buy an o-line for Andrew luck that led to disaster… I don’t think that will happen regardless of who is at the helm. -
2 minutes ago, Solid84 said:
So, if you don't have any first hand experience doing "X" job, you can't comment on the results of people doing "X" job - is this what you're saying?
no- so don’t put words of which I am not saying. I have never tried to silence anyone here. If someone has the right to comment against a professional’s way of doing things, another has the right to question the comment/thought. My point is more about individuals on here thinking they are correct in their sole-way of thinking, and even going as far to state their opinions as facts. Which is hilarious.-
1
-
2
-
-
2 minutes ago, Solid84 said:
I get your point, I do. But, I'd rather SUCK for 2-3 years than stay mediocre for 8. I'm not saying one way is right and the other isn't, but this is how I feel about it.
Idk. I don’t think you realize the odds of getting back past your definition of mediocre after several years of sucking… it’s not great. Meaning: we could tear it all down, suck for 2-3 years, and then suck for decades. I’d rather stick to the approach we are watching, even if we just have a few winning seasons sprinkled in. I think there are better odds of building consistent competitors this way than starting over. Just my opinion. We’ve seen a change in approach to premium positions- could even further this draft. My main point is this- I just don’t want to suck…-
1
-
-
1 minute ago, Superman said:
I expect the Colts to add a good WR prospect in the draft. That's been my stance since the end of the last season, and continues to be my expectation. If the draft ends and we look the same at WR, my tone on Ballard and Co. will shift. I do not think the Colts are withholding weapons from Richardson. Apparently, I think more highly of the Colts offensive skill players than most people. And I still think they need to add a WR.
I was not interested in Diggs or Ridley, so their signings don't move the needle for me.
Also, I think it can be risky to add a mercurial WR to a room with a young QB and an emerging core. I'm sure the Texans have thought it through, but the Diggs trade could go either way.
how deep do you think the class is to get a quality receiver added? 2nd or 3rd round reasonable? -
1 minute ago, Restinpeacesweetchloe said:
Ballard had his choice yes. You forget he bailed. Irsay and Polian bailed him out helping them get Reich.
I’m not referring to McDaniels Chloe. I’m referring to the head coach that he inherited his first year here.-
1
-
-
Just now, Restinpeacesweetchloe said:
This is true. Not to mention will the new GM WANT RICHARDSON or want to keep Steichen.
did Ballard have the choice of hiring his own Head coach when he took this job? Did he really want Carson Wentz?
just curious
-
1
-
-
1 minute ago, Jason_ said:
LOL
God forbid the company that owns this forum be able to set up the terms of service that they want and appoint people to enforce those terms. This isn't exactly something new.
I never said they don’t have the right to do so. Just question why they feel the need to. Have you ever been on some of the other teams forums? LOL! My word… Feels like you should have to verify your age to participate. I’ve watched harmless posts disappear, when others stay up that certainly would fall under prohibited posting under the terms of service. That’s all… hypocrisy. You know, sort of like those that complained about Houston trading for Diggs when they not long ago said absolutely not to the idea of the Colts trading for him. -
3 minutes ago, DavePSL said:
Its not as simple as Ballard just being gone. He will leave a mess behind that we will have to clean up (3 years) and we better hope he doesn't ruin AR's progression in the process and waste the prime of JT because that's where this is heading. Expecting the Colts to compete with teams that are more talented and not winning is going to hurt the head coach too. Get ready to hear another "we were young" excuse after next season. The excuses people make for Ballard after 8 years of mediocrity is amazing. I'm convinced Ballard could trade AR for a 6th round pick and people would be on here justifying it and how Ballard knows more than us. Remember, Ballard has proven nothing before getting this job, NOTHING!!!! People act like he had a track record like Polian so we should give him the benefit of the doubt. The Colts have pretty much become irrelevant in the NFL now and that's sad considering how hard it was for them to become relevant again through the Manning and Luck years.
tell us more about the “mess” he’s going to leave us in?
-
1 minute ago, DougDew said:
I don't know how Ballard feels about that. What he would do if he was confident that a player would succeed right away.
I'm talking about giving up pick 46, which is likely a ceiling guy, to move up to 8 for a player you "knew" was gong to step in and be good right away.
is that an exact science? I can look at the draft the last two decades and see plenty of top 10 busts… -
1 minute ago, Restinpeacesweetchloe said:
Every person ads value to this forum
like this?Just now, Restinpeacesweetchloe said:Ballard is the almost GM. Well I tried GM.
Value is a funny thing… Beauty in the eye of the beholder, I guess.-
2
-
Colts offseason discussion / Ballard Grievances (merge)
in Colts Football
Posted
BOLD. I like it…
That looks really good on paper- but man, how can you balance the ego trip of that receiving room… especially if things turn south a game or two. What happens if the o-line gets in shambles or Stroud gets injured? Do they get along, or start pointing at Diggs for any drama that arises?