Superman

I don't really like Verse.

I subscribe to his Patreon for a month at a time, here and there. It's worth a few bucks, and he has full game breakdowns there. If the Vikings draft a QB, I'd recommend checking it out for a short period of time to see what you're getting. IMO, there's no one better than JT.

Either rights claims, or college teams beefing about all 22 film... There's a weird underground with college tape.

I think that's simplifying it too much. The same team started out 0-3. There were problems all season, and the only time things looked good was when the run game was on fire. The next season, without Covid as a factor, the team pumped up the importance of starting strong. They acknowledged the streak of losing the opener, they acknowledged the streak of losing in Jacksonville. Everyone stared it right in the face and said how important it was to change those two things in the first two games of the season. The team sleepwalked through the first three quarters of the opener, eventually limping to a tie against one of the worst teams in the league. And the next week they got shut out in Jacksonville. Ballard always talked about not flinching. Reich always talked about being mentally tough and finishing strong. IMO, the end of 2021 and the beginning of 2022 showed that the team had a severe lack of heart, and deficient leadership. It seemed like that was all laid on the shoulders of Wentz and Reich, which I think was a good place to start, but they were not the only problems. The Covid situation was a part of it, but I think what happened at the end of 2021 was a symptom of deeper issues.

I remember. I wasn't a huge fan of the Funchess signing/price, but that graphic and Ballard's comments were encouraging. We never got to see how that would have worked out. I don't think we have meaningful data like that for Richardson yet. I doubt that his college tape would offer enough insight, and his sample size from 2023 is too small.

@stitches How much weight do you put into stuff like this?

I think there's more to Pierce than we've seen. I think that's somewhat true of all of our pass catchers, honestly. But I definitely think we need to add a dynamic receiver. I'm not trying to sell Nico short. Just saying he's a good example of the difference a playmaking QB can make.

Is this post intentionally cliche? Just asking, because you hit all the buttons there. I don't think DeJean is sneaky athletic. I think his athleticism is simply overrated and overstated. He's athletic for sure, but more in an explosive way than in a 'blur on the field' kind of way. His speed has a cap, he probably can't run and change direction with the really good receivers, and he gets beat down the field because of it. I think he's more of a safety/nickel guy than a corner. DeJean in the first round is a rough one for me.

It's possible, and I wouldn't be surprised if that's a factor. I agree that Ballard is more likable and easier to get along with than Grigson and late stage Polian for sure. And I think that Ballard's personality and the way he's tried to build relationships with the media has led to some grace from those guys. In general, though, I think Irsay really believes in continuity, like he says. I think Grigson might have stayed longer if he wasn't so difficult to get along with.

Collins isn't the only pass catcher to take a leap after being paired with a more dynamic QB. They're not all perfect comparisons, but when you go from Matt Ryan/Gardner Minshew to someone like Richardson, it makes sense to expect that your receivers will benefit. I don't think we disagree on that; you said earlier that you think Pierce should benefit from Richardson. Again, everyone agrees that a good QB is a force multiplier, even Ballard, despite him saying 'it's not about one guy.' It's not about one guy, but it's a universally accepted premise that having a dynamic QB makes a big difference. I think picking at this is off the mark. I also think the Colts will add another WR in the draft, but we'll see about that.

Ironically, I think Nico Collins speaks to the benefit of having good QB play. He wasn't on anyone's radar before 2023 when he was playing with random QBs like Davis Mills and Tyrod Taylor, then Stroud comes along and now he's the anchor of a great WR corps... Random WR 1, first two seasons: 24 games, 126 targets, 70 catches, 927 yards, three TDs Random WR 2, first two seasons: 33 games, 143, 73 catches, 1,107 yards, four TDs You can guess which is Nico Collins, and which is Alec Pierce. Collins is the argument for giving Pierce some rope as a third year guy who will finally have a QB who can throw down the field. And it illustrates why I don't think saying Richardson can help the WRs produce better is the same as asking Richardson to drag a bad WR corps into the top tier. To answer your question, I think Pittman vs Diggs is a discussion, because I think Diggs is on the way down and Pittman is a more well rounded X receiver. But please note that I never argued that the Colts have a better pass catcher group than the Texans. I argued that the Colts pass catchers have more potential than you're giving them credit for.

Irsay did use the word "mistake." I think Ballard's quote was: "We thought it was a good move... at the time." And he repeated this line, stressing at the time, like 'we definitely wouldn't have done this if we knew what we know now.' He even strongly suggested that they would have moved on from Wentz even if the team made the playoffs. He's pretty careful about what he says publicly, so using the word mistake probably wouldn't happen, but it was pretty obvious that he regretted trading for Wentz. I don't think anyone has directly called him a megalomaniac, but that's kind of the portrayal, at least by some. He sets up scapegoats so he can protect his job, he has to be the smartest guy in the room, he doesn't accept responsibility for his mistakes, etc. I don't think any of that is remotely true of Ballard, but that's how some people say they see him. And it's kind of wild to me. Edit: By the way I see that csmopar was responding to you, so I understand why you replied to me. I wasn't necessarily pointing that comment at anyone in particular.

Again, one can disagree with their assessment. You think the roster is deficient. Do you think they think the roster is deficient? I take issue with the bolded. The OL isn't an issue right now. The DB group wasn't left unaddressed last season. Rodgers got cut, Flowers got hurt, Brents was in and out of the lineup with injuries. Corner was a weak spot in 2023, but it's not because the position was left unaddressed. And at DL, they aren't relying on guys like Turay and Banogu like they did in 2021; Paye and Dayo are on a much different level than those guys. We agree that they can do more at WR. I don't agree that they are relying on Richardson to turn our group in a great one. I think they believe that our pass catchers have been held back by limited QBing, and I think that's an obvious fact. Pierce is more of a weapon with a QB who can actually threaten downfield, which is one of Richardson's strengths. And I don't agree about what Luck used to do. Luck didn't turn a mediocre group into a great producing group. Luck fed his best WR -- TY Hilton most of the time -- and everyone else continued to be mediocre to serviceable. When Luck played with Ebron, he didn't turn a mediocre TE into a great one. He did however help a good TE produce at a higher level. This is normal. Pass catcher is the position most dependent on QB play. If you put a good receiver with a good QB, you'll get better production than if you put the same receiver with a limited QB. Again, they can do more at WR. I expect that from this draft. Okay, this is pretty laughable, IMO. Not only are you highlighting Dulin instead of the three WRs ahead of him who are actually pretty talented, you're also pumping up players that you didn't think the Colts should have targeted. The Texans signed Mixon. the Titans signed Pollard; Richardson has JT, who is better than both. I guess part of this is intentionally absurd and sarcastic, it just doesn't land for me. There are also diminishing returns with pass catchers. Just take the Texans -- they already have Collins, Dell, Schultz... add Diggs, and part of Mixon's appeal is presumably his pass catching. They'll figure it out, but just adding guys to the mix doesn't raise the level of production as significantly as it seems. And if one guy isn't getting the targets he wants -- like Diggs -- it could raise other issues. Yes, young QBs need support. My thinking is that there's more potential among the Colts pass catchers and offensive weapons than you are giving them credit for. Sure, I'll take a monster WR, but that's a different conversation. I'm not as concerned about splurging for weapons. I think the defensive side of the ball is where we need more attention. I feel pretty good about the offense, assuming Richardson is good, JT is good and healthy, and guys like Woods and Ogletree are available.

I wasn't high on him as a first rounder to begin with.

Stubborn, yes. I think he believes in his process, for better or worse. Arrogant, I don't agree. There have been a couple times when Ballard bristled a little bit, got somewhat defensive, etc. In general, he appears to be collaborative, takes blame when things go wrong, assigns credit when things go right, doesn't air dirty laundry (I think he protected JT more than he should have, for example), gets along well with other people, etc.

I think those pieces from Atkins and Holder are puff pieces, and I don't find them particularly insightful. It's laughable that Atkins teased his article the day before like he was going to be offering some meaningful perspective, only to repeat the same things we heard for two weeks with some week old Ballard quotes sprinkled in. So if your response here is basically an extended eye roll at that kind of stuff, let me get out of the way so you can cook. I'm fully with you there. But if we're talking about the Colts roster, then there's two things to consider, IMO. First, what the Colts think of their roster. If they think they have talented young DBs, and feel like Pierce and others (including Pittman) have more to offer with a playmaking QB, and maybe think the pass rush can be improved with better coaching (this is NCF's angle, I'm not so sure about it), then I think it's pretty clear what the strategy is. Specific to WR, we know very well that the passing game has been held back by QB. We also know how important good QB play is to any team. So it's not 'we're going to put the entire weight of our team's future on the shoulders of our QB.' It's more like 'we think we have a good roster already, and with better QB play, we think we can go further.' And I think your early point about Ballard's approach being ironic is kind of off the mark. The second thing to consider is whether they are right in their assessment. I know you disagree. I've voiced my own concerns. But it could be that as the season plays out, the corner position is better than we think, maybe we see better pass coverage over the middle of the field, maybe the pass rush is better. On offense, maybe Pierce and Woods give us some explosives, maybe JT healthy and locked in makes a dynamic pairing with Richardson, etc. I wouldn't bet on all of that working out, but I think any of those prospects is realistic on its own. Even if you don't agree, it doesn't mean they're just waiting for the QB to fix everything. Another element is whether they could feel great about their current guys, but still do more than they've done so far. Some veteran insurance at corner and safety -- especially after Ballard called himself out for having such a young secondary; some OL competition, etc. There's still the draft, and I think some of the areas we're all eager to see improved -- WR, DB, edge -- will be addressed there. But I think they could do more, and I think they'll probably add a vet player who can supplement one of those groups. My gripe with your argument is just that I think it misrepresents the approach. It also downplays a fundamental fact that we all agree with -- good QB play is crucial to any team's prospects.

I don't remember exactly what words he used, but he all but called the Wentz trade a mistake. It's really confusing to me how many people paint Ballard as a megalomaniac.

Not just complaints about Ballard, but a place to discuss and litigate and in some cases bellyache and call for him to be fired, which there's not necessarily anything wrong with. But in the interests of not having every discussion devolve into another back and forth about Ballard and his philosophies, having a grievances thread allows a place for those discussions to continue in a robust manner, while other threads can stay more on topic. That said, even in this thread, posters need to respect the rules and each other. There's way too much name calling, labeling, and personal bickering in this thread, and it inevitably spills out into other interactions.

I don't really see the irony. I actually think this argument is a misrepresentation. I think the more accurate way to describe the team's approach is they think the roster is good, and having a playmaking QB will make a huge difference. We all agree with the second part, in principle, right? Whether or not the roster is good enough remains to be seen, but that's probably where the disagreement lies.

Feels like a strawman, to be honest. I don't think anyone is frowning upon the Texans, including Colts fans. They're getting plenty of credit, and it's pretty well deserved.

That's all I'm saying.

I don't understand the point of the comparison. I think it's premature to pump up the Texans staff, especially given how forgettable everything they've done has been prior to 2023.

What options was he supposed to pursue in August 2019? And what impact did that have on whether the team could pursue other QB options during the typical QB acquisition time period? This is a major stretch. Ballard traded a depth WR for a backup QB in 2017, and that guy wound up being a pretty decent backup / spot starter. Then they overpaid him for 2019 to protect against his potential free agency, and when it was obvious that he wasn't the guy, they moved on. If you think that's a whiff in the QB evaluation process, have at it. But it's not as strong of a point as you think.

Reich apologized to Irsay for Wentz. We know because Reich told us so. And then Irsay fired Reich in the middle of the season, and kept Ballard. We're not even talking about what might have happened if the Colts didn't acquire Rivers or Wentz. Maybe they acquire a different veteran who bombs, maybe they draft a guy who bombs... who knows? But those are hypotheticals. We can look back and see what actually happened. Like was said earlier, you're being pedantic. You want to make sure that no one who blamed Reich for the QB situation gives Ballard credit if Richardson works out, and you're trying to push this topic through a tiny pinhole so all the context gets left behind.