NewColtsFan

If you scroll up just a few posts you’ll see a post I made yesterday (not to you) which explains why Arizona is not trading down to Indy. The rumor goes like this: Minnesota has picks 11 and 23. They could trade both of those picks PLUS another very high pick, possibly another first to Arizona. So the Cardinals would get potentially 3 first round picks and only have to move down to 11. The Colts are never making a better offer than that. Not even close. Even if Irsay ordered Ballard to offer 4 first round picks, the Cardinals don’t want to move down to 15. Hope this explains the situation better.

Huh? Who says we can’t talk about it? Have the mods here said anything? Until they do it’s a fair game. All the NFL can do is restrict the use of video of Simpson. I don’t expect anything more than that.

Since I can’t use an emoji…. I’ll just leave this here….

I don’t think Arizona wants to trade down as far as 15. The hottest rumor is this: Arizona might trade down to Minnesota. The Vikings have 11 and 23. Plus they’d include another high pick from the 25 draft. For that haul, Arizona would trade down and still go no lower than 11. So, any possible trade works best with Minn and not with Indy.

No, I don’t think Arizona is giving up on their QB. But I think Arizona might trade down to pick up draft picks. They’d let another team trade up to take the 4th QB and the Cards would take a player other than Harrison. Nabor and Oduze are graded as pretty close to Harrison. Sorry I wasn’t more clear. I’ve written that in other posts and didn’t want to keep writing that over and over. I thought you would’ve read that in my other posts. My bad. It’s been widely reported that Zona might do this.

Glad I asked you to explain yourself. This is a very good 30,000 foot view post, just what I was hoping for. You refreshed my memory of things that were said and done that perhaps I didn’t think much of at the time (fear and doubt) but now with a few years passed they make more sense with a longer view of Colts history. More pieces of the puzzle reveal a clearer picture. Thanks again.

This is a very interesting response. Earlier today, you had a fun post where you asked a poster if he was aware he had hit every cliche known to mankind. (It was a fun moment.) In my post to you, I’d point to the end of your last sentence “a symptom of deeper issues.” I’d simply say to you, what does that mean? Because I think it’s the kind of phrase you don’t often write, because it’s so open ended. It could mean something different to everyone who reads your post and that’s not like you. To me, it implies character. But with the premium Ballard emphasizes on character, I’d seriously doubt it. It could also mean there were issues with the OL Coach the Colts had then. He got let go after the disastrous 2022 season. (By the way, the former Colts OL coach joined Houston last year.) So I’m asking…. Can you elaborate on what you were trying to say? Can you clarify? I’m not trying to put words in your mouth, or force your hand. Only trying to understand better.

All true. I always need to remind myself that it’s “Lying Season” and lots of what is put out there are smoke screens. Feels like we’re all throwing darts in a very big, but very dark room!

Entirely possible. But I don’t think the odds are low. Arizona may look for a small trade back to allow some team to come up for the 4th QB. Arizona could then move back a bit and still get Nabors or Odunze. This is what I’ve read recently and only offered as food for thought.

I think you’re going to be shocked. Quarterbacks might go 1, 2, 3, 4. If that happens I’m not sure I see Harbaugh taking Nabers as the first non-quarterback off the board. Not with Alt, Harrison, Odunze and even Bowers still on the board. I’ve also seen lots of speculation that the Chargers might try to trade down a little, get more picks, and still get a top level player. Just food for thought.

I’ve always thought went wrong was Covid. A good number of key top players got it. Right around that time the NFL changed the ruling of how long you had to sit out from 10 (or 7) days to 5. That meant you could declare you had Covid on a Monday and still play on the up coming Sunday. The guys played, but I don’t think they were up to snuff. Nobody wants to say so publicly because it looks like an excuse for getting beat two weeks in a row. But in the absence of anything substantive, to me it seems the most reasonable and logical.

I think there news is very good for the Colts and Drew…. BUT…. The NFL reserves the right to hand down its own discipline even if Drew has been cleared by the legal system. They could still hand down some level of suspension citing in the best interest of the League. In other words, the NFL jury is still out until they issue their decision.

FWIW: This story is true. When the Colts signed Funchess, East ranted for weeks about how Funchess had a very high percentage of drops. Then, eventually Ballard gave his FA interview and was asked about it. He commented that (A) Frank said he wasn’t worried about drops and (B) the Colts did their own homework and learned that on the two routs Luck liked most, Funchess had ZERO drops in his career. That sealed the deal for the Colts. I only remember this because it was the subject for one of my many ongoing battles with East for years.

You won’t find out how good or not good McCarthy is for at least 3-4 years. Hope you’re patient. Honestly, that’s the message I have for fans of every team that picks a QB up high. The success is not always apparent early on. And yes, I include the Colts.

Add at least one more to your list. Ed Dodds. He’s just under Ballard and ahead of Brown on the chain of command.

Im in the minority on Ryan. I’m not selling that he was very good. But I think he got too much blame. I think the complete meltdown of the offensive line made Ryan's job far more difficult than it needed to be. I also thought Ballard and Reich gave up on Rivers too soon. I thought Rivers played really well considering practice was cut way back due to COVID. He retired the next day after Ballard told him to please give the Colts about two weeks to figure things out. I get why…. It’s an easy trade off.. a potential long term answer at QB vs a very short term solution. I’d make the same choice. It just didn’t feel right the way it played out. The NFL business side can get pretty ugly pretty quickly.

If true, I’d assume there were many other examples for Irsay to base his decision. But we’re never going to know them. I remember Wentz’s first game, at home vs the Rams. Aaron Donald dragged down Wentz in the end zone and rolled over his legs. Wentz suffered TWO high ankle sprains in one play. I’ve never heard of that in my life. But to his credit, Wentz got his ankles taped and didn’t miss any games because of that. I thought that was good leadership. But, if I remember correctly, I think Wentz got Covid twice, once late in the season. I’m sure that didn’t help his cause. Again, I’m only going on what I’ve read here.

True. But they were players like Nelson and Kelly and I think Smith. Trading them was never going to happen. I’ve always read here that Irsay thought Wentz was a bad leader. That’s not what you want from your quarterback.

Wentz was here in 2021. I don’t think he was impacted by the talent around him. It’s my understanding of the primary reason the Colts moved on from him was how Wentz dealt with COVID. He didn’t get the shot and I think Irsay felt he was a very poor leader. I don’t think Wentz failed because he didn’t have enough talent around him. Numbers-wise, Wentz had a decent season. Much better than the last season he had in Philly.

Ditto! 100 percent!

Moose? I’m not trying to yank your chain here, but I don’t think you were following the conversation I was having with Coach Lite. He was saying there’s an administrative aide who works inside the Colts front office who is terrible at his job and has been hurting the Colts for years, if not longer. I disagreed. He was saying there’s a person like that dug in to his job most everywhere in business. I was saying likely not in a football franchise. And we disagreed. So he and I were talking about a much different thing at a much lower level. Your response had nothing to do with my conversation with Coach Lite. Hope this explanation makes sense to you.

My response would be this…. I listen to every Ballard presser he gives, long or short. I’ve never heard him give a snide response to a reporter, though I realize that’s all in the ear of the listener. And I more typically hear him say “That’s a fair question” to anyone who asks a tough question. As to changing his approach…. I don’t think Ballard believes his approach has been the problem for the lack of success. I think he believes he’s built a good roster except at one position, quarterback. And certainly not because he didn’t try. If Wentz had worked out I think the conversation around here would’ve been very different these last years.

Sincere question: How do you measure Ballard’s arrogance? Perhaps you’re using it in a way I might not. And that’s ok. I’m just trying to understand your thinking on that viewpoint.

I’m just going by what I’ve read here. That our 24 schedule is much harder than our 23 schedule. Comparatively our SOS is always going to be weak as long as the league has been one good to very good team, one slightly above average team, one poor team and one that is among the five worst. It’s built in until the AFC South flips the script. I think we are now a little better. The AFC South I believe is now the 7th best division behind the NFC South. They’re now the lowest ranked. That’s what I’ve read at least.

No. Not at all. Fired with a winning record (in 24) and an inexperienced QB? Who does that? Growing pains should be expected. If not, great. But if they happen, no one should be surprised. Most here believe Ballard and AR are connected. So I think they’ll be together in 24, 25, and maybe even 26. I know that won’t be popular with you and others, but that’s my viewpoint.