Jump to content
Indianapolis Colts
Indianapolis Colts Fan Forum

Bill Polian on Free Agency: Nice article in Indy Star.


Recommended Posts

I consider your lack of knowledge about our team and what we were trying to achieve not a small mistake. Bill doesn't decide if we run a 4-3, 3-4, west coast, power offense. The coaches do....Bill finds players to fill the skills the coaches wanted. Tony Dungy was a tampa 2 guru...he VALUED smaller, faster players that would fit his defense...do you want larger/slower corners trying to play in space??? No that is dumb. They wouldn't have fit Tony's system...same for a big brute LB that couldn't drop back in zone. We also knew that the coach was a defensive minded and should be able to maximize the potential of his defense while our true superstars were on the offensive side (Manning and Harrison and James). We built an offense to maximize Peyton's potential. To get the most out of your super star you try to give them weapons. There is a balance and if you look closely at what we did we were pretty balanced with our drafting of offense and defense with varying degrees of success. Bill selected a number of great defensive guys...I'm not saying he was perfect...we can all point out the failures...and yes the last couple years when it became time for a change. We aren't saying it wasn't ok to go another direction..it was needed...but your viewpoint seems very shallow and short sighted. That said my opinions are no more valued than yours but the fact we retained Bill for so long and he was awarded many times for his leadership and widely praised within the football community for his ability are in stark contrast to your views of him.

and bill pretty much decided we were running tampa 2 by hiring dungy. you dont hire a coach because you like his personality but hate his scheme

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 88
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

look dude the defense sucked and that was largely pollians fault, yeah dungy insisted on tampa 2 but bill couldve said change it or get out its not working WHEN YEAR AFTER YEAR IT SUCKED AND SHOWED IN THE PLAYOFFS WHEN MANNING WASNT RUNNING UP THE SCORE BOARD. I think mr irsays interview prior to the broncos game was indicative of that, is his knowledge of the game a mistAKE? 

 

for the record early on bill was pretty good from 97-2005 but his successes from that period hid a lot of his flaws later on and hiring his son didnt help, i dont think he was horrible but i didnt agree with some of his philosophies and lack of importance to defense he was alright id give him 7/10 decent

For some reason I have a hard time putting sucking and playoffs in the same sentance and figuring out how that computes. I love PM probably as much as anyone on this board but lets be honest it wasn't like the defense was giving up 30-40pts in those playoffs either. Most games were close...and we had our shots on offense to win them and sometimes on defense to hold them...but when we lost we didn't put together a complete game. When we won we saw that. Maybe your level of success is different than mine but getting to the playoffs every year and having a shot at the SB is success to me. Going through down years after down years and a blimp here and there isn't to me. What we did worked very well...else we wouldn't be in the playoffs and we wouldn't have went to two SBs. It wasn't all Bills doing that made us successful but it sure wasn't his building that threw ints to Pittsburg in 2005...or missing fgs...or calling time outs...and Jim has much more say in who the coach is. There is a whole lot to winning and I think Bill was a big reason for the success around here. If I had one big issue with our teams during those years was that the coaches didn't turn out more talent or improve a lot of our players. I think we could have done a better job grooming our replacements, special teams, defense and offensive lines. I know a lot points back to talent and that was Bills job but to me a lot goes to the coaches in getting more out of our guys. Plenty of blame for not winning it all to go around...but I think Bill did more than a good job at building the team is all.

Link to post
Share on other sites

For some reason I have a hard time putting sucking and playoffs in the same sentance and figuring out how that computes. I love PM probably as much as anyone on this board but lets be honest it wasn't like the defense was giving up 30-40pts in those playoffs either. Most games were close...and we had our shots on offense to win them and sometimes on defense to hold them...but when we lost we didn't put together a complete game. When we won we saw that. Maybe your level of success is different than mine but getting to the playoffs every year and having a shot at the SB is success to me. Going through down years after down years and a blimp here and there isn't to me. What we did worked very well...else we wouldn't be in the playoffs and we wouldn't have went to two SBs. It wasn't all Bills doing that made us successful but it sure wasn't his building that threw ints to Pittsburg in 2005...or missing fgs...or calling time outs...and Jim has much more say in who the coach is. There is a whole lot to winning and I think Bill was a big reason for the success around here. If I had one big issue with our teams during those years was that the coaches didn't turn out more talent or improve a lot of our players. I think we could have done a better job grooming our replacements, special teams, defense and offensive lines. I know a lot points back to talent and that was Bills job but to me a lot goes to the coaches in getting more out of our guys. Plenty of blame for not winning it all to go around...but I think Bill did more than a good job at building the team is all.

i thought he grossly under achieved and so did irsay im not alone in my opinion. scoring isnt the only way to measure a defense, teams ran the ball and kept peyton off the field limiting his scoring a lot. if you dont think bill couldve done better than im glad u aint in charge, because like i said he was "aite" nothing more nothing less

Link to post
Share on other sites

i thought he grossly under achieved and so did irsay im not alone in my opinion. scoring isnt the only way to measure a defense, teams ran the ball and kept peyton off the field limiting his scoring a lot. if you dont think bill couldve done better than im glad u aint in charge, because like i said he was "aite" nothing more nothing less

Fair enough...I'm not going to continue to debate it because we will never agree. He was better than alright (if that is what that is suppose to mean...you could be speaking an entirely different language and I apologize I'm not familiar with it) imo...and a majority of people as well. I wouldn't have traded the 2000 decade for any other teams except maybe New Englands but even though some other teams won more SBs like Pittsburg or the Giants I still think our teams were superior for the entire decade. I loved what we achieved and all our teams. I was entertained and a very happy Colts fan. Considering I've followed them since they arrived here and I was a young child Polian's tenure here was the best we've seen with the Colts. Grigson is doing a good job too but we will see as things go forward how long or to what levels we can achieve. We will just disagree on Polian but I hate to sit by and watch people bash him when he was responsible for putting together one of the most successful decades football has seen.

Link to post
Share on other sites

obviously the only reason we had a winning record was because peyton and not because pollian, fact

 

No.

 

Actually that's an opinion....   

 

But we're just going to have to agree to disagree and leave it at that.

 

I'm not interesting in arguing or debating with you...............

Link to post
Share on other sites

I dont think much of Polian. His whole career in Indy was due to Peyton, we seen what a Polian team did without Peyton.

What good is it to constantly make the playoffs if you never get over the hump ?

I think Peyton could get just about any team to the playoffs, but he needed a little help to win the big one and Polian was busy drafting guys who couldnt even cut it as backups.

I think we could easily fall back into the same routine with Grigson. Luck carries the team while Grigson trades picks for practice squad talent players and projects. Yippie. 11 wins.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I enjoyed the article.  I enjoyed the what 14 years of winning football?  I love the Colts.  I really did not like his son.

 

Bill is a Hall of Fame GM that took 3 different franchises to the Super Bowl.  His GM talent throughout  his career is undeniable.

 

I also love my Bears/Colts Super Bowl Football on the mantle :)  More good days to come if WE have our way Coffeedrinker!! :blueshoe:  :blueshoe:  :blueshoe:

Who is the 3rd franchise?

Link to post
Share on other sites

If you draft well, this is a winning strategy. When you make big mistakes in the draft, you have to supplement with free agency, and that means sometimes you don't get the best bang for your buck. But you have improved your roster, even for a short period of time, while you try again in the draft. You can't just ignore your drafting mistakes, and you certainly shouldn't double down on the mistakes by re-signing your own players who aren't quite worthy of being re-signed, just because they're your own.

 

So yeah, it's hard for me to read Polian's words without rolling my eyes. No GM is perfect, and no GM drafts perfectly every year. And with the cap, sometimes you're even going to lose good players to other teams. It's part of the cost of doing business. But to turn your nose up at the concept of free agency like he does in this article, and like he did for most of his tenure with the Colts, is irresponsible. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

I dont think much of Polian. His whole career in Indy was due to Peyton, we seen what a Polian team did without Peyton.

You mean the 3 AFC Championships, Taking a new franchise to the NFC Championship his 2nd year in existence?  Yeah we saw that.

Link to post
Share on other sites

If you draft well, this is a winning strategy. When you make big mistakes in the draft, you have to supplement with free agency, and that means sometimes you don't get the best bang for your buck. But you have improved your roster, even for a short period of time, while you try again in the draft. You can't just ignore your drafting mistakes, and you certainly shouldn't double down on the mistakes by re-signing your own players who aren't quite worthy of being re-signed, just because they're your own.

 

So yeah, it's hard for me to read Polian's words without rolling my eyes. No GM is perfect, and no GM drafts perfectly every year. And with the cap, sometimes you're even going to lose good players to other teams. It's part of the cost of doing business. But to turn your nose up at the concept of free agency like he does in this article, and like he did for most of his tenure with the Colts, is irresponsible. 

Agree with a lot of it.  But people forget, in his first two years as the Colts GM, he signed nearly as many free agents as Grigson.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Polian did a good job for most of his tenure here. He started to lose me though in 2009 the moment Curtis Painter trotted out onto the field against the Jets. He lost me for good the following week when I watched the same players we were allegedly protecting from injury playing in the snow intentionally trying to set arbitrary milestones.

Link to post
Share on other sites

No.

 

Actually that's an opinion....   

 

But we're just going to have to agree to disagree and leave it at that.

 

I'm not interesting in arguing or debating with you...............

fact: with peyton and bill we won games

fact:without peyton and with bill we went 2-14 

fact: peyton didnt go down so suddenly that we didnt have time to find a suitable free agent to win some games but he decided to just junk a whole season because "he doesnt over pay free agents" which he probably shouldve because he couldnt evaluate talent very well

 

so i think its fair to say it is fact that we won because of manning not pollian, its a big generalization that would be easy to nit pick apart but the FACT is pollian did not win in indy without peyton despite having the chance to do so. 

 

also he was the only bone head who thought "resting the starters for a month" would help us win in the playoffs. if youre my gm and youre intention is not to win every game then you can gtho imo

Link to post
Share on other sites

fact: with peyton and bill we won games

fact:without peyton and with bill we went 2-14 

fact: peyton didnt go down so suddenly that we didnt have time to find a suitable free agent to win some games but he decided to just junk a whole season because "he doesnt over pay free agents" which he probably shouldve because he couldnt evaluate talent very well

 

so i think its fair to say it is fact that we won because of manning not pollian, its a big generalization that would be easy to nit pick apart but the FACT is pollian did not win in indy without peyton despite having the chance to do so. 

 

also he was the only bone head who thought "resting the starters for a month" would help us win in the playoffs. if youre my gm and youre intention is not to win every game then you can gtho imo

 

Congratulations....

 

You're rapidly moving to the top of the list of the most argumentative people here.

 

Sorry,   not the least bit interested.  

 

You're not interested in discussing.....   you're interested in winning and proving how smart you are.

 

Good luck with that.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Congratulations....

 

You're rapidly moving to the top of the list of the most argumentative people here.

 

Sorry,   not the least bit interested.  

 

You're not interested in discussing.....   you're interested in winning and proving how smart you are.

 

Good luck with that.

im not the one who gets belligerent and rude, thanks for being not interested enough to engage me and tell me youre not interested pretty neat

Link to post
Share on other sites

im not the one who gets belligerent and rude, thanks for being not interested enough to engage me and tell me youre not interested pretty neat

 

And thanks for proving my point.....   again and again and again....

 

I engage with all sorts of people on this website.

 

But once someone shows they're not interested in discussing,  they're only interested in winning and being proven right....  I lose interest.

 

So....  have fun here....    there will be lots of people who will do battle with you...   

 

I just won't be one of them.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I think the general premise of the article is just about right. You need to do what you can to hold onto your good players, but be prepared to pay a little overs in the FA market, as in the case of Jackson--a handy guy wanted by several teams (that alone will push up his salary).

Currently it appears that Vontae will test the market, pushing his price up. I'm still not convinced that he will be worth the money--his consistency is a problem, but to find a replacement in FA will be just as expensive, and maybe more risky.

My thought is that we should be using FA to fill the voids in our DL and OL--areas where you probably need a few hard heads, while using the draft for other areas. If Vontae won't sign, look to draft a young guy to develop. Maybe we also need to stop trading away our draft picks.

Link to post
Share on other sites

“Football is not a seamless sport. Baseball is. Basketball is. Hockey to some degree is.” --Bill Polian

 

Look man, I respect what you did in Buffalo, Carolina, & in bringing a championship to INDY I do, but you work for NFL LIVE & Sirius XM Radio, don't bring up sports outside your level of expertise. It's not relevant to the discussion. Even in passing, mentioning baseball, basketball, & hockey has no bearing on football free agency at all.

Dear God...

Not just this post but the number of misguided thoughts and revisionist history is kind of funny.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I dont think much of Polian. His whole career in Indy was due to Peyton, we seen what a Polian team did without Peyton.

What good is it to constantly make the playoffs if you never get over the hump ?

I think Peyton could get just about any team to the playoffs, but he needed a little help to win the big one and Polian was busy drafting guys who couldnt even cut it as backups.

I think we could easily fall back into the same routine with Grigson. Luck carries the team while Grigson trades picks for practice squad talent players and projects. Yippie. 11 win

I feel the same way about Polian and Grigson finaly a Colt fan who can really see through both of them. I like Irsay but feel Grigson will be his down fall he goes for quantity instead of quality. Manning and luck covered up many of there mistakes and as far as Pagano goes he is clueless I feel luck's tenure in Indy will be the same as Peyton

Link to post
Share on other sites

You mean the 3 AFC Championships, Taking a new franchise to the NFC Championship his 2nd year in existence? Yeah we saw that.

If you run around claiming "we are the AFC champions" do you know what that means ? It means you lost the big game and are drafting 31st, nothing else.

Look at Polians draft history. The guy missed way more then he got it right. I'm not talking about he couldnt find superstars, he couldnt find mediocre players most of the time. While he was winning executive of the year awards the Patriots were winning superbowls, guess which one Irsay and the team would have rather had ?

He sucked as a talent evaluator for the most part and if he had taken Leaf over Peyton then he wouldn't have done anything in Indy.

His time in Indy was totally defined by Peyton, if he had taken Leaf then none of the other good picks he made, which was usually 1 a season or less, would have amounted to anything.

The guy is overrated.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm not singling anyone out but I'm just going to say this in general about a lot of posters who live behind a computer screen with pseudo screen names and make comments that they never have to answer for or be held to any accountability for. I find it pretty lame the level of attacks we make on our players, gms, and coaches. I fully support having free speech and making an opinion known...I've criticized many things but usually try to be open minded or at least be careful of my comments. These guys do their jobs in full sight of everyone...all the right decisions and wrong easy to see and some not easy to see but they do a job that we can all agree none of us could even come close to doing or being qualified for and yet we act like we know so much more than them. Yet how many times if we were honest have we said one guy would be great or one not and been wrong and never had to own up to it. None of us qualified to understand how to put a contract together and work an agent to get the deal done. Its very easy sitting on this side of the screen. Even the very very bad GMs would be better than any of us...and yet we've had some very good leaders in this organization and a super successful one for the last 15 yrs basically. We should be careful because we very well could have had people like the ones in Miami, OAK, DAL, Was, or Clev making decisions over that time instead of what we got.

As for this article he is perfectly right. The theory is perfectly sound....execution can sometimes fail. He knew the right thing to do but that doesn't mean he is going to make 100% the right choices. What is the goal as a GM? Win a championship? He did that....gave us a team that was possibly an onside kick away from 2.

You said it very well, Dgambill. Like you, I am amazed that fans could be criticizing Polian after all the success that he helped bring. Fans of the Bengals, Lions, Raiders, Browns, and many more can only pray to have had the success the Colts fans have enjoyed. Do Colts fans remember the years before Polian came? There were some really bad seasons. Those seem like so long ago.

Fans and media are too critical of teams, players, and team executives. Like you said, most do the best they can. Bill Polian is a Hall of Fame GM. Who else during his time has been better besides maybe Ozzie Newsome. I would not be surprised to find Ravens fans complaining about Ozzie. NY Giants fans criticize Jerry Reese all the time, citing that he does not go after free agents. The off-season before the 2nd Super Bowl, fans were calling for him to be replaced because he did not re-sign WR Steve Smith who was asking for too much money, in Reese's opinion. Reese made the right move. I dont know what happened to Steve Smith, but Victor Cruz, who replaced Smith, is still very productive. Fans don't know as much as the football people do.

You find that the teams with the most stability and continuity -- in players as well as coaches and front office personnel-- are the most successful. So, I agree with the article. Invest in your own good players for continuity and add a few complementary free agents here and there. Teams that spend a lot in free agency rarely seem to do well -- see Redskins, Cowboys, Raiders, and more.

Link to post
Share on other sites

And thanks for proving my point..... again and again and again....

I engage with all sorts of people on this website.

But once someone shows they're not interested in discussing, they're only interested in winning and being proven right.... I lose interest.

So.... have fun here.... there will be lots of people who will do battle with you...

I just won't be one of them.

Your response is the right one. It is not worth the trouble to engage with that poster. I try to skip over his posts whenever possible because he is argumentative and his comments on this and other threads have often been crude and inappropriate. But do keep posting, as I want to read what you have to say.

Link to post
Share on other sites

http://m.bleacherreport.com/articles/1007781-jim-irsay-fired-bill-chris-polian-for-bad-decade-of-drafting

People tend to forget how bad everyone wanted him gone year after year. Time heals all wounds I guess.

 

Acknowledging that it was time for a change does not negate his entire tenure. 

 

Hell, there was a time when Tom Landry needed to be let go.  That doesn't make him a bad coach.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Agree with a lot of it.  But people forget, in his first two years as the Colts GM, he signed nearly as many free agents as Grigson.

He also did exactly what he said in the article in signing a couple KEY free agents/moves that helped us get over the top. Without Adam Vinatari and Mcfarland those were two huge acquisitions that directly paid off in putting us over the top. People act like he never went out on a limb and did that. He tried to add Corey Simon who would have been another big addition if he would have stayed healthy. Bill made some moves and some didn't pan out...he didn't overpay for free agents electing to trust his coaching staff in their ability to develop our own talent. We made some misses...especially Hayden...but mostly we did ok....and yes up til the about 2010 we did fine...his logic was sound...just like with anything sometimes the execution missed...but the plan was good. I know we missed some opportunities here but overall I couldn't imagine what our team could have looked like without Reggie and Dwight and Pierre and Austin and Robert and Bob and so many others that won our division every year because we likely would have had none of those guys with a different leader...for better or worse. I enjoyed our run and very happy with what we accomplished.

Link to post
Share on other sites

He went to 4 Super Bowls.

How many did he win ?

Besides I dont care if he won every Superbowl before coming to Indy. All that matters is what he did here.

Just the fact that he hired his son as GM proves to me he was bad at evaluating talent. Chris should have been a towel boy at most.

2012 is all you need to know about Polian, without Peyton to win him an executive of the year award the team he built fell apart in one season.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Oh goody, the Polian debate for the 1705th time

Bill in Buffalo: great. That team was stacked

Bill in Charlotte: good, but the league gave big advantages to the new franchises...he should have done well.

Bill in Indy: good, but much like Grigson, being in the right place at the right time is sometimes more important than anything else.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Acknowledging that it was time for a change does not negate his entire tenure. 

 

Hell, there was a time when Tom Landry needed to be let go.  That doesn't make him a bad coach.

 

I'm out of "likes",  but wanted to take a moment to say WOW!    That's a great post!

 

Simple....   straight forward.....    and right to the heart of the matter.    It's crushingly good!

 

Thanks Jaric....   I could not have said it better myself.    And I'm sorry that I didn't!

 

It's early, but I feel confident in saying yours will be the best post of the day!!     :thmup:

Link to post
Share on other sites

How many did he win ?

Besides I dont care if he won every Superbowl before coming to Indy. All that matters is what he did here.

Just the fact that he hired his son as GM proves to me he was bad at evaluating talent. Chris should have been a towel boy at most.

2012 is all you need to know about Polian, without Peyton to win him an executive of the year award the team he built fell apart in one season.

Well unless you see the world in complete black and white it illustrates that while not perfect, he was pretty good at running an NFL team.

At the end of his time here, it became clear he was no longer the person to guide this team and we made the switch.

I'm not sure why those two things can't seem to coexist for you.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm out of "likes", but wanted to take a moment to say WOW! That's a great post!

Simple.... straight forward..... and right to the heart of the matter. It's crushingly good!

Thanks Jaric.... I could not have said it better myself. And I'm sorry that I didn't!

It's early, but I feel confident in saying yours will be the best post of the day!! :thmup:

/blush

:D

Link to post
Share on other sites

Well unless you see the world in complete black and white it illustrates that while not perfect, he was pretty good at running an NFL team.

At the end of his time here, it became clear he was no longer the person to guide this team and we made the switch.

I'm not sure why those two things can't seem to coexist for you.

When were his good years in Indy ? He did nothing in free agency and 70% of his draft pics were epic fails.

Peyton made him look good. Replace Peyton with a mid-level QB and Polian is easily exposed as a failure. He got a few players here and there but rarely could he find 2 in the same draft. 99% of his defensive players were failures.

Even now as an analyst more then half the players he likes end up as mid-level talent at the most.

Link to post
Share on other sites

When were his good years in Indy ? He did nothing in free agency and 70% of his draft pics were epic fails.

Peyton made him look good. Replace Peyton with a mid-level QB and Polian is easily exposed as a failure. He got a few players here and there but rarely could he find 2 in the same draft. 99% of his defensive players were failures.

Even now as an analyst more then half the players he likes end up as mid-level talent at the most.

 

This is some pretty serious revisionist history and hyperbole. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

When were his good years in Indy ? He did nothing in free agency and 70% of his draft pics were epic fails.

Peyton made him look good. Replace Peyton with a mid-level QB and Polian is easily exposed as a failure. He got a few players here and there but rarely could he find 2 in the same draft. 99% of his defensive players were failures.

Even now as an analyst more then half the players he likes end up as mid-level talent at the most.

You have not distinguished yourself in this thread and this post is far and away the worst, which is a pretty amazing feat given the competition.

Link to post
Share on other sites

When were his good years in Indy ? He did nothing in free agency and 70% of his draft pics were epic fails.

Peyton made him look good. Replace Peyton with a mid-level QB and Polian is easily exposed as a failure. He got a few players here and there but rarely could he find 2 in the same draft. 99% of his defensive players were failures.

Even now as an analyst more then half the players he likes end up as mid-level talent at the most.

If you replace a superstar QB any team is going to get exposed to an extent. The Packers didn't look so hot when Rodgers went down.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.


×
×
  • Create New...