Jump to content
Indianapolis Colts
Indianapolis Colts Fan Forum

Poll: Who do you want to be our next GM?


Who do you want to be the Colts next GM?   

236 members have voted

  1. 1. Who do you want to be the Colts next GM?

    • Jimmy Raye III - Colts VP of football operations
      5
    • Trent Kirchner, Seahawks co-director of player personnel
      17
    • Scott Fitterer, Seahawks co-director of player personnel
      10
    • Eric DeCosta, Ravens assistant general manager
      29
    • Eliot Wolf, Packers director of football operations
      23
    • George Paton, Vikings assistant general manager
      22
    • Chris Ballard, Chiefs director of football operations
      130


Recommended Posts

1 minute ago, Dilger85 said:

I am not razzing you, I just do not agree with you.  You have a very black and white definition of winning anything though.  Super Bowl or nothing?  I recalled incorrectly, it happens.  I thought they won with Rex Grossman but it must have just been the NFC Championship.

It's all good I'm just messing with you. Grossman was QB against the Colts in the SB . They have been in 2 . 

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 220
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

44 minutes ago, BCoop said:

I'm a fan of Paton or Ballard. Out of curiousity, I put together a recent draft history for both compared to Grigson. Players in bold are projected starters in 2017 (based on some very quick, non-thorough research).

 

Edit: I also stopped after the 5th round in the interest of time.

 

Draft.JPG

 

Good idea with the chart, but...

 

Bridgewater, Waynes, Hunter, Clemmings and Treadwell should all be projected starters, IMO. I get Bridgewater being held back due to injury, but the others are anticipated to be part of the Vikings core.

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, bap1331 said:

Wait, so they not only got smoked by the chiefs with luck but then you bring up the bears where manning smoked them in the Super Bowl? Lol.

Sent from my SM-G935T *

So you are going to make a decision on a GM on two games against the Colts as some sort of vindication that Ballard is not worthy of being a GM.  Again what KC game are you referring to?  The game in his first year taking over for Pioli?  What an asinine concept.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Dilger85 said:

So you are going to make a decision on a GM on two games against the Colts as some sort of vindication that Ballard is not worthy of being a GM.  Again what KC game are you referring to?  The game in his first year taking over for Pioli?  What an asinine concept.

I didn't bring up the Bears. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
Thank you!! Im so surprised noone voted for the Seahawks guys and everyone prefers ballard. Preposterous!!

Not really, Ballard has the more extensive resume and longer track record.

The Seahawks dudes have been to the super bowl twice since 2012. For such a short time frame. That's impressive.

Sent from my SM-G935T *

Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, Steamboat_Shaun said:

 

Yeah, Alex Smith sucks. If Ballard can build a defense similar to what's in KC, we're a legitimate contender. Elite QB, and defense that can hold up in the playoffs against a good offense.

Not in the playoffs he don't . 

Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, Dilger85 said:

So you are going to make a decision on a GM on two games against the Colts as some sort of vindication that Ballard is not worthy of being a GM.  Again what KC game are you referring to?  The game in his first year taking over for Pioli?  What an asinine concept.

Seems lateral to me. They haven't been much more successful than us since Grigano came around. With a better roster. Not just 2 games. I just prefer the guy coming in to have a ring that's all. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, bap1331 said:

The Seahawks dudes have been to the super bowl twice since 2012. For such a short time frame. That's impressive.

Sent from my SM-G935T *

It is impressive but it also just not them doing it.  They don't even have the final say in personnel matters (neither does Ballard).  I put more of the success of the Seahawks on Carroll and Schneider.  Mainly Carroll, he is a great coach which is why I prefer to hire a candidate with multiple stops and successes acquiring talent which is the GM's primary function.

Link to post
Share on other sites
28 minutes ago, Superman said:

 

Good idea with the chart, but...

 

Bridgewater, Waynes, Hunter, Clemmings and Treadwell should all be projected starters, IMO. I get Bridgewater being held back due to injury, but the others are anticipated to be part of the Vikings core.

 

Clemmings?

 

I usually agree with lot of what you say but Clemmings shouldn't be starter anywhere IMO. Worst tackle in the game.

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, mahagga73 said:

Seems lateral to me. They haven't been much more successful than us since Grigano came around. With a better roster. Not just 2 games. I just prefer the guy coming in to have a ring that's all. 

Ok, I can see wanting a proven winner.  I don't view it that way.  The coach's job is to win; the GM's job is to find talent for the coach to win and that is the characteristic that I would be looking for in a new GM.  The ability to find talent.  Ballard just has more of a track record in my opinion of finding talent.

Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, Dilger85 said:

So you are going to make a decision on a GM on two games against the Colts as some sort of vindication that Ballard is not worthy of being a GM.  Again what KC game are you referring to?  The game in his first year taking over for Pioli?  What an asinine concept.

 

If a candidate has ever been part of a team that did anything wrong, or was remotely associated with a team when they weren't winning, he is unsuitable and should not be considered for the Colts GM spot. 

 

"Oh, you were an area scout for the Chargers when they lost SB29? I wish I had know that before we had you come all the way down here, sorry to waste your time. We'll be going in a different direction."

 

"Oh, you were a window washer in the Buffalo area when they lost four SBs in a row? I'm sorry, you are no longer under consideration." 

 

Really lofty standards around here lately...

Link to post
Share on other sites
23 minutes ago, bap1331 said:

The Seahawks dudes have been to the super bowl twice since 2012. For such a short time frame. That's impressive.

Sent from my SM-G935T *

 

I think Scot McCloughan has had the biggest impact in that. He was with them from 2010-2013/2014, left shortly before the 2014 draft but might have had big impact in setting up their draft boards.

 

He was with the 49ers before that, and their drafting fell off after he left.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Superman said:

 

If a candidate has ever been part of a team that did anything wrong, or was remotely associated with a team when they weren't winning, he is unsuitable and should not be considered for the Colts GM spot. 

 

"Oh, you were an area scout for the Chargers when they lost SB29? I wish I had know that before we had you come all the way down here, sorry to waste your time. We'll be going in a different direction."

 

"Oh, you were a window washer in the Buffalo area when they lost four SBs in a row? I'm sorry, you are no longer under consideration." 

 

Really lofty standards around here lately...

but you're a regular poster on the Colts message board.....you're hired!!!

Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, Finball said:

 

Clemmings?

 

I usually agree with lot of what you say but Clemmings shouldn't be starter anywhere IMO. Worst tackle in the game.

 

I'm not saying he's an All Pro, but I do think he'll be starting for them next year. Coming in, he needed a lot of work, especially in the weight room. I think they threw him into the lineup before they wanted, and I assume they're not giving up on him just yet.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Superman said:

 

I'm not saying he's an All Pro, but I do think he'll be starting for them next year. Coming in, he needed a lot of work, especially in the weight room. I think they threw him into the lineup before they wanted, and I assume they're not giving up on him just yet.

sounds like a certain safety that was drafted by the Colts last year too.

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Superman said:

 

If a candidate has ever been part of a team that did anything wrong, or was remotely associated with a team when they weren't winning, he is unsuitable and should not be considered for the Colts GM spot. 

 

"Oh, you were an area scout for the Chargers when they lost SB29? I wish I had know that before we had you come all the way down here, sorry to waste your time. We'll be going in a different direction."

 

"Oh, you were a window washer in the Buffalo area when they lost four SBs in a row? I'm sorry, you are no longer under consideration." 

 

Really lofty standards around here lately...

I didn't say that. I said I prefer rings , a track record with a title winning team.  Therefore I picked the Seattle guys.  I'm not impressed with the Chiefs at all. They have one stinking playoff win in 25 years. My opinion. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, mahagga73 said:

I didn't say that. I said I prefer rings , a track record with a title winning team.  Therefore I picked the Seattle guys.  I'm not impressed with the Chiefs at all. They have one stinking playoff win in 25 years. My opinion. 

 

I'm obviously being facetious. But I do think we're going overboard in our criticism of some pretty good candidates right now...

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Steamboat_Shaun said:

 

Yes, he does. 2-4 record since 2011, not to mention he only threw 15 TDs this year, total. That's not good.

Stats, not record.  He's average, maybe a little above. Everyone else says this Chiefs team is awesome, and not wanting this Ballard guy is criminal. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, mahagga73 said:

Stats, not record.  He's average, maybe a little above. Everyone else says this Chiefs team is awesome, and not wanting this Ballard guy is criminal. 

 

The team as a whole isn't "awesome" by any means, mainly because their QB is very pedestrian, but their defense is loaded with talent, and we desperately need talent on defense. It's not hard to figure out why people would want a guy who had a hand in building that defensive unit.

Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, Steamboat_Shaun said:

 

The team as a whole isn't "awesome" by any means, mainly because their QB is very pedestrian, but their defense is loaded with talent, and we desperately need talent on defense. It's not hard to figure out why people would want a guy who had a hand in building that defensive unit.

All kidding aside, yeah he does have a nice track record with the Bears great defenses in the mid 2000s. I guess it would be a good fit with this team. Cursed at QB , Grossman . That must be the reason he is interested, Luck I mean. KC fans are panicking , I just checked the forum. I hate it when I have to do research. Sounds like a good candidate. I can't find anything on these Seattle guys , they look young though. How involved are they ? 

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, BCoop said:

I'm a fan of Paton or Ballard. Out of curiousity, I put together a recent draft history for both compared to Grigson. Players in bold are projected starters in 2017 (based on some very quick, non-thorough research).

 

Edit: I also stopped after the 5th round in the interest of time.

 

Draft.JPG

 

I'd note/add that Ballard came in after the '13 draft; so the '13 draft being less than stellar for the Chiefs isn't on him.

 

Vikings also found Shamar Stephen in 2014 with their 7th rounder; he was a starter for them last season at DT.

 

Chiefs picked Laurent Duvernay-Tardif and Zach Fulton, both in the 6th round in the '14 draft. Both are starters in their offensive line, though neither is a world-beater. Their 6th rounder from 2015, Rakeem Nathan Nunez-Roches started some games on their Dline though that was probably more due to Chiefs' injuries than his ability.

 

 

Edit. Something I don't like about the Vikings recent draft record; they have badly missed with their picks when it comes to offensive lineman. Not really high picks used there but Clemmings and Beavers being 4th rounders is borderline inexcusable to me.

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Superman said:

We shouldn't hire Ballard, he has five kids. Grigson had five kids when we hired him. He's just going to be another Grigson.

Do not hire him only if he's planning on having a 6th kid.  That might be when things went downhill.  

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Superman said:

We shouldn't hire Ballard, he has five kids. Grigson had five kids when we hired him. He's just going to be another Grigson.

Although it's funny,  but I don't think that's a fair way of determining a candidate 

Link to post
Share on other sites

If Irsay wants to keep Raye, but hire someone else for GM, maybe he should give him a new position or title to keep him pleased.  (Yes, I know he is under contract).  Now, you are talking about 2 guys that are highly sought after and they are both under 1 roof.  After all, Seattle has co-directors.  I wouldn't make Raye a co-GM, but I'd give him a raise or something.

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...