Jump to content
Indianapolis Colts
Indianapolis Colts Fan Forum

Colts hire Chris Ballard as GM [Merge]


MTC

Recommended Posts

15 hours ago, Superman said:

 

All 32 teams passed on him. There must have been convincing evidence that he was going to hold out, just like he said he would.

 

Agreed.  And teams / GM's very much value every, and I do mean every, draft pick.  A 7th rounder in hand is better than La'el in the bush.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 458
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

12 hours ago, Superman said:

 

I blame the people asking the questions. I think they're awful at it. Good questions would draw Pagano out better, and in fact, when they ask better questions he actually gives substantive responses. 

 

"You can't get blood out of a turnip." I think the problem is, "there is no there, there".

Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 hours ago, OffensivelyPC said:

You are really disappointed in that lone 1 vote, are you? lol

 

I just tend to view it as splitting the baby in half in some respects and without certain pieces of information available, it's hard to judge this hire - particularly when he hasn't done anything yet.  How about this, I'm excited to enter a new chapter for the Colts and hopeful that Ballard could be a piece that we won't regret moving forward.

 

 

i wouldn't say disappointed.   I just prefer that people vote the way they feel as to not scew poll results(not really possible in this poll).   

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Myles said:

i wouldn't say disappointed.   I just prefer that people vote the way they feel as to not scew poll results(not really possible in this poll).   

 

Oh, I wouldn't vote differently just because.  Like I said, it was just my thought process as of now.  I think Ballard could be better than Grigson, but I'm more of a wait and see guy.  He could be worse for all we know.  Like I said, I'm just hopeful at this point - even excited after watching his introduction interview yesterday.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On ‎1‎/‎30‎/‎2017 at 0:00 PM, Superman said:

 

As always, thanks for the kind words.

 

But I don't think simple acknowledgment of fact qualifies as wisdom. I'm swinging back because I don't understand why we're trying to change the past here. Grigson wasn't some unqualified * that no one had ever heard of. He was a respected personnel man with a solid resume. He turned out to not be a good GM, that doesn't mean that Irsay's hiring process was flawed, and it certainly doesn't mean that it was a crazy hire.

 

And yes, I agree, Grigson is being demonized because he's an easy target, and because he didn't really have any redeeming qualities (bad draft picks, bad free agent signings, bad attitude). But I don't like revisionist history. 

Yep. Exactly. He had worked his way up in Philly. I mean everyone around here would kill Irsay if he hired some tired retread. He went out and got a young and up and coming guy. Honestly I think Grigson took too long in building an OL for Andrew. That process to me should have started right away imo. Obviously the TY pick was great but I just thought going TE/TE with those early rd picks when we had issues everywhere but LT. I mean the guy tried but it just seem like his defensive free agents just didn't perform well at all outside Langfords first year, DQ, and Adams time here. Offensively it just seemed like he had horrible luck with injuries to Gosdner, Thomas, and Thorton...but if your bread and butter is the OL that just took to long to get right. I think we are on track now but too many swings and misses. So I understand why people are happy he is gone...I'm excited at the possibility of moving forward...but recongnize Grigson added some good pieces. Everyone thought we were going to the SB when we came away with AJ, Gore, and Cole amoungst others but it just didn't pan out. Its a tough job...and a lot out of your control (health especially) but there were guys a lot of people on this board where just sold couldn't miss that Grigson brought in (I'm looking at you Landry and Nicks and Jones) and drafted (Smith and Chapman and Allen) but people won't admit to it. Sometimes luck just doesn't work out. Your right he is an easy way to blame all our problems...Chuck too...when in reality its a combination of a lot of things.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 1/30/2017 at 10:05 AM, Superman said:

 

Actually, it's because every GM got played. His agents said after the draft that they were bluffing, that he would have signed with whoever drafted him.

 

Still, they must have been very convincing for all 32 teams to pass on him for 256 picks over three days. It's easy as a fan to say what you would have done, but none of us had the information the actual decision makers had. There had to be something there to make everyone pass on him. I think it's unreasonable to hold that over anyone's head.

 

I think the other factor the 32 GM's had to factor in was this....

 

The owner's position.

 

I'll be there was a considerable number of owners who said it was OK to sign Collins as a Free Agent,  but not OK to spend a draft pick on him,    not even a 7. 

 

A draft pick draws attention,  even a 7, if he has a name.    And Collins was a big story then.

 

But a free agent is a dime a dozen.    Yes,  he still had a name,  but it's easier to tell the media and a fan base that a free agent is easier to cut,  a smaller investment,   all those things.

 

I'll bet a number of GM's had their hands tied by their owners.    They just can't publicly say so for all the obvious reasons.

 

(I know you know this SM,  I just wrote the for the bigger, broader reading audience here....)

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If someone has already posted this thought, please forgive me. Too busy looking for work to read much. But I was checking into times Ballard might have seen his Chiefs play the Colts. In 2013, there was the 23-7 Colts win, followed by the 45-44 miracle win during that year's playoffs.

  

That might do two things...give Ballard a positive view of Pagano (and certainly Luck). But it also might, lol, give him the thought for the 500th time that "I better fix that defense"!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, CR91 said:

 

Missing one game doesn't mean the oline didn't improve

That's not what I said. *Just because they improved doesn't mean they're where they need to be.

 

Any team where the QB has been hit that many times and sacked that many times and missed a game as a result of being hit is not "fine".

 

*EDITED for clarification.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

53 minutes ago, bluebombers87 said:

That's not what I said. *Just because they improved doesn't mean they're where they need to be.

 

Any team where the QB has been hit that many times and sacked that many times and missed a game as a result of being hit is not "fine".

 

*EDITED for clarification.

 

We have much more pressing needs. Last year, all we did was draft olineman. Don't need to repeat especially with all the other needs we have

Link to comment
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...