Chris Ballard radio interview 02/06/17

[Superman]

9 minutes ago, BR-549 said:

I think a lot of that has to do with the way Grigson rubbed everyone wrong..... his poor decisions and general attitude.  Not to mention he really didn't get a lot of love from others around the league where just the opposite  seems to be true with Ballard.  

 

So we hear (not here but hear) him speaking the way he does and feel his excitement .... naturally makes us think he is going to do well.  He seems to be more like "us" than someone who seems to be all about themselves.  Just my thoughts.

 

Grigson's attitude didn't rub me the wrong way. So to me, all of this embracing Ballard's attitude while complaining about Grigson's is kind of revisionist history. And when he was hired, people said he was a good personnel man. It wasn't until recently that people started saying he wasn't a good candidate, and I reject that also. I don't agree with the whole 'he's sooo much different than Grigson was, what a great hire!' stuff. 

 

To me, where Ballard will separate himself from Grigson will be in the things he does, not the things he says (or even how he says them). To me, so far, there's nothing extraordinary about Ballard's approach or his demeanor. It's great that he comes highly regarded, but his reputation won't run the draft.

[BR-549]

1 minute ago, Superman said:

 

Grigson's attitude didn't rub me the wrong way. So to me, all of this embracing Ballard's attitude while complaining about Grigson's is kind of revisionist history. And when he was hired, people said he was a good personnel man. It wasn't until recently that people started saying he wasn't a good candidate, and I reject that also. I don't agree with the whole 'he's sooo much different than Grigson was, what a great hire!' stuff. 

 

To me, where Ballard will separate himself from Grigson will be in the things he does, not the things he says (or even how he says them). To me, so far, there's nothing extraordinary about Ballard's approach or his demeanor. It's great that he comes highly regarded, but his reputation won't run the draft.

Being a Purdue Alum I tried and tried to like Grigson. From what I remember he only had a few on his team and not a large sample across the NFL or even media .  What I heard was that he had a good pedigree, but was not seasoned and time would tell.... the story has been told.

 

Sorry, but I couldn't stand the guy and speaking of standing I think he stood in the way of progress.  Pretty much at this point any high points of his tenure are luck.... and I don't mean Andrew.

 

Ballard is a breath of fresh air.  I don't want to keep saying his name, but I would say Grigson rubbed more wrong than he did not.

 

We are all pretty desperate after the last couple of seasons and hopefully with change comes change.  I am okay with the fact he hasn't done anything.  He has my vote of confidence in his ability.

 

I completely understand what you are saying, however.  I just don't necessarily agree with it.

[Superman]

4 minutes ago, BR-549 said:

Being a Purdue Alum I tried and tried to like Grigson. From what I remember he only had a few on his team and not a large sample across the NFL or even media .  What I heard was that he had a good pedigree, but was not seasoned and time would tell.... the story has been told.

 

Sorry, but I couldn't stand the guy and speaking of standing I think he stood in the way of progress.  Pretty much at this point any high points of his tenure are luck.... and I don't mean Andrew.

 

Ballard is a breath of fresh air.  I don't want to keep saying his name, but I would say Grigson rubbed more wrong than he did not.

 

We are all pretty desperate after the last couple of seasons and hopefully with change comes change.  I am okay with the fact he hasn't done anything.  He has my vote of confidence in his ability.

 

I completely understand what you are saying, however.  I just don't necessarily agree with it.

 

It's fine that some (a lot, by the end) didn't like him.

 

I don't think his high points were luck. He deserves credit for picks like Hilton and trades like Davis, and there are a few others. There just weren't nearly enough of them.

 

Ballard has my vote of confidence as well. I think he's a great candidate. I just think we're mostly in 'anyone but Grigson' territory at this point. Like I said, Ballard isn't saying anything Grigson wasn't saying five years ago. Grigson just didn't do a good job of executing. If he had, I don't think most people would care whether he had an abrasive personality (evidently he did, but he didn't come across that way to me, not publicly). 

 

Anyway, not to defend Grigson. We're on to the next at this point. 

[BR-549]

2 minutes ago, Superman said:

 

It's fine that some (a lot, by the end) didn't like him.

 

I don't think his high points were luck. He deserves credit for picks like Hilton and trades like Davis, and there are a few others. There just weren't nearly enough of them.

 

Ballard has my vote of confidence as well. I think he's a great candidate. I just think we're mostly in 'anyone but Grigson' territory at this point. Like I said, Ballard isn't saying anything Grigson wasn't saying five years ago. Grigson just didn't do a good job of executing. If he had, I don't think most people would care whether he had an abrasive personality (evidently he did, but he didn't come across that way to me, not publicly). 

 

Anyway, not to defend Grigson. We're on to the next at this point. 

You are right!  He does deserve credit for those picks and I normally would have said that too.  And he certainly didn't come across abrasively in pressers or round table talk etc, but .........!

 

I veered from my original point which was that I just think we are all (a lot of us) so tired of failed decisions and poor play that we are glad to see and hear a new face and voice.  I wanted CP gone too, but I am totally cool with him being around another year with different management.  Hope it was the right choice.

 

I am so ready for next season and really don't think we are that far away from being competitive again.  Like you said.... now we move forward.

[2006Coltsbestever]

32 minutes ago, Superman said:

 

It's fine that some (a lot, by the end) didn't like him.

 

I don't think his high points were luck. He deserves credit for picks like Hilton and trades like Davis, and there are a few others. There just weren't nearly enough of them.

 

Ballard has my vote of confidence as well. I think he's a great candidate. I just think we're mostly in 'anyone but Grigson' territory at this point. Like I said, Ballard isn't saying anything Grigson wasn't saying five years ago. Grigson just didn't do a good job of executing. If he had, I don't think most people would care whether he had an abrasive personality (evidently he did, but he didn't come across that way to me, not publicly). 

 

Anyway, not to defend Grigson. We're on to the next at this point. 

Something about Ballard intrigues me. Just a gut feeling he will do really well. Maybe it's because Grigson is gone too as to why I am so happy with the move.

[Horse Shoe Heaven]

2 hours ago, Superman said:

 

That's fine. I just wonder why people are acting like he's saying anything that's special. 

 

I'm very excited about Ballard. By the time the process was winding down, he was my favorite candidate (Paton started off at the top of my list, with Ballard #2). I think he can do really good things. I like his temperament, from what I can see. I look forward to seeing what happens.

Becuase he says it nicer, without ego, and has a proven track record of being a good talent evalutor.!! Now comes the hard part when we all will pick apart his draft. Grigson, IMO make some bad mistakes. Satile, Richardson, Thornton, Landry, Werner, Dorsett jury out still on him but to CUTE a pick for me. theres more as well those are off the top of my head.Now we shall see, I just get the feeling Ballard will be a better evaluator & possibly better at truly getting the pulse of the team. NO EGO INVOLVED!! I also think he is someone Pagono will work very well with!  

[Superman]

5 minutes ago, Horse Shoe Heaven said:

Becuase he says it nicer, without ego, and has a proven track record of being a good talent evalutor.!! Now comes the hard part when we all will pick apart his draft. Grigson, IMO make some bad mistakes. Satile, Richardson, Thornton, Landry, Werner, Dorsett jury out still on him but to CUTE a pick for me. theres more as well those are off the top of my head.Now we shall see, I just get the feeling Ballard will be a better evaluator & possibly better at truly getting the pulse of the team. NO EGO INVOLVED!! I also think he is someone Pagono will work very well with!  

 

I think it's naive to think that Ballard doesn't have a healthy ego about him. 

[krunk]

I ain't gon lie! And I've never said this before,but I was mad with Grigs for his entire career because he didn't have a "Grigson Corner", or a "Ryans View" or anything where the fans could follow his thinking.

 

I been missing the hell out of the "Polian Corner" all these years and Grigson gave me nothing to substitute it with damn it!

 

 

What a loser.....     LOL

[Superman]

1 minute ago, krunk said:

I ain't gon lie! And I've never said this before,but I was mad with Grigs for his entire career because he didn't have a "Grigson Corner".

 

I been missing the hell out of the "Polian Corner" all these years and Grigson gave me nothing to substitute it with damn it!

 

 

I hate that damn Grigson for that.....     LOL

 

Yeah, I've missed that. I wonder if Ballard will do something similar. 

 

Grigson did do a weekly thing with Lamey this past season.

[krunk]

1 minute ago, Superman said:

 

Yeah, I've missed that. I wonder if Ballard will do something similar. 

 

Grigson did do a weekly thing with Lamey this past season.

I always looked forward to the Polian Corner after every game.   Grigs didn't really do a whole lot where the fans could interact with his thinking to me.   Oh well.

[Horse Shoe Heaven]

8 minutes ago, Superman said:

 

I think it's naive to think that Ballard doesn't have a healthy ego about him. 

We all have some ego!! But I think its naive to think that his is ANYWHERE close to Grigsons, which could barley fit into a room!!

[Horse Shoe Heaven]

6 minutes ago, krunk said:

I always looked forward to the Polian Corner after every game.   Grigs didn't really do a whole lot where the fans could interact with his thinking to me.   Oh well.

I liked Polian corner to!! 

[Superman]

22 minutes ago, Horse Shoe Heaven said:

We all have some ego!! But I think its naive to think that his is ANYWHERE close to Grigsons, which could barley fit into a room!!

 

I don't know how you'd measure the sizes of their egos, but your words were "NO EGO INVOLVED," so I thought that meant no ego involved. Not less ego involved. 

[Horse Shoe Heaven]

1 minute ago, Superman said:

 

I don't know how you'd measure the sizes of their egos, but your words were "NO EGO INVOLVED," so I thought that meant no ego involved. Not less ego involved. 

You have a ego! I have one! Grigson has one. Ballards seems to MUCH less IMO than Grigson's for what ever thats worth. As they say opinions are like * everyones got one!!

[Superman]

8 minutes ago, Horse Shoe Heaven said:

You have a ego! I have one! Grigson has one. Ballards seems to MUCH less IMO than Grigson's for what ever thats worth. As they say opinions are like * everyones got one!!

 

Yes, but your ego is bigger than my ego.

[FanFromtheWasteland]

Definatly sounds like he knows what he wants. Let's just hope he knows how to find it

[Horse Shoe Heaven]

13 minutes ago, Superman said:

 

Yes, but your ego is bigger than my ego.

I think they are the same!

[LockeDown]

THere is a difference between ego and confidence.  You can be humble with confidence but you can't be humble and egotistical.  Ballard has confidence for sure, but constantly praises those that have helped him get here.  That's a good characteristic to have.

[NewColtsFan]

15 hours ago, Mr Clueless said:

 

Yessir! Love that he say so about linebackers, but that means we need to clean house with most of the garbage we have at ILB now. 

 

Putting a linebacker in that can't do it all fairly well is just something any decent OC will exploit while he laugh in joy.

 

I seriously doubt we're going to clean house at ILB.

 

It's not like we picked up two-down linebackers because the Colts prefer them to three-down linebackers.

 

The number of quality linebackers who can stay on the field for all three downs and be an asset is just not that high.       If they could,  all 32 teams would have three down linebackers.

 

There are just only so many.....

 

[Mr. Irrelevant]

3 minutes ago, NewColtsFan said:

 

I seriously doubt we're going to clean house at ILB.

 

It's not like we picked up two-down linebackers because the Colts prefer them to three-down linebackers.

 

The number of quality linebackers who can stay on the field for all three downs and be an asset is just not that high.       If they could,  all 32 teams would have three down linebackers.

 

There are just only so many.....

 

 

True, but I would add that I consider ILB an undervalued group. They need to stop the run, rush the QB and drop back in coverage. LIke a DL + OLB + CB in one player. Crazy when you think about it. I would think long and hard about how to find the right talent and coach them up, because that could be critical in a pass-happy league. At least that is my line of thinking. 

[NewColtsFan]

21 minutes ago, Mr Clueless said:

 

True, but I would add that I consider ILB an undervalued group. They need to stop the run, rush the QB and drop back in coverage. LIke a DL + OLB + CB in one player. Crazy when you think about it. I would think long and hard about how to find the right talent and coach them up, because that could be critical in a pass-happy league. At least that is my line of thinking. 

 

 

Good post.    Good points.

 

Hopefully this gets addressed this off-season.

 

[NewColtsFan]

9 hours ago, Superman said:

 

It's fine that some (a lot, by the end) didn't like him.

 

I don't think his high points were luck. He deserves credit for picks like Hilton and trades like Davis, and there are a few others. There just weren't nearly enough of them.

 

Ballard has my vote of confidence as well. I think he's a great candidate. I just think we're mostly in 'anyone but Grigson' territory at this point. Like I said, Ballard isn't saying anything Grigson wasn't saying five years ago. Grigson just didn't do a good job of executing. If he had, I don't think most people would care whether he had an abrasive personality (evidently he did, but he didn't come across that way to me, not publicly). 

 

Anyway, not to defend Grigson. We're on to the next at this point. 

 

Thank you.      This part about Ballard is NOT saying anything that Grigson didn't also say five years ago is so true.      

As you noted,  it's not that Grigson didn't know these things.    He did.     But most of his moves just didn't pan out.       Draft picks and free agents.     Too many misses and not enough hits.

 

It's not that Grigson believed the best way to build a defense was through free agency.     He was forced to because he kept spending so many draft assets on offense and kept missing.      He had no choice.      When you take five years trying to get the offense just right,  then you're going to be behind schedule on the defense.    And that's where we are.

 

But,  we've moved beyond those days......     and now,  we can move on to what will hopefully be some better days ahead.....       at last.

 

[braveheartcolt]

Ha, Polian Corner. Good for a season or two, until you realised that he just said the same things week in week out. Very similar to Tuesday Morning QB in that respect, but not as funny. The whole ego thing is a crock. Everybody (apart from me) loved Bill. Now, being an arrogant sob is not a good commodity? Can he (the GM) evaluate and sign up good players to good contracts. That is all I really care about. By the time I started watching the Colts (2004), Polian's best years were behind him......

[krunk]

Seems like teams are starting to release players this week.  I'm interested to see if we will be letting anybody go in the next couple of weeks.

[richard pallo]

18 minutes ago, krunk said:

Seems like teams are starting to release players this week.  I'm interested to see if we will be letting anybody go in the next couple of weeks.

I would think so.  If I remember correctly I thought we did so last year but I could be wrong.  With Ballard being new he might take longer evaluating players and putting together his strategy. 

[dgambill]

So far it's all talk and conjecture. No reason to live in the past Grigson just did not bring in enough talent for us to compete at an elite level. Funny enough I think last two drafts weren't that bad. It was 13 and 14 where I think things unraveled a bit too much. I don't know him personally to say he was an * or not...reports suggest he want easy to get along with and be motivated to work for. The one thing that rubbed me wrong was his quote that Lucks contract will make things more difficult to surround Luck with talent or build a defense something along those lines. Now I know in reality it's true but it still comes off as a bit whiney and something nobody wants to hear. Otherwise I was satisfied with his past couple off seasons. I just hope these players progress and that Ballard has a nice offseason. I really feel we are a couple good ones and some player development away from fielding a really formidable team.

[Superman]

19 minutes ago, dgambill said:

So far it's all talk and conjecture. No reason to live in the past Grigson just did not bring in enough talent for us to compete at an elite level. Funny enough I think last two drafts weren't that bad. It was 13 and 14 where I think things unraveled a bit too much. I don't know him personally to say he was an * or not...reports suggest he want easy to get along with and be motivated to work for. The one thing that rubbed me wrong was his quote that Lucks contract will make things more difficult to surround Luck with talent or build a defense something along those lines. Now I know in reality it's true but it still comes off as a bit whiney and something nobody wants to hear. Otherwise I was satisfied with his past couple off seasons. I just hope these players progress and that Ballard has a nice offseason. I really feel we are a couple good ones and some player development away from fielding a really formidable team.

 

That's not what he said. 

[dgambill]

1 hour ago, Superman said:

 

That's not what he said. 

Yeah I don't have the quote...but that was how it was played off in the media. I can't remember it exactly now but it was poorly worded and kinda implied he was now kinda operating with one hand tied behind his back...even though we know that wasn't the truth and I think he didn't mean it that way but it certainly came off that way. That was my only gripe...it was poorly worded and made the organization look bad. It more or less said the defense would just take time to fix because of Lucks huge contract. It just sounded bad because he had been in position to do something about that for several years and didn't get it done. Then he kinda implied Lucks contract would make it more difficult and he would need more time.

[DarkHorseColts]

19 minutes ago, dgambill said:

Yeah I don't have the quote...

 

Here ya go...

http://www.espn.com/nfl/story/_/id/17740259/ryan-grigson-says-andrew-luck-contract-impacts-indianapolis-colts-ability-improve-defense

Quote

 

INDIANAPOLIS -- Indianapolis Colts general manager Ryan Grigson said during a radio interview this week that the team has had a difficult time improving its defense because it gave quarterback Andrew Luck a new $140 million contract during the offseason.

 

"We have a defense that is work in progress," Grigson said on Fox Sports Radio. "When you pay Andrew what we did, it's going to take some time to build on the other side of the ball."

 

 

[dgambill]

24 minutes ago, DarkHorseColts said:

 

Here ya go...

http://www.espn.com/nfl/story/_/id/17740259/ryan-grigson-says-andrew-luck-contract-impacts-indianapolis-colts-ability-improve-defense

 

Thanks. I know in the media it didn't play well. I don't think he meant it like it's Lucks fault just that it didn't need said at all. He had time to fix the defense and could in the draft but it sounded like an excuse and a bid for more time.

[bleevit]

On 2/7/2017 at 2:08 PM, braveheartcolt said:

Let's give him at least one pre-season before annointing him as our saviour. Smart management interview speak 'doth butter no parsnips'. I'm hopeful going into every season, and this one is no different. And maybe he does knock it out the park.....we can only but hope.

LOL. The rubber will hit the road when the evaluation of talent begins. That coupled with rudimentary math skills for the cap is the majority of the GM job. His history is good, he speaks well and seems to have a good concept. I'm encouraged (a little now).

[GoColts8818]

I heard him say "coach" and "new" at different points.  Clearly he's talking in code to say he's going to fire Pagano and bring in a new coach!

 

in all seriousness he sounds like the new boss, he has a clear vision for what he wants.  I wouldn't expect a new GM to not have that so I won't read too much into it. He's going to be judged on the moves he makes to make his vision happened.  Grigson had a vision too but most of his moves failed leaving that vision unfulfilled.  So visions without the right actions don't mean much.  

 

Id expect high roster turnover the next couple of years that's what GMs do, bring in their own guys.  Look at Grigson by year two of him being here the only guys still on the roster before he got here were Castonzo, Reitz, McAfee, AV, Wayne, and Mathis.

[Defjamz26]

Things I ascertained from the interview:

 

-I think there is a clear vision for what he wants. He wants athletic LBs and he wants to start with a young team. Different from Grigson's approach.

 

-He gets the whole Rule vs Exception to the rule thing. He is a believer that although you can occasionally find a small school gem, your best players "will be from division 1 schools". Those were his words. So while every team looks at all avenues for players, I don't think Ballard will be like Grigson where he scavenges for guys from the AFL, CFL, overseas, super small schools, etc... Like a player like that might come along once in a blue moon for him but I don't think we'll see moves like Duron Carter, Muamba, Adongo, etc... I think you'll see more Jack Doyle's. Guys who may not be super hyped coming out of college but he'll take a chance on and develop like with Ron Parker.

 

-I think he's going to take a different approach with character issue guys. Hearing about what he did to become comfortable with Marcus Peters and Tyreek Hill makes me believe that a guy like Mixon may not be out of the question.

 

-Hes going to be more no nonsense with underperforming guys and looking for upgrades. He didn't sugar coat that the defense needs to be better and that the right side of the OL need to be fixed. He didn't say some generic statement like "Yeah we've got some pieces on defense, and I think we've got a good group". He straight up said "We've got a lot of work to do on defense ". 

 

Overall I thought it was a good interview that gave us more insight on his philosophy and vision. And while I agree that some of the things he said about things like the trenches are things that Grigson also said, I think Ballard has an entirely different approach.

[cbear]

I found it interesting that he mentioned getting after the QB with four rushers and mentioned Freeney and Mathis and Tony Dungy.  I wonder if he prefers a 4-3 scheme?

[NewColtsFan]

37 minutes ago, Defjamz26 said:

Things I ascertained from the interview:

 

Here we go....    again....

37 minutes ago, Defjamz26 said:

-I think there is a clear vision for what he wants. He wants athletic LBs and he wants to start with a young team. Different from Grigson's approach.

 

All new GM's have clear visions.    Once upon a time,  Ryan Grigson did too...

All 32 GM's want athletic linebackers and a young team.   But that's literally impossible.   No one has that.   Not even the New England Patriots and they just won the Super Bowl.    Grigson wants that too.    He just couldn't pull it off.    It took him 5 years to build the offense (and the line still isn't done) and that's why the defense is old and slow.   But it's NOT BECAUSE THAT'S GRIGSON'S PREFERRED APPROACH.   Come on now,  don't over-think this.     Nobody wants what we have on defense,  not even Ryan Grigson.

 

37 minutes ago, Defjamz26 said:

-He gets the whole Rule vs Exception to the rule thing. He is a believer that although you can occasionally find a small school gem, your best players "will be from division 1 schools". Those were his words. So while every team looks at all avenues for players, I don't think Ballard will be like Grigson where he scavenges for guys from the AFL, CFL, overseas, super small schools, etc... Like a player like that might come along once in a blue moon for him but I don't think we'll see moves like Duron Carter, Muamba, Adongo, etc... I think you'll see more Jack Doyle's. Guys who may not be super hyped coming out of college but he'll take a chance on and develop like with Ron Parker.

 

Again with this...    Trying to find players elsewhere as Grigson did NOT cost the Colts anything.  We're not 8-8 two years in a row because of this.     We didn't pick Carter over Reggie Wayne.     We didn't pick Muamba over DQJackson or Jerrell Freeman.    We didn't pick Adongo over Robert Mathis and Eric Walden.      The Colts were never hurt by any of these moves.   The only problem is we weren't helped enough,  and that's,  in part,  why Grigson is unemployed.    But doing these moves were NOT bad.     This is the view of a frustrated fan.

 

37 minutes ago, Defjamz26 said:

-I think he's going to take a different approach with character issue guys. Hearing about what he did to become comfortable with Marcus Peters and Tyreek Hill makes me believe that a guy like Mixon may not be out of the question.

 

The character issue is as much an Irsay issue as it is Grigson.   Perhaps more.    If Irsay wanted Grigson do draft poor Character guys --- we would have.    Some organizations are more comfortable doing it than others. And Hill was a FIFTH ROUND draft pick.    I don't suppose you recall Grigson saying "No knuckleheads until after the 4th round!"      In other words,  Grigson might have considered Hill.     Or not,  because Hill punched a woman and we don't know how Irsay will deal with that.    But your view of things is a complete guess.    If Irsay says no,  then it's game over to Joe Mixon.    It won't matter what Ballard is willing to do.

 

37 minutes ago, Defjamz26 said:

 

-Hes going to be more no nonsense with underperforming guys and looking for upgrades. He didn't sugar coat that the defense needs to be better and that the right side of the OL need to be fixed. He didn't say some generic statement like "Yeah we've got some pieces on defense, and I think we've got a good group". He straight up said "We've got a lot of work to do on defense ". 

 

Wow.....    he stated the incredibly obvious and you're impressed.     It's the difference between being the guy who built the team (Grigson) the guy coaching the team (Pagano)  and the NEW GUY WHO IS NOW TAKING OVER (Ballard)  who is free to do and say what he wants.      All three of those people have different perspectives.

 

37 minutes ago, Defjamz26 said:

Overall I thought it was a good interview that gave us more insight on his philosophy and vision. And while I agree that some of the things he said about things like the trenches are things that Grigson also said, I think Ballard has an entirely different approach.

 

Today Chris Ballard sounds great.    I'm very happy he's our new GM.    But 5 years ago Ryan Grigson sounded this way.      And we all know how this turned out.      If Chris Ballard misses on draft picks and free agents the way Grigson did,  we'll be back here in five years analyzing what went wrong.     Let's hope that doesn't happen.

[Defjamz26]

6 hours ago, NewColtsFan said:

 

Here we go....    again....

 

All new GM's have clear visions.    Once upon a time,  Ryan Grigson did too...

All 32 GM's want athletic linebackers and a young team.   But that's literally impossible.   No one has that.   Not even the New England Patriots and they just won the Super Bowl.    Grigson wants that too.    He just couldn't pull it off.    It took him 5 years to build the offense (and the line still isn't done) and that's why the defense is old and slow.   But it's NOT BECAUSE THAT'S GRIGSON'S PREFERRED APPROACH.   Come on now,  don't over-think this.     Nobody wants what we have on defense,  not even Ryan Grigson.

 

 

Again with this...    Trying to find players elsewhere as Grigson did NOT cost the Colts anything.  We're not 8-8 two years in a row because of this.     We didn't pick Carter over Reggie Wayne.     We didn't pick Muamba over DQJackson or Jerrell Freeman.    We didn't pick Adongo over Robert Mathis and Eric Walden.      The Colts were never hurt by any of these moves.   The only problem is we weren't helped enough,  and that's,  in part,  why Grigson is unemployed.    But doing these moves were NOT bad.     This is the view of a frustrated fan.

 

 

The character issue is as much an Irsay issue as it is Grigson.   Perhaps more.    If Irsay wanted Grigson do draft poor Character guys --- we would have.    Some organizations are more comfortable doing it than others. And Hill was a FIFTH ROUND draft pick.    I don't suppose you recall Grigson saying "No knuckleheads until after the 4th round!"      In other words,  Grigson might have considered Hill.     Or not,  because Hill punched a woman and we don't know how Irsay will deal with that.    But your view of things is a complete guess.    If Irsay says no,  then it's game over to Joe Mixon.    It won't matter what Ballard is willing to do.

 

 

Wow.....    he stated the incredibly obvious and you're impressed.     It's the difference between being the guy who built the team (Grigson) the guy coaching the team (Pagano)  and the NEW GUY WHO IS NOW TAKING OVER (Ballard)  who is free to do and say what he wants.      All three of those people have different perspectives.

 

 

Today Chris Ballard sounds great.    I'm very happy he's our new GM.    But 5 years ago Ryan Grigson sounded this way.      And we all know how this turned out.      If Chris Ballard misses on draft picks and free agents the way Grigson did,  we'll be back here in five years analyzing what went wrong.     Let's hope that doesn't happen.

Apparently Grigson didn't want athletic LBs though. He drafted guys like Andrew Jackson, Amarlo Herrera, and Antonio Morrison who are all the same type of LB. slow phone booth tacklers who couldn't cover. And his FAs like D. Jackson and Muamba were the same. And I agree that every team wants a young roster but under Grigson there were 1-2 seasons where the Colts had the oldest roster in the NFL. Saying and doing are two different things but I think Ballard mindset is diff in regards to how to build a team.

 

2. You misunderstand me. I never said his digging for players hurt or cost us. I simply brought it up to demonstrate part of Grigson's philosophy. As noted every team does it to an extent but he placed a greater emphasis on it than most, and I just don't think it's something that Ballard will do at much.

 

3. Again you misunderstand me. I wasn't saying anything about how Grigson handled character issues. I'm saying that Ballard just might have a different approach. I was thinking more Marcus Peters than Tyreek Hill. And he may not take guys with domestic violence issues completely off his board since that was the case with Tyreek.

 

4. Regardless if he's the new guy, the Colts are his team now. He could have come in and gave a stereotypical answer but he didn't. We have some young guys we just drafted in defense. He could have just said "we're trending in the right direction " or something generic like that. I appreciate it is all.

[ManningGM]

On 2/8/2017 at 1:53 AM, 2006Coltsbestever said:

Something about Ballard intrigues me. Just a gut feeling he will do really well. Maybe it's because Grigson is gone too as to why I am so happy with the move.

Nah, I feel it too.

 

Some guys just have that aura about them.

[theanarchist]

54 minutes ago, Defjamz26 said:

Apparently Grigson didn't want athletic LBs though. He drafted guys like Andrew Jackson, Amarlo Herrera, and Antonio Morrison who are all the same type of LB. slow phone booth tacklers who couldn't cover. And his FAs like D. Jackson and Muamba were the same. And I agree that every team wants a young roster but under Grigson there were 1-2 seasons where the Colts had the oldest roster in the NFL. Saying and doing are two different things but I think Ballard mindset is diff in regards to how to build a team.

 

2. You misunderstand me. I never said his digging for players hurt or cost us. I simply brought it up to demonstrate part of Grigson's philosophy. As noted every team does it to an extent but he placed a greater emphasis on it than most, and I just don't think it's something that Ballard will do at much.

 

3. Again you misunderstand me. I wasn't saying anything about how Grigson handled character issues. I'm saying that Ballard just might have a different approach. I was thinking more Marcus Peters than Tyreek Hill. And he may not take guys with domestic violence issues completely off his board since that was the case with Tyreek.

 

4. Regardless if he's the new guy, the Colts are his team now. He could have come in and gave a stereotypical answer but he didn't. We have some young guys we just drafted in defense. He could have just said "we're trending in the right direction " or something generic like that. I appreciate it is all.

All good points. Grigson needed to go. He ran this roster into the ground the last two years. I said a number of times, if you miss on your first round picks it will cost you your job. Grigson missed on Richardson, Dorsett and Werner. 3 out of 5 1st rounders and his 2013 draft was so bad he couldn't recover from it. Not only that but his FA signings did not pan out like they needed to.

[LockeDown]

Irsay had good things to say about Grigson,  whom he obviously liked, but he did let him go and he did say Ballard, in his opinion, was the best GM candidate since the beginning of the 21st century.  That would include the  Grigson hiring.  That's 17 years by my count and that's almost saying a generation.  So, if people are super excited over things Ballard is saying and how he handles himself, let's put a little blame on Irsay.  He Is telling us this guy is better on a pretty grand scale. Anyone who thinks we are judging too early,....why wouldn't we?