Are we building through the draft or?

[OLD FAN MAN]

15 hours ago, COLTS449 said:

Somebody explain to me how in the holy __ you're cool with waiting 3 years to have a juggernaut team when we could have done 75% of it this offseason in FA and the draft.

 

Somebody explain to me why we're wasting Lucks career away with the hopes to win a SB in 3-4 years, when we could have gone all in and been SB contenders NOW.

 

Somebody explain to me why you'd rather get 5-6 mediocre players than 2 stars.

 

 

 

 

i agree, each season we should grab free agents to compete this season so we dont have to wait several years for draft picks to develop if they ever do, let some other team develop them then steal them

[chad72]

7 minutes ago, Colts1324 said:

Good analysis. I do agree. The giants got hot right before the playoffs when they won both of their super bowls. But they still had a good defense. And a franchise QB. Manning was on fire one of those years in the playoffs when the Giants won it all.  Flacco was unstoppable in the playoffs when the Ravens won the Superbowl. But they had a top defense. The Colts need to be able to stop Pittsburg, Oakland, and NE once every 3 times at least to win in the playoffs. That is being generous. We would still have to score 30-35 points to beat any of those teams. I think we are capable. But it is more than just getting hot. The teams that have won the super bowls with 8-8 to 10-6 records usually had a top 5 defense and above average QB play. Some teams take longer to gel as a team(mainly offensively) and I think that is more the case. 

 

Yep. All the teams that we talk about getting hot started 6-2 or better (go back as far as 2003 for SB champs), had a mid-season slump, corrected themselves in time for the playoffs showing everyone why they were good earlier. So, technically they didn't suddenly get good, they were good for the most part and showed it when it mattered most. 

 

That is why I don't believe in "momentum" and "got hot" terms thrown around by pundits on TV and fans alike.

[OLD FAN MAN]

14 hours ago, LockeDown said:

I would beg to differ with the cool your jets squad.  The best team almost never wins the SB.  It's the team that plays the best or the hot team.  ( yes I think Falcons and Seahawks were better than the Pats) Our offense is ahead of our defense.  If they ramp it up another notch this year, the new defense should begin gelling toward the playoffs, assuming they gel.  At that point, you never know.  Injuries happen,   There is no way I believe Ballard is on a 2 year plan. I bet he wouldn't admit it anyway.  He knows 2 great FAs wouldn't get the job done with a lack of cohesive talent at the other positions.  So, he is distributing good talent and depth across the board.  Draft 3-4 really  good players and make our run.  Oh yeah, The Pats were the best team with Moss and they lost.  Colts  had their best team the year before we actually won.  You can't say it's been 2-3 years now, we will win this year.  Doesn't work that way.

i concur

[OLD FAN MAN]

21 minutes ago, Peterk2011 said:

 

Denver Broncos, 2011-2015. They had a roster full of holes in 2010, starting with the QB *. Then, they added Peyton Manning, Wes Welker, Emmanuel Sanders, Demarcus Ware, Aquib Talib, T.J Ward, etc. to name a few big time free agent signings out of their 2013 SB and/or 2015 SB winning roster. 

 

Of course, they had very good drafts too.... which played just as important role in their success as their free agent acquisitions. Or even more important role. But a team can definitely add key pieces from free agency.

i agree, good post, it is about picking talent, what better way to pick talent than vets who have shown what they can do, i cant believe any gm or coach would write off a season waiting for draft picks to develop or bust, while their star qb gets older. many college players look good on paper but in the nfl they never can cut it

[Peterk2011]

5 minutes ago, chad72 said:

 

I don't think Superman was talking about several seasons, just in 1 season.

 

Over several seasons, even the Colts would make enough FA moves to offset FAs leaving, roster tweaking etc., that is a universally accepted thing. It is just that Superman feels, like most of us do, that we cannot go "all in" on free agency in ONE season and expect to turn into a SB contender.

 

Well, their FA acquisitions were dated mostly in the first 2 offseasons. First year Manning+ a few, then next year most of the rest. Only Ware arrived in the 3rd year. But yeah, 1 year is hardly enough. I do not expect the Colts to become contender immediatelly neither. I just want to see improvement in all 3 phases of the game, especially in defense. In defense, i want to see massive improvement, last years production was waay below acceptable.

[chad72]

9 minutes ago, Peterk2011 said:

 

Well, their FA acquisitions were dated mostly in the first 2 offseasons. First year Manning+ a few, then next year most of the rest. Only Ware arrived in the 3rd year. But yeah, 1 year is hardly enough. I do not expect the Colts to become contender immediatelly neither. I just want to see improvement in all 3 phases of the game, especially in defense. In defense, i want to see massive improvement, last years production was waay below acceptable.

 

This is how it exactly happened, FAs were acquired over 3 years as a matter of fact. In the meanwhile, key draft picks like Malik Jackson, Danny Trevathan and Bradley Roby all developed and flourished and were a big part of that SB winning D in 2015.

 

2012 - Peyton

2013 - Wes Welker (big part of record breaking season on offense), ended in SB thrashing

2014 - Emmanuel Sanders (to replace Decker who left), T.J.Ward, Aqib Talib (which prompted Belichick to sign Revis since Talib left Patriots), and Ware came together then

2015 - SB champs (key hire was Wade Philips who maximized their D compared to Jack Del Rio who had pretty much the same horses the previous year)

 

Funny that Wes Welker is 0-3 in SBs and is part of 2 SBs that Brady lost, he is a jinx I say.  

[Dark Superman]

The Draft is where we will need to make our mark. We have three fourth round picks. I think we could find some gems in the middle rounds if we play our cards right. If Ballard can nail this draft, the Colts could turn this franchise around in one year.

Bring in a new coach and have another solid year of FA and the Draft and the Colts could arguably be one of the top teams in the NFL in 3-4 years.

Just need to get Luck some help already.

[COLTS449]

47 minutes ago, Superman said:

 

Still waiting on you to give an example of a team that 'went all in in free agency' and went on to have success. Especially a team that had significant holes in the starting line up. 

 

Denver signed Ware, Ward, and Talib. Plus Sanders what? The year before they signed those guys? I cant remember exactly.

 

Seattle signed Bennett and Avril

 

And yes those 2 teams had better players on D they we could ever dream of, but still. Signing good FA's to go with good drafts would have us over the top by now.

 

In the end It really doesn't matter what other teams do. It's different from team to team. A team can win a SB after going all in, in FA, or a team could win without, but IMO bringing in big time ballers through FA would give us a much better chance, and when you have 12 and holes everywhere I think its dumb to not try and fill those holes and compete from day 1.

 

Grigson screwed the team up by his terrible drafts, trades, signings, etc.

[Superman]

13 minutes ago, Peterk2011 said:

 

Denver Broncos, 2011-2015. They had a roster full of holes in 2010, starting with the QB *. Then, they added Peyton Manning, Wes Welker, Emmanuel Sanders, Demarcus Ware, Aquib Talib, T.J Ward, etc. to name a few big time free agent signings out of their 2013 SB and/or 2015 SB winning roster. 

 

Of course, they had very good drafts too.... which played just as important role in their success as their free agent acquisitions. Or even more important role. But a team can definitely add key pieces from free agency.

 

Of course the Broncos would come up. The truth, though, is that they built their foundation through the draft, mostly pre-dating Elway. They did NOT have a roster full of holes, they had one hole, primarily, at QB, and were good enough to win a playoff game without a QB.

 

They supplemented their already pretty good roster in free agency, and did so judiciously. They only added auxiliary guys like Jacob Tamme in 2012 and Wes Welker and Terrance Knighton in 2013. They got more aggressive in 2014 with Ware, Ward, Talib and Sanders, but those players still supplemented the mostly drafted core of Miller, Thomas x2, Harris, Wolfe, Jackson, Moreno, Trevathan, Woodyard, Irving, etc. 

 

The Broncos were still a unique case of 'get what we can before it's too late,' having an old QB who could fall apart at any minute. And they only got aggressive in free agency after they had already been to the SB. And even then, it was the right guys at the right price. And, on top of having the ideal circumstances, the Broncos happened to hit it out of the park on virtually all of their free agents, which is almost unheard of. Don't count on duplicating their level of success in free agency.

 

I am absolutely not saying you can't or shouldn't add players in free agency. I am saying it is foolish to "go all in in free agency" when you don't even have a good stable of starters. No team has ever done it successfully. Some people are acting like it's a path to guaranteed success to go out and sign the best free agents every offseason -- no matter that 'the best' free agents sometimes aren't really that good, like Nick Perry who got $12m/year, and no matter the state of your current roster. 

 

Smart teams get a critical piece in free agency here and there. Sometimes you'll have the opportunity to add multiple pieces in one offseason, especially if you're right there in contention. But this 'we could have done 75% of our team building in free agency' stuff is folly. Not only is it not likely to work, it's very difficult to accommodate from a cash/cap standpoint and a recruitment standpoint. And when you listen to Irsay and Ballard talk, everyone should have known that they weren't going to try to catapult themselves to the top of the league in one March using free agency. 

[COLTS449]

Just now, Superman said:

 

Of course the Broncos would come up. The truth, though, is that they built their foundation through the draft, mostly pre-dating Elway. They did NOT have a roster full of holes, they had one hole, primarily, at QB, and were good enough to win a playoff game without a QB.

 

They supplemented their already pretty good roster in free agency, and did so judiciously. They only added auxiliary guys like Jacob Tamme in 2012 and Wes Welker and Terrance Knighton in 2013. They got more aggressive in 2014 with Ware, Ward, Talib and Sanders, but those players still supplemented the mostly drafted core of Miller, Thomas x2, Harris, Wolfe, Jackson, Moreno, Trevathan, Woodyard, Irving, etc. 

 

The Broncos were still a unique case of 'get what we can before it's too late,' having an old QB who could fall apart at any minute. And they only got aggressive in free agency after they had already been to the SB. And even then, it was the right guys at the right price. And, on top of having the ideal circumstances, the Broncos happened to hit it out of the park on virtually all of their free agents, which is almost unheard of. Don't count on duplicating their level of success in free agency.

 

I am absolutely not saying you can't or shouldn't add players in free agency. I am saying it is foolish to "go all in in free agency" when you don't even have a good stable of starters. No team has ever done it successfully. Some people are acting like it's a path to guaranteed success to go out and sign the best free agents every offseason -- no matter that 'the best' free agents sometimes aren't really that good, like Nick Perry who got $12m/year, and no matter the state of your current roster. 

 

Smart teams get a critical piece in free agency here and there. Sometimes you'll have the opportunity to add multiple pieces in one offseason, especially if you're right there in contention. But this 'we could have done 75% of our team building in free agency' stuff is folly. Not only is it not likely to work, it's very difficult to accommodate from a cash/cap standpoint and a recruitment standpoint. And when you listen to Irsay and Ballard talk, everyone should have known that they weren't going to try to catapult themselves to the top of the league in one March using free agency. 

 

I believe in building through the draft, but IMO, with our situation we should have went all out each of the last few years to fill the holes we have all over the D and OL. Then after bringing in some star caliber FA's to get things rolling then start building through the draft.

[aaron11]

we had cap money to spend so we are spending it

 

what else is it good for?

[chad72]

7 minutes ago, COLTS449 said:

 

I believe in building through the draft, but IMO, with our situation we should have went all out each of the last few years to fill the holes we have all over the D and OL. Then after bringing in some star caliber FA's to get things rolling then start building through the draft.

 

The only move I would vouch for right now is to bring in a quality CB like Trumaine Johnson given that Vontae will be a free agent after this season again and should things go south, we will have someone like Trumaine manning the #1 spot. Then, we save the money to see if guys like Butler come down back to earth realizing their market value and either him or Lardarius Webb or another rotational body for the front 7 on a short 1 or 2 year deal. 

 

We would need the rest to sign draft picks, IMO. Of course, all our draft picks can be independent of our FA moves given how much talent we'd like to infuse at all levels.

[COLTS449]

2 minutes ago, aaron11 said:

we had cap money to spend so we are spending it

 

what else is it good for?

 

4 years from now.  

[PrincetonTiger]

16 hours ago, COLTS449 said:

Somebody explain to me how in the holy __ you're cool with waiting 3 years to have a juggernaut team when we could have done 75% of it this offseason in FA and the draft.

 

Somebody explain to me why we're wasting Lucks career away with the hopes to win a SB in 3-4 years, when we could have gone all in and been SB contenders NOW.

 

Somebody explain to me why you'd rather get 5-6 mediocre players than 2 stars.

 

 

 

 

See the Marlins Franchise

  The Ownership/Management spend tons of money to win a WS and within 2 years were irrelevant  

[PrincetonTiger]

I love what CB has dine

[COLTS449]

Just now, PrincetonTiger said:

See the Marlins Franchise

  The Ownership/Management spend tons of money to win a WS and within 2 years were irrelevant  

 

Hold on a second bro. I'm a huge Atlanta Braves fan. The Miami Marlins went all in ONLY to sell tickets. In fact they targeted mostly Spanish players since the Spanish population is so high in Miami.. Their owner was just stupid. He was just worried about getting ticket sales up. Not building a monster team that year

[chad72]

I wouldn't mind a FA WR/TE that is a big bodied one for key 3rd down throws underneath (would we even entertain Michael Floyd or Jared Cook???).

[Superman]

1 minute ago, COLTS449 said:

 

I believe in building through the draft, but IMO, with our situation we should have went all out each of the last few years to fill the holes we have all over the D and OL. Then after bringing in some star caliber FA's to get things rolling then start building through the draft.

 

If I had the time, I would go back through the last four years, point out all the big name signings everyone wanted, most of which weren't good signings for other teams, and show to you that we'd still have the same holes all over the D and OL. The difference would be that we wouldn't have any cap space. 

 

You can't go all out in free agency every year.

[chrisfarley]

16 hours ago, COLTS449 said:

Somebody explain to me how in the holy __ you're cool with waiting 3 years to have a juggernaut team when we could have done 75% of it this offseason in FA and the draft.

 

Somebody explain to me why we're wasting Lucks career away with the hopes to win a SB in 3-4 years, when we could have gone all in and been SB contenders NOW.

 

Somebody explain to me why you'd rather get 5-6 mediocre players than 2 stars.

 

 

 

 

Ballard has already said he is NOT going to pay someone huge Free Agency Lottery winnings money (my term) and have them thrown into our locker room and force a fit, and then have consternation amongst players which puts the new acquisition on an island and doesn't do anyone in the organization any good and for long-term sake, just creates a poisonous and vitriolic situation.  (I am para-phrasing but hope I am conveying what he said satisfactorily).

I couldn't agree more with the approach...... but at the same time, I understand that father-time will eventually catch up to Luck.....  But there's time.  I'd rather have him win one Super Bowl later on , than zero coming close 2 or 3 times.

[PrincetonTiger]

1 minute ago, chrisfarley said:

Ballard has already said he is NOT going to pay someone huge Free Agency Lottery winnings money (my term) and have them thrown into our locker room and force a fit, and then have consternation among players which puts the new acquisition on an island and doesn't do anyone in the organization any good and for long-term sake, just creates a poisonous and vitriolic situation.  (I am para-phrasing but hope I am conveying what he said satisfactorily).

I couldn't agree more with the approach...... but at the same time, I understand that father-time will eventually catch up to Luck.....  But there's time.  I'd rather have him win one Super Bowl later on , than zero coming close 2 or 3 times.

Nicely put

[COLTS449]

Just now, Superman said:

 

If I had the time, I would go back through the last four years, point out all the big name signings everyone wanted, most of which weren't good signings for other teams, and show to you that we'd still have the same holes all over the D and OL. The difference would be that we wouldn't have any cap space. 

 

You can't go all out in free agency every year.

 

I didn't mean every year. I meant a year or 2 in a row. Like this year and slightly less next year. You just gotta be smart about who sign. We all wanted Jenkins, Hayward, etc last offseason. Look what Jenkins and Hayward done this year. Like the first year we had cap money (Lucks 2nd season) we should have targeted Dumervil, Smith or Grimes, Slauson, etc instead of RJF, Landry, Cherilous, etc.

[buccolts]

9 minutes ago, COLTS449 said:

 

Hold on a second bro. I'm a huge Atlanta Braves fan. The Miami Marlins went all in ONLY to sell tickets. In fact they targeted mostly Spanish players since the Spanish population is so high in Miami.. Their owner was just stupid. He was just worried about getting ticket sales up. Not building a monster team that year

 

It's been a while, but it also got them a couple World Series titles.

[deedub75]

6 hours ago, theanarchist said:

Yes, so far most of the signings are players that are coming in to compete. As you say, not core players. The draft is and will always be the most important aspect of roster building. We'll see how good Ballard is come the end of April

 

At least the players being brought in are relatively young and Ballard may believe that some of them may improve and become fixtures on the team.  Unfortunately, I don't see Pagano as a coach that can take mediocre players to the next level. 

 

[PrincetonTiger]

1 minute ago, buccolts said:

 

It's been a while, but it also got them a couple World Series titles.

Yep

[PrincetonTiger]

Unless you are a major market in the NFL, NBA, NHL, or MLB building through FA can be a death sentence for the Franchise

 

the Cubs tried this and failed but by building Through home grown players got them a WS Title

[Colts1324]

1 hour ago, chad72 said:

 

Yep. All the teams that we talk about getting hot started 6-2 or better (go back as far as 2003 for SB champs), had a mid-season slump, corrected themselves in time for the playoffs showing everyone why they were good earlier. So, technically they didn't suddenly get good, they were good for the most part and showed it when it mattered most. 

 

That is why I don't believe in "momentum" and "got hot" terms thrown around by pundits on TV and fans alike.

Exactly. I do kind of believe in momentum though. If you have won 4 or 5 games going into the playoffs it does make some difference. But you still have to have the team to compete. I don't know if you have ever played basketball or football in high school or college, but that feeling when you are on fire or just made a big hit does get you going pretty good. 

[Superman]

5 minutes ago, COLTS449 said:

 

I didn't mean every year. I meant a year or 2 in a row. Like this year and slightly less next year. You just gotta be smart about who sign. We all wanted Jenkins, Hayward, etc last offseason. Look what Jenkins and Hayward done this year. Like the first year we had cap money (Lucks 2nd season) we should have targeted Dumervil, Smith or Grimes, Slauson, etc instead of RJF, Landry, Cherilous, etc.

 

You literally said "we should have went all out each of the last few years..."

 

Now we're back to hindsight. It's one thing to say 'we should have signed different free agents.' We all agree with that. We also should have drafted better. 

 

The point is that, right now, we don't have the kind of roster where it makes sense to sign the free agents that were available this offseason. I wouldn't have minded a top corner, but I would have cringed at the price, given the fact that we have no pass rush (and we won't until we draft some edge rushers and get better up front). You wanted Nick Perry, but we all know he's not good enough to warrant $12m/year, especially if he's going to be the primary pass rush threat. 

 

Discipline is critical, and you want to disregard all discipline and just go buck wild in an effort to shortcut the process. Without a time machine, we can't change what Grigson did. But Ballard is in position to build the roster the right way, and throwing money around in free agency right now is not the right way. 

[COLTS449]

10 minutes ago, buccolts said:

 

It's been a while, but it also got them a couple World Series titles.

 

Twice. That was a different time. What 97 and 03? They brought up all these superstars and had a few good years, then traded away all their good players. Then repeated. Who were their FA's in 03? I don't know what year they signed them exactly but Pierre, Castillo, La Duca,  Encarnacion, and a few more. I know they had Pudge and Delgado a minute but they weren't there for the WS in 03 I don't think. LOL that's been a while. It was Cabrera's rookie or 2nd year. They had a stacked rotation. Beckett, Burnett, Willis, etc. In 97 it was Sheffield, Renteria, Leiter, and did they have Kevin Brown that year? Pretty sure they did.

[Myles]

1 hour ago, Superman said:

 

Still waiting on you to give an example of a team that 'went all in in free agency' and went on to have success. Especially a team that had significant holes in the starting line up. 

I'm not defending him who wants to sign multiple top free agents.

 

I would cite the Giants from last year.    They pretty much bought a good defense and it worked pretty well for them.

 

[COLTS449]

4 minutes ago, Myles said:

I'm not defending him who wants to sign multiple top free agents.

 

I would cite the Giants from last year.    They pretty much bought a good defense and it worked pretty well for them.

 

 

Yeah. You should back me cause I'm right. What if we had brought in Harrison, Jenkins, Vernon, and this year Marshall??? We'd be even better than Eli's Giants. Cause we have 12.

 

Or Oakland bringing in Hudson, Osemele, Crabtree, Williams, Irvin, Smith, and Nelson, and the brilliant trade for Amerson. See Oakland wants to put talent arounf their young, franchise QB

[Superman]

4 minutes ago, Myles said:

I'm not defending him who wants to sign multiple top free agents.

 

I would cite the Giants from last year.    They pretty much bought a good defense and it worked pretty well for them.

 

 

That's probably the best example anyone is going to come up with. And they got smoked in the wild card game, specifically on defense. 

 

And the bigger question is about how those signings are going to impact them long term. 

[COLTS449]

1 minute ago, Superman said:

 

That's probably the best example anyone is going to come up with. And they got smoked in the wild card game, specifically on defense. 

 

And the bigger question is about how those signings are going to impact them long term. 

 

That's why I said then after bringing in big time FA's you start building through the draft. If you draft right you don't have cap issues. you let the guys you sign go in 3-4 years and re-sign your own guys.

[chad72]

15 minutes ago, Colts1324 said:

Exactly. I do kind of believe in momentum though. If you have won 4 or 5 games going into the playoffs it does make some difference. But you still have to have the team to compete. I don't know if you have ever played basketball or football in high school or college, but that feeling when you are on fire or just made a big hit does get you going pretty good. 

 

That has been the narrative perpetrated by the Steelers winning their last 5 in 2005 and the Giants as a wild card winning their last few games in 2007 & 2011. However, the other wild card stories of the Ravens losing 4 out of their last 5 in 2012, Colts losing 4 out of their last 7 in 2006 are all discarded since they don't fit the narrative.

 

Most important is that you get "hot in the playoffs". It is 0-0 when it starts and if you are a wild card, you need the D to travel well on the road as most of those wild card teams showed, and a few favorable match ups along the way (like we didn't have to play the Chargers in 2006, Steelers didn't have to play Patriots in 2005 or 2008 etc.). Just have to be a complete team to win it different ways, whether staying balanced on offense or gutting out a FG game on the road.

[COLTS449]

The way the world's going all sissified we probably wont even have the NFL in 4 years. Things are getting bad. Young player after young player retiring after all this concussion bull. I miss the world I grew up in 10 years ago. When a concussion wasn't really a big deal.

[Colts1324]

3 minutes ago, chad72 said:

 

That has been the narrative perpetrated by the Steelers winning their last 5 in 2005 and the Giants as a wild card winning their last few games in 2007 & 2011. However, the other wild card stories of the Ravens losing 4 out of their last 5 in 2012, Colts losing 4 out of their last 7 in 2006 are all discarded since they don't fit the narrative.

 

Most important is that you get "hot in the playoffs". It is 0-0 when it starts and if you are a wild card, you need the D to travel well on the road as most of those wild card teams showed, and a few favorable match ups along the way (like we didn't have to play the Chargers in 2006, Steelers didn't have to play Patriots in 2005 or 2008 etc.). Just have to be a complete team to win it different ways, whether staying balanced on offense or gutting out a FG game on the road.

Yeah. But like you said you have to have a complete team. Whether you are hot or not. If you aren't talented enough and don't have a great game plan you aren't going to beat New England and get out of the AFC. I hate it but the AFC runs through NE. I'm pretty sure we all can agree to that.

[chad72]

Just now, Colts1324 said:

Yeah. But like you said you have to have a complete team. Whether you are hot or not. If you aren't talented enough and don't have a great game plan you aren't going to beat New England and get out of the AFC. I hate it but the AFC runs through NE. I'm pretty sure we all can agree to that.

 

To me, getting to the playoffs can be done with a few star players. However, once you are in the playoffs, that is when coaching separates the cream of the crop, IMO.

[Colts1324]

7 minutes ago, chad72 said:

 

To me, getting to the playoffs can be done with a few star players. However, once you are in the playoffs, that is when coaching separates the cream of the crop, IMO.

I agree. But we only have 2 "star" players. Mewhort, Kelly, Castanzo(some games), Davis, and Geathers are our above average players. We are lacking 2 stars on defense. 

[Colts1324]

58 minutes ago, COLTS449 said:

 

I believe in building through the draft, but IMO, with our situation we should have went all out each of the last few years to fill the holes we have all over the D and OL. Then after bringing in some star caliber FA's to get things rolling then start building through the draft.

Agreed. Grigson had a lot of money to spend. I only wish I could see what our team looked like with a good GM at the top of the helm since 2012. 

[Colts1324]

46 minutes ago, chrisfarley said:

Ballard has already said he is NOT going to pay someone huge Free Agency Lottery winnings money (my term) and have them thrown into our locker room and force a fit, and then have consternation amongst players which puts the new acquisition on an island and doesn't do anyone in the organization any good and for long-term sake, just creates a poisonous and vitriolic situation.  (I am para-phrasing but hope I am conveying what he said satisfactorily).

I couldn't agree more with the approach...... but at the same time, I understand that father-time will eventually catch up to Luck.....  But there's time.  I'd rather have him win one Super Bowl later on , than zero coming close 2 or 3 times.

But nothing is guaranteed. I think once Brady and Big Ben retire. Both franchises won't be as hard to beat. So if we want to compete in the next 3 years. We need to move fast. But smart at the same time. I might complain sometimes, but I'll trust Ballard. He knows a lot more than I do. Lol 

 

the whole point of this thread was not t start an argument or complain, as I like what he is doing, but to see if anyone else envisioned his plan for this team. I know he wants to creat competition. Just surprised he has been targeted to be interested in so many people. But I love it. FA and the draft are two of my favorite things to watch. 

[Jason_]

22 minutes ago, COLTS449 said:

The way the world's going all sissified we probably wont even have the NFL in 4 years. Things are getting bad. Young player after young player retiring after all this concussion bull. I miss the world I grew up in 10 years ago. When a concussion wasn't really a big deal.

 

oh, you mean the world where many former players wind up with permanent brain damage?  Yeah that's good for everyone!