Stampede Blue: Theory that Ballard knows his coach already

[Restored]

I do like how he's connected the dots in terms of the type of personnel the Colts currently have. Do I think its all the way true? No. But I certainly think there's something to his theory in terms of the philosophy Ballard has and how he wants the team to look.

[Superman]

1 hour ago, J@son said:

 

yeah, the writer assumes that Ballard brought in those specific front office personnel because of the type of players they were acquiring so that they can bring in the same types of players to Indy.  The writer completely overlooks the possibility that maybe Ballard simply saw that these front office guys were able to get quality players with the skill sets that their coaches wanted, and THAT's why Ballard brought them here...because they find good players with the right traits and skills, not to bring in those same types of players. 

 

Yeah, the idea that good personnel guys are only able to scout scheme-specific players is wrongheaded, IMO. The Chiefs were mostly a 3-4 defense. The Seahawks have run multiple fronts for years; as a matter of fact, Pete Carroll has historically been more of a 3-4 guy.

 

The "article" is supposition, speculation, conjecture. At best.

[jshipp23]

I have a "feeling" Ballard wants a YES MAN, and Toub or Nagy is that guy unfortunately.......I'd rather have McDaniels by a mile, but he will want to do his  own thing which won't mesh with Ballard's vision....Prepare yourselves for Toub, a special teams coach without an offensive philosophy...We need an offensive minded coach who has a proven system, not another first time coach who is gonna make 1st time coach mistakes.....

[krunk]

I'm enjoying this part of the season more than I did the regular season.  LOL!

[Defjamz26]

5 minutes ago, jshipp23 said:

I have a "feeling" Ballard wants a YES MAN, and Toub or Nagy is that guy unfortunately.......I'd rather have McDaniels by a mile, but he will want to do his  own thing which won't mesh with Ballard's vision....Prepare yourselves for Toub, a special teams coach without an offensive philosophy...We need an offensive minded coach who has a proven system, not another first time coach who is gonna make 1st time coach mistakes.....

So much wrong in this post...I don’t know where to begin.

[Jason_]

8 minutes ago, jshipp23 said:

I have a "feeling" Ballard wants a YES MAN, and Toub or Nagy is that guy unfortunately.......I'd rather have McDaniels by a mile, but he will want to do his  own thing which won't mesh with Ballard's vision....Prepare yourselves for Toub, a special teams coach without an offensive philosophy...We need an offensive minded coach who has a proven system, not another first time coach who is gonna make 1st time coach mistakes.....

 

Well i doubt anyone is going to start expecting anything based on your "feeling" that is based on nothing.   

 

I don't know why you'd think Ballard wants a yes man.  Literally everything he's said to this point would suggest otherwise.

[lollygagger8]

I can prove that water is wet.

 

 

Look how much time I saved you with the cliff notes version. 

[jshipp23]

If we go with yet another Defensive coach I do like what I see in Wilks and he seems very knowledgeable, and has that Tomlin like intensity which we need..Seems like a guy who can make in game adjustments on defense, as well as coordinate the defense which Pagano was horrible at..As far as Ballard wanting a yes man, he made it pretty clear in the press conference that the coach had to be on same page with his vision period...Not necessarily the best thing...I just hope he lets the next coach do his job without meddling....Most proven in demand coaches are gonna want some say so in personnel which WON'T happen here....So that eliminates all the big fish and probably McDaniels as well...

[Rally5]

26 minutes ago, Superman said:

 

If you go to the comments section, you'll see the writer was very serious.

It looks like the Ballard is seriously leaning towards Coach Klein due to his defensive nature and he specializes in coaching Linebackers!  "Son, you just opened up a whole case of whoop-*!" -CK

[2006Coltsbestever]

21 minutes ago, krunk said:

I'm enjoying this part of the season more than I did the regular season.  LOL!

Me too.

[Jason_]

22 minutes ago, jshipp23 said:

If we go with yet another Defensive coach I do like what I see in Wilks and he seems very knowledgeable, and has that Tomlin like intensity which we need..Seems like a guy who can make in game adjustments on defense, as well as coordinate the defense which Pagano was horrible at..As far as Ballard wanting a yes man, he made it pretty clear in the press conference that the coach had to be on same page with his vision period...Not necessarily the best thing...I just hope he lets the next coach do his job without meddling....Most proven in demand coaches are gonna want some say so in personnel which WON'T happen here....So that eliminates all the big fish and probably McDaniels as well...

 

every coach gets a "say" in personnel decisions.  Every single one.  not all have final say on those decisions, most don't actually.  and saying that the new coach needs to be on the same page does not mean that he wants a yes man.  in fact he could have meant that he doesn't want a yes man, and the new coach needs to be on the same page and not be a yes man himself.  

[will426]

14 hours ago, NewColtsFan said:

 

 

I don't get all this talk about Seattle playing zone defense.

 

And here's a quote from the article from Safety Kam Chancellor...

 

"We play man-to-man or Cover-3, not much more than that. It's not a secret." - Kam Chancellor

 

Even Cam says the team plays man-to-man.     Yes, they play some zone,  but I've always known the Seahawks for their man-to-man play.    Sherman and whoever the other corner has been are mostly man corners.

 

They play way more zone and are better at that than man 

[ztboiler]

51 minutes ago, Superman said:

The Seahawks have run multiple fronts for years; as a matter of fact, Pete Carroll has historically been more of a 3-4 guy.

 

Small quibble on Carroll as more of a 3-4 guy historically....I don't know much of Carroll's history pre-USC, but since 2001 he's run with his 4-3 under scheme which he admits uses 3-4 principles and personnel on the strong side.  It's hard to say that is anything but his system of choice since he installed it immediately in Seattle, though many remember him as a 3-4 guy because he used it a couple years to get his best players on the field with Mathews, Cushing and Maualuga.  

[Superman]

2 minutes ago, ztboiler said:

Small quibble on Carroll as more of a 3-4 guy historically....I don't know much of Carroll's history pre-USC, but since 2001 he's run with his 4-3 under scheme which he admits uses 3-4 principles and personnel on the strong side.  It's hard to say that is anything but his system of choice since he installed it immediately in Seattle, though many remember him as a 3-4 guy because he used it a couple years to get his best players on the field with Mathews, Cushing and Maualuga.  

 

Fair enough. It was their base personnel at USC, IIRC. 

 

But, as we know and as the article even admits, the alignment has become a misnomer. How you play the gaps is the primary difference. Wade Phillips runs a "3-4" but it's way different than our 3-4 has been, because his linemen 1 gap and penetrate.

 

And far more important is disruptive personnel upfront and rangy off ball linebackers. I don't care what alignment we use, and I don't think anyone should, as long as we have good front six/seven personnel and can get after the passer. 

[ztboiler]

12 minutes ago, Superman said:

 

Fair enough. It was their base personnel at USC, IIRC. 

 

But, as we know and as the article even admits, the alignment has become a misnomer. How you play the gaps is the primary difference. Wade Phillips runs a "3-4" but it's way different than our 3-4 has been, because his linemen 1 gap and penetrate.

 

And far more important is disruptive personnel upfront and rangy off ball linebackers. I don't care what alignment we use, and I don't think anyone should, as long as we have good front six/seven personnel and can get after the passer. 

 

Agreed....like I said...small quibble.  Its been a year or two...but the rest we've discussed multiple times and completely agree on.

[Smonroe]

1 hour ago, Superman said:

 

If you go to the comments section, you'll see the writer was very serious.

 

I appreciate all the work he put into it, and I realize that it's free content.  So I'm not complaining.  But it sure read like someone who works for their high school paper.  (Do they still have those?)

[dgambill]

15 hours ago, chad72 said:

 

Wagner and Wright make that D tick in the middle though the LOB gets more attention, we need some serious upgrades at the LB position before trying to emulate that. Right now, no matter which scheme or front we choose, we have some serious deficiencies before fielding a Top 10 unit.

 

I do think that the 4-3 base front is easier to draft for and build quality depth. The LB weakness can be masked a little bit with the 4-3 as well if you are strong in DL and secondary. However, against elite teams, if you want to beat the best, you have to build all levels of the defense.

Exactly we don't have a single player at any level of our defense on par with any of Seattle's guys. We have no Thomas or Chancellor, no Sherman, no Wagner/Wright, no Avril/Richardson/Bennett. I agree we got some work to do. Great players will make almost any scheme successful.

[dgambill]

1 hour ago, Superman said:

 

Yeah, the idea that good personnel guys are only able to scout scheme-specific players is wrongheaded, IMO. The Chiefs were mostly a 3-4 defense. The Seahawks have run multiple fronts for years; as a matter of fact, Pete Carroll has historically been more of a 3-4 guy.

 

The "article" is supposition, speculation, conjecture. At best.

I agree! The article might be correct....Ballard may know who he wants the coach to be....but I guarantee the writer has no clue who that is. It may end up being right but to think anyone knows where he is leaning or headed I think is just full of.....well....it.

[Superman]

1 minute ago, Smonroe said:

 

I appreciate all the work he put into it, and I realize that it's free content.  So I'm not complaining.  But it sure read like someone who works for their high school paper.  (Do they still have those?)

 

Yeah, it's not quality journalism, but it's SB so no one should expect that.

 

He connected some dots that I don't think really connect, but he did some good research. 

[Buddy Lee]

3 hours ago, Coltsfanforlife12 said:

I’m pretty sure he’s referring to Richard.  The writer has written multiple articles about him as a coaching candidate.

I believe what the author was saying is that Ballard already knew who his HC would be before the interview process begins. I don't think the author was saying that the author knows.

[jshipp23]

It's gonna be Toub...smh...Should've hired Kyle Shanahan last year....I'd rather have freakin Mike Shanahan than Toub...The guy is in his 50's never been a head coach or offensive or defensive coordinator. ...If he was that great he would have done something by now. ....Hey at least our Special Teams will be good.....Anybody but him....Wilks, Richard I can deal with I guess...Idk why we aren't looking at Frank Reich...WE really should offer Harbaugh or Urban Meyer 5 years 50 million if we want to win.....$$ talks..

[2006Coltsbestever]

4 minutes ago, jshipp23 said:

It's gonna be Toub...smh...Should've hired Kyle Shanahan last year....I'd rather have freakin Mike Shanahan than Toub...The guy is in his 50's never been a head coach or offensive or defensive coordinator. ...If he was that great he would have done something by now. ....Hey at least our Special Teams will be good.....Anybody but him....Wilks, Richard I can deal with I guess...Idk why we aren't looking at Frank Reich...WE really should offer Harbaugh or Urban Meyer 5 years 50 million if we want to win.....$$ talks..

I am ok with Toub, he is 55 so not real old and has good chemistry with Ballard. I would prefer Nagy who is only 39 and is an OC with KC but maybe we hire both?

[richard pallo]

2 minutes ago, 2006Coltsbestever said:

I am ok with Toub, he is 55 so not real old and has good chemistry with Ballard. I would prefer Nagy who is only 39 and is an OC with KC but maybe we hire both?

Nagy as coach, Toub OC?

[krunk]

No

[2006Coltsbestever]

3 minutes ago, richard pallo said:

Nagy as coach, Toub OC?

Not sure what the game plan is. Toub is a Special Teams Coach so who knows. I do like Nagy though. Not sure how the McDaniels interview went, does anyone know?

[richard pallo]

2 minutes ago, 2006Coltsbestever said:

Not sure what the game plan is. Toub is a Special Teams Coach so who knows. I do like Nagy though. Not sure how the McDaniels interview went, does anyone know?

Each job would be a promotion for both. Nagy could still call the plays like he's doing in KC.  I read where McDaniel's interview went "very well". 

[chad72]

For what it is worth, our special teams is not really that bad:

 

http://www.footballoutsiders.com/stats/teamst

 

I was looking at Toub's ST resume and it is pretty good. Could be a case of Arians who was OC for the longest time but never truly got the chance till Pagano underwent chemo. Besides, nobody hires with a 10 year plan in mind in this "Not For Long" NFL, so even a great 5 years if it results in a SB would be a trade off I'd settle for, even if the older coach decides to hang it up then.

[LSD9402]

47 minutes ago, richard pallo said:

Each job would be a promotion for both. Nagy could still call the plays like he's doing in KC.  I read where McDaniel's interview went "very well". 

 

They're already Coordinators. They can't move laterally you have to promote them if you're hiring them. KC and more importantly Toub with have to agree to this move, since its obviously a fake promotion.

[BOTT]

3 hours ago, jshipp23 said:

I have a "feeling" Ballard wants a YES MAN, and Toub or Nagy is that guy unfortunately.......I'd rather have McDaniels by a mile, but he will want to do his  own thing which won't mesh with Ballard's vision....Prepare yourselves for Toub, a special teams coach without an offensive philosophy...We need an offensive minded coach who has a proven system, not another first time coach who is gonna make 1st time coach mistakes.....

My "gut" tells me your "feeling" is wrong

[Coltsfanforlife12]

1 hour ago, 2006Coltsbestever said:

Not sure what the game plan is. Toub is a Special Teams Coach so who knows. I do like Nagy though. Not sure how the McDaniels interview went, does anyone know?

I doubt we will hear anything concrete.  I saw someone post an article from nbc sports that it went “very well”.  I personally do not believe that it will be Toub unless he can put together a good staff.  Personally I think it will be Nagy, Richard or McDaniels. 

[Coltsfanforlife12]

50 minutes ago, LSD9402 said:

 

They're already Coordinators. They can't move laterally you have to promote them if you're hiring them. KC and more importantly Toub with have to agree to this move, since its obviously a fake promotion.

They can move laterally but their current team has to give permission for them to interview for the job.  They cannot block a promotion to head coach. 

[krunk]

I'm starting to like Wilks over Toub

[Coltsfanforlife12]

3 minutes ago, krunk said:

I'm starting to like Wilks over Toub

I’ll take Richard over Toub.  He has more experience as a DC and he kept that defense in the top 12 even with the injuries to some of its best players.  He’s never had a secondary ranked lower than 12th in the league as a DB coach or DC.

[jshipp23]

Wilks is the real McCoy....

[Jason_]

2 hours ago, richard pallo said:

Nagy as coach, Toub OC?

 

What has toub done that gives you confidence that he could scheme an offense and call plays? 

[Colts_Fan12]

5 minutes ago, J@son said:

 

What has toub done that gives you confidence that he could scheme an offense and call plays? 

Stop asking this ? No one is ever gonna answer it. You keep trying but no one has a clue how to answer you cause they are super stumped!!

[Scott Pennock]

If this theory holds true, that means there would be an even BIGGER roster turnover than last year. We would have to add AT LEAST one difference maker at each level of the defense...while this has merit with the current 3-4 alignment it seems we're A LOT closer to a competitive defense without breaking the bank.

 

LCB: Wilson

FS: Hooker

SS: Geathers / Farley

RCB: FA / Draft Pick

Nickel: Hairston

 

LDE: FA / Draft Pick

UT: Hankins / Ridgeway

DT: Woods / Stewart

RDE: Sheard / Basham

* Anderson and Hunt aren't real good fits

 

WILL:  FA / Draft Pick / Grace ?

MIKE: Walker

SAM: Simon / Morrison

 

Needs:

 

2-3 more big corners to play press man

Melvin? Desir? Draft Pick?

 

2-3 more Edge Rushers

Ziggy Ansah? 1-2 Draft Picks?

 

Draft or sign a FA WILL or two

Mingo?

 

[Patagonia Chris]

22 hours ago, gnet550 said:

The whole Brad Kaaya thing throws me off too...unless Ballard knows Lucks done??? Which I don’t think to be true...is guess chances are pretty large that Jacoby is the backup next year 

 

Brad Kaaya is a high ceiling QB prospect who left school too early. If Luck comes back healthy then Brissett may have trade value. Either way, there is little downside to signing a once highly touted QB prospect who has practice squad eligibility. Especially when you consider that Indianapolis paid Scott Tolzien to take up a roster spot for the whole season.

[VaAllDay757]

I wonder what was said about desir

[crazycolt1]

9 hours ago, jshipp23 said:

I have a "feeling" Ballard wants a YES MAN, and Toub or Nagy is that guy unfortunately.......I'd rather have McDaniels by a mile, but he will want to do his  own thing which won't mesh with Ballard's vision....Prepare yourselves for Toub, a special teams coach without an offensive philosophy...We need an offensive minded coach who has a proven system, not another first time coach who is gonna make 1st time coach mistakes.....

I really don't know where you come up with this "yes" man stuff?

As far as Toub him not having an offensive philosophy would make no difference. That would fall on the OC he hired if he became a head coach. Toub is a long time veteran coach and has been around some pretty good coaches himself. The head coaches job is to put a group of coordinators and assistants together and get wins. His past history of organizing is pretty strong.