Chris Ballard

[dgambill]

15 hours ago, csmopar said:

Oh I know, its in my signature lol. 

 

He definitely took it personally. 

100% believe that was an Irsay thing...it was a throw in line...some red meat for Colts fans. It was a meaningless statement...and a true professional like Ballard it just seemed way too cheesy. It looked like he was almost embarrassed to say it.

[csmopar]

1 minute ago, DougDew said:

You're talking about leadership.  I get it.  But that only goes so far if the talent is mediocre.  His main job is to get the pieces first, and replace the ones that leave.  I think we should judge him on the performance of his main job, which is way too early to tell.

 

What I can speculate is this, he's put himself into a bit of a hole by using #1 picks on a FS and a G, when our LT and #1 WR will need replacing soon.  So far, he's benefited from the 4 most important positions on offense being given to him by his predecessor, QB, LT, #1 WR, and C.  He's going to have to replace 2 of those while also improving the overall quality of the team, in the process of changing schemes. 

 

How he talks about all of that in pressers is one of the least of my concerns.

While I get that, and agree it's far too soon to fully judge him, all I said was that he gained respect in my kind from his handling of that situation. I did not say that meant he was the best GM ever. Nor the contrary. Judging his draft picks is too early as well. This team has a TON of talent voids, all due to the previous GM. Outside of those 4 positions you mentioned, there wasn't much else. No way he'd fix it in a single off season

[crazycolt1]

3 minutes ago, stitches said:

Really? All I want to do is find something negative to + about? Seriously? In what world can you read my post and get this out of it? 

 

I didn't say anything about Ballard being different than other GMs. All GMs spin narratives and rhetoric. That's the point. I was responding specifically to the options in the poll and one of them was "Ballard is doing what he said he would do"... that's obviously not the case point blank when it comes to this specific narrative he's been pushing. 

When Ballard explained why he cut Simon he made it clear why he did.  You wanted to make it a point of negativity.  I understand why Ballard had to do what he did. If you don't that is your right. But if this is all you can come up with on the negative side I think we are in good hands with Ballard so far.

Look, I am not crowning him anything at this point but making an issue over Simon is nit picking.

[#12.]

I can't say any of his draft picks or acquisitions jumped off the screen in 2017.  I can't say any of his draft picks or acquisitions have jumped off the screen so far in 2018.  The players who did show a little something - Simon, Melvin, Hankins - were all shown the door.  

 

To date, I don't know what to think.  

[DougDew]

18 minutes ago, csmopar said:

While I get that, and agree it's far too soon to fully judge him, all I said was that he gained respect in my kind from his handling of that situation. I did not say that meant he was the best GM ever. Nor the contrary. Judging his draft picks is too early as well. This team has a TON of talent voids, all due to the previous GM. Outside of those 4 positions you mentioned, there wasn't much else. No way he'd fix it in a single off season

I like his presser's, don't get me wrong. 

 

Nobody is expecting him to fix it in one season like his predecessor did, but maintaining it when you're picking 25 and below is not that easy.  QB, LT, #1WR, and (probably) top 5 C are 4 first round draft picks he won't have to spend for a couple of years.  He has his franchise QB, so he could trade his high pick for more good picks. 

 

Where would he be if he had to stay put at #3 and draft Sam Darnold this year?

 

If the intent is to not win for a while to maintain high round draft picks, that's fine, but I doubt he's going to be open enough to say that in pressers.  He'll probably just say typical GM speak.

 

[LockeDown]

 

8 minutes ago, #12. said:

I can't say any of his draft picks or acquisitions jumped off the screen in 2017.  I can't say any of his draft picks or acquisitions have jumped off the screen so far in 2018.  The players who did show a little something - Simon, Melvin, Hankins -were all shown the door.  

 

To date, I don't know what to think.  

You can think that the FAs you mentioned are 3/4 guys and the rookies are 4/3 guys.  We are now in a 4/3 with rookies needing experience.  Would you honestly want to field a team that doesn’t fit your system?  Sooner or later that’s going to backfire even for Simon.

[stitches]

1 minute ago, crazycolt1 said:

When Ballard explained why he cut Simon he made it clear why he did.  You wanted to make it a point of negativity.  I understand why Ballard had to do what he did. If you don't that is your right. But if this is all you can come up with on the negative side I think we are in good hands with Ballard so far.

Look, I am not crowning him anything at this point but making an issue over Simon is nit picking.

I understand why he did it and as I said above(and in other threads) I don't even mind it. It's perfectly understandable and reasonable thing to do if you think we are not ready to compete(which it seems both I and Ballard think). But it doesn't make his "everything is won on the field, the lockerroom is watching" narrative any easier to defend after he cut a player who is obviously better than half our remaining defensive line. You simply decided to project on me that I thought this was some sort of huge negative, which I have repeatedly said it isn't.  I was simply responding to OP in what I considered a balanced and nuanced way. And I will say it for about 5th time in the last 2 days so you don't decide to put words in my mouth again - I'm good with cutting Simon. I don't think it's a huge loss and in the long-term it might turn out to be a positive because of all the development snaps our young players will get. With all that said the next time Ballard says "the best player will make it because the lockerroom is watching", I will just take it with a pinch of salt. 

[throwing BBZ]

16 minutes ago, stitches said:

Why did he keep him until now then? He knew Simon didn't have the speed in the beginning of training camp. Did he expect him to suddenly become faster at age 27-28? Why didn't he get a player to camp that had legitimate chance to make the roster? 

 

Let me put it this way - after the preseason we had, with Simon being arguably our best pass-rusher and multiple others disappointing or being a no-show, did he really have any chance in hell to make the roster? Did it matter what Simon did during the preseason or was his faith sealed the moment we changed the system in Feb-March? 

 

This was a farce. We kept him this long because we were trying to trade him, this is the real reason. Simon never had a shot to make this roster simply because he did more than enough to make the roster while players like Basham were trash once again and Simon still didn't make it while we are waiting for Basham to show something... anything really to prove that he deserves to be on an NFL roster... he didn't... and he still made the roster. What more could Simon have done to win the spot? 

 

edit: And again - I'm OK with this... I don't think this is some sort of a huge loss for the Colts,especially when we know we won't be competitive this year and the future development of the youth is probably more important and I understand why Ballard would do that, but when you do it, you don't get to come out and pretend that everything is won the the field. 

 

Awe, bet you were a we gonna make the playoffs guy.   
Ballard should have said he fired the guy because he was insurance in case his less expensive, or younger guys got hurt. Simon's latest injury in the same place as last year doomed him as trade bait for a draft pick or a piece we surely need. Way to go _____ Simon! 
Still, Ballard has about $2.5M of cold hard cash to spend on a future difference maker that Hopefully you will approve of.
Cash is King when you start dishing out Big Guarantees, and you need to think beyond this year and next or your bubble may burst.  

[LockeDown]

8 minutes ago, stitches said:

I understand why he did it and as I said above(and in other threads) I don't even mind it. It's perfectly understandable and reasonable thing to do if you think we are not ready to compete(which it seems both I and Ballard think). But it doesn't make his "everything is won on the field, the lockerroom is watching" narrative any easier to defend after he cut a player who is obviously better than half our remaining defensive line. You simply decided to project on me that I thought this was some sort of huge negative, which I have repeatedly said it isn't.  I was simply responding to OP in what I considered a balanced and nuanced way. And I will say it for about 5th time in the last 2 days so you don't decide to put words in my mouth again - I'm good with cutting Simon. I don't think it's a huge loss and in the long-term it might turn out to be a positive because of all the development snaps our young players will get. With all that said the next time Ballard says "the best player will make it because the lockerroom is watching", I will just take it with a pinch of salt. 

You do realize the only reason this happened is because we are year one into transitioning to a new system.  Going forward,  Ballard will NEVER again bring a 3/4 guy through the door and this scenario will not happen again.  I would say you don’t have to worry about the locker room.  

[DougDew]

5 minutes ago, stitches said:

I understand why he did it and as I said above(and in other threads) I don't even mind it. It's perfectly understandable and reasonable thing to do if you think we are not ready to compete(which it seems both I and Ballard think). But it doesn't make his "everything is won on the field, the lockerroom is watching" narrative any easier to defend after he cut a player who is obviously better than half our remaining defensive line. You simply decided to project on me that I thought this was some sort of huge negative, which I have repeatedly said it isn't.  I was simply responding to OP in what I considered a balanced and nuanced way. And I will say it for about 5th time in the last 2 days so you don't decide to put words in my mouth again - I'm good with cutting Simon. I don't think it's a huge loss and in the long-term it might turn out to be a positive because of all the development snaps our young players will get. With all that said the next time Ballard says "the best player will make it because the lockerroom is watching", I will just take it with a pinch of salt. 

People throw out things like "only so many players remain on the roster from previous seasons" as if its the quality alone that drives it.

 

Scheme change drives it too.  Brackett and Freeney were cut and a 2nd rounder was used on VD, a press man corner.  Roster moves happened the last time a defensive scheme change happened.

 

Hankins and Simon were CBs own signings, and Anderson was moved because of scheme change.  I doubt many other defensive players were a good fit or worth developing.

[deedub75]

I think he's doing what he'd said he'd do, but that doesn't mean what he's doing is going to work.  

[stitches]

1 minute ago, throwing BBZ said:

 

Awe, bet you were a we gonna make the playoffs guy.   
Ballard should have said he fired the guy because he was insurance in case his less expensive, or younger guys got hurt. Simon's latest injury in the same place as last year doomed him as trade bait for a draft pick or a piece we surely need. Way to go _____ Simon! 
Still, Ballard has about $2.5M of cold hard cash to spend on a future difference maker that Hopefully you will approve of.
Cash is King when you start dishing out Big Guarantees, and you need to think beyond this year and next or your bubble may burst.  

Lol, you guys are so weird. Why do you need to project whatever makes sense to you on me and my thoughts about Ballard and the Colts. I've never been impatient with this team. Like I need to have been desperate to make the playoffs in order to not like Simon being cut... (which I don't - I don't mind him getting cut as I said in the very post you are quoting). It's also weird that you think my point is any less valid if I thought we were going to make the playoffs. 

 

I've held from before we fired Pagano that this is not a season for big expectations. Here's from like... 4 days ago:

 

Quote

 

For me priority this season should be developing the young players and getting Luck back into the groove of NFL football. I don't care much about how many games we win. A successful season for me would be Luck staying healthy and looking like his old self by the end of the year as well as finding players among the rookies and second year players who look like future building blocks for this team + 2-3-4+ of them looking like future pro-bowlers. We need difference makers all around the roster. 

 

Looking competent on the field as a team would be a good bonus and a preliminary condition to Ballard feeling more comfortable accelerating the building process by using some of the free agency money we have on impact players. I want this season to be the foundation for next year's fringe contender and the year after's legit contender. 

 

 

Now try again without the condescension. 

 

I've come away from this thread thinking that people can't handle even the mildest of perceived criticism of Ballard. 

[stitches]

19 minutes ago, LockeDown said:

You do realize the only reason this happened is because we are year one into transitioning to a new system.  Going forward,  Ballard will NEVER again bring a 3/4 guy through the door and this scenario will not happen again.  I would say you don’t have to worry about the locker room.  

It's possible it never happens... but it's possible(I think it's likely) it does. Maybe not for this specific reason. Maybe it will be money(again - could be legitimate reason), maybe chemistry(legitimate), maybe it's something else we cannot even think about right now... 

[deedub75]

41 minutes ago, dgambill said:

100% believe that was an Irsay thing...it was a throw in line...some red meat for Colts fans. It was a meaningless statement...and a true professional like Ballard it just seemed way too cheesy. It looked like he was almost embarrassed to say it.

 

He should have checked the record between this "rivalry" before he said that statement.  LOL!

[throwing BBZ]

20 minutes ago, #12. said:

I can't say any of his draft picks or acquisitions jumped off the screen in 2017.  I can't say any of his draft picks or acquisitions have jumped off the screen so far in 2018.  The players who did show a little something - Simon, Melvin, Hankins - were all shown the door.  

 

To date, I don't know what to think.  

 

 THINK rebuild.
Simon played in 9 games last season and had 3 sacks, and lightly for now, re-injured the same neck area. Gee, if we kept him this season he would have been in the way of developing our future players and for how many games this season, and sucking off about $2.5 M in cash we will Need to sign FA in the near future.
 Melvin had a career year in the 10 games he was able to stay on the field last season.
By most accounts he Chose to leave.
 Hankins was a very good run stuffer but a Huge detriment when it came to pressuring the QB.
QB's throw often on 1st down when he was usually out there doing nothing to discomfort the QB.  BTW, he is currently Unemployed. Al Woods had a slightly higher PFF grade for last season and playing for about $7M less.

[deedub75]

30 minutes ago, DougDew said:

I like his presser's, don't get me wrong. 

 

Nobody is expecting him to fix it in one season like his predecessor did, but maintaining it when you're picking 25 and below is not that easy.  QB, LT, #1WR, and (probably) top 5 C are 4 first round draft picks he won't have to spend for a couple of years.  He has his franchise QB, so he could trade his high pick for more good picks. 

 

Where would he be if he had to stay put at #3 and draft Sam Darnold this year?

 

If the intent is to not win for a while to maintain high round draft picks, that's fine, but I doubt he's going to be open enough to say that in pressers.  He'll probably just say typical GM speak.

 

 

Don't give too much credit to his predecessor.  He had a perfect storm of good Luck (pun intended) in 2012.  Plus, the division was much worse back then.  Grigson did have much less to work with money wise though.  

[deedub75]

3 minutes ago, throwing BBZ said:

 

 THINK rebuild.
Simon played in 9 games last season and had 3 sacks, and lightly for now, re-injured the same neck area. Gee, if we kept him this season he would have been in the way of developing our future players and for how many games this season, and sucking off about $2.5 M in cash we will Need to sign FA in the near future.
 Melvin had a career year in the 10 games he was able to stay on the field last season.
By most accounts he Chose to leave.
 Hankins was a very good run stuffer but a Huge detriment when it came to pressuring the QB.
QB's throw often on 1st down when he was usually out there doing nothing to discomfort the QB.  BTW, he is currently Unemployed. Al Woods had a slightly higher PFF grade for last season and playing for about $7M less.

 

I'm not upset about Simon being gone.  It just made no sense to keep him as long as they did.  If Simon would have gotten cut earlier, he could have latched on with another team.  Who knows?

[crazycolt1]

14 minutes ago, stitches said:

 

 

 

I've come away from this thread thinking that people can't handle even the mildest of perceived criticism of Ballard. 

I think your criticism of Ballard with bringing up Simon and then adding the locker room into it was not warranted. 

I know the buck stops with Ballard but it's not like he is doing these things without consulting the coaching staff. 

 

[crazycolt1]

9 minutes ago, deedub75 said:

 

I'm not upset about Simon being gone.  It just made no sense to keep him as long as they did.  If Simon would have gotten cut earlier, he could have latched on with another team.  Who knows?

Ballard said he was trying to make a trade happen with Simon. Kind of self explanatory IMO.

[deedub75]

1 minute ago, crazycolt1 said:

Ballard said he was trying to make a trade happen with Simon. Kind of self explanatory IMO.

 

Who knows when he was trying to make a trade. I would assume it was late in the game. Simon should have been gone after the season or before training camp is what I’m saying. Why wait so close to when he’s due $3M?  He knew he wasn’t a fit. 

[Four2itus]

10 minutes ago, throwing BBZ said:

 

 THINK rebuild.
Simon played in 9 games last season and had 3 sacks, and lightly for now, re-injured the same neck area. Gee, if we kept him this season he would have been in the way of developing our future players and for how many games this season, and sucking off about $2.5 M in cash we will Need to sign FA in the near future.
 Melvin had a career year in the 10 games he was able to stay on the field last season.
By most accounts he Chose to leave.
 Hankins was a very good run stuffer but a Huge detriment when it came to pressuring the QB.
QB's throw often on 1st down when he was usually out there doing nothing to discomfort the QB.  BTW, he is currently Unemployed. Al Woods had a slightly higher PFF grade for last season and playing for about $7M less.

Exactly. 

 

What I said..."What if Simon is not likely to be playing in 3 years? What if the staff thinks there might be a young man in the building that might be "That" guy in 3 years, but needs to reps and roster spot to make it happen?"

 

What Chris Ballard said later..."They need to play. They need to play, and they need to get game action. And that's how they're gonna get better."

 

Now I know he was talking about LB's at the time, but that is not a "Position specific" comment. Nor do I think I know anything, it just seems obvious to me why Simon was cut. 

[throwing BBZ]

2 hours ago, Coltsman1788 said:

Very good point also.

 

Actually he is totally missing the point.
Simon fails at height and weight (strength) to play the same position as Basham, and lacks the burst of Sheard or Ballard favorite Turay.
 Simon could have helped if there were injuries enough to need his body, or been good trade bait if he didn't have a bad neck.

[crazycolt1]

1 minute ago, deedub75 said:

 

Who knows when he was trying to make a trade. I would assume it was late in the game. Simon should have been gone after the season or before training camp is what I’m saying. Why wait so close to when he’s due $3M?  He knew he wasn’t a fit. 

Because it was cut time?  If he was working on making a trade then he had to have him on the roster. Cutting him earlier would have stopped him from trying.  Like I said, kind of self explanatory.

[DougDew]

29 minutes ago, deedub75 said:

 

Don't give too much credit to his predecessor.  He had a perfect storm of good Luck (pun intended) in 2012.  Plus, the division was much worse back then.  Grigson did have much less to work with money wise though.  

I'm not giving any judgmental credit.  I'm stating the facts. I'm not concerned about comparisons like many, because as you point out, its always an apples to oranges comparison. 

 

Our two previous GMs had to use their high round draft picks on a QB, did not have the opportunity to trade them, and then were picking 25 or later each year (because of winning in weak divisions?).

 

Before Anthony Costanzo, Polian's last first round picks were Jerry Hughes, Donald Brown, Tony Ugoh (traded), and Anthony Gonzalez.  All were late in the round. We've seen the results of that.  Excluding Kelly, Grigson's last first round picks were Dorsett, Werner, and TRich (trade).  All were late in the round.  We have seen the results of that.

 

Ballard had the ability to not draft Darnold and accumulate picks with which to build through the draft.  We haven't started winning yet.  Once we begin winning, he'll have to maintain the roster by picking low in each round, or do something to flip positions. 

 

If people want to compare GMS, we'll have to wait to see what happens after we start winning.

 

As far as cap.  IMO, there is only one way to approach free agency.  That is to never sign FAs to contracts where they demand a lot of guaranteed money, which forces the team into dead cap space.  Polian did that, and we see the results of it.

[akcolt]

1 minute ago, deedub75 said:

 

I'm not upset about Simon being gone.  It just made no sense to keep him as long as they did.  If Simon would have gotten cut earlier, he could have latched on with another team.  Who knows?

Ballard spoke to that it was on him he loves Simon thinks he's a heck of a football player he really wanted it to work. They had a long talk over the summer he held on too long hoping it'd be different but at the end of the day it just didn't work you have to have speed coming off that edge It was one the toughest decision he's had to make and it sticks with him that one hurts. He laid it out there opened more then he had to. If his feelings weren't  sincere I was fooled. If Simon is 100% from the neck injury he won't have trouble finding a job nobody has enough pass rushers. 

[throwing BBZ]

4 minutes ago, crazycolt1 said:

Because it was cut time?  If he was working on making a trade then he had to have him on the roster. Cutting him earlier would have stopped him from trying.  Like I said, kind of self explanatory.

 

They want to brag on Simon being such an effective player, yet can't get how his value to some other team with a need might get us a trade for a player Ballard thinks could fit or get a draft pick. Ya, THAT is weird.   

[ColtsBlueFL]

1 hour ago, #12. said:

I can't say any of his draft picks or acquisitions jumped off the screen in 2017.  I can't say any of his draft picks or acquisitions have jumped off the screen so far in 2018.  The players who did show a little something - Simon, Melvin, Hankins - were all shown the door.  

 

When regime change (especially when it involves scheme change) comes, people get released.  Happens to every team (why not go check out NY Giants since Gettleman and Shurmur have arrived...).  The old switch to a 3-4 and build the monster failed.  New regimes do not build off players from a failed system unless they are of elite talent.  New regimes want to succeed or fail on their own terms, with their own people running their scheme.  Hankins is a bigger Zero technique, 2 gap, lane plugging nose tackle.  Eberflus runs a fast and penetrating 1 gap 4-3.  He won't, and I don't expect him to, change his scheme and playbook to keep Hankins on board.  Simon is at least 3rd at LDE depth, and does not have the physical (height, length, burst, speed, and reaction) attributes to be an RDE in this system, etc... Nevertheless, it was a tough decision for him to make anyway.

 

Let the new coaches and 2nd year GM develop the team first.

 

50 minutes ago, LockeDown said:

You do realize the only reason this happened is because we are year one into transitioning to a new system.  Going forward,  Ballard will NEVER again bring a 3/4 guy through the door and this scenario will not happen again.  I would say you don’t have to worry about the locker room.  

 

Exactly.  Ballard was in Chicago during many years of the Bears/Lovie Smith Tampa 2 days, so he know exactly the type of player Eberflus needs at each position (he scouted and brought in Charles 'Peanut' Tillman, Nathan Vasher, Tommie Harris, etc... while there), and whether a player fits, or they have to go get some.

 

[Bshultz]

The young guys need snaps to develop, That's what this year is about. Hopefully they develop and get better along the way. Some will and some won't. 

 

Simon rookie year 0 sacks, 4 tckls. 

Basham rookie year 2 sacks, 5 tckls.

 

Let's get a little perspective. It took Simon into his third year to get 2 sacks. 

[Coltsman1788]

53 minutes ago, throwing BBZ said:

 

Actually he is totally missing the point.
Simon fails at height and weight (strength) to play the same position as Basham, and lacks the burst of Sheard or Ballard favorite Turay.
 Simon could have helped if there were injuries enough to need his body, or been good trade bait if he didn't have a bad neck.

I think he is aware of Ballard's justification of his decision as most of us are by now.  He was speaking more towards the consistency of Ballard's message to the guys in the locker room.  We see now that it is not about who works hard and earns their spot as Ballard said in the past.  It's about who has the best measurables and fits the scheme best.   So a player can outperform his competition but still not make it over a guy who fits the scheme better but is not performing as well.  A little different from "the players know who deserve it" rhetoric that Ballard was espousing.  I happen to think he raised an interesting point.  You may not.  That's how it goes on here.  Also the only reason he brought it up at all is that it directly related to one of the poll choices.  Stitches was simply clarifying his reason for voting the way he did.  Not necessarily bashing Ballard.  Read all of his responses not just that one post.

[adamthyst]

He's doing what he said he'd do. I remember he said that he may or may not make the best decisions, and he's handled situations like McDaniels and John Simon so well. I'm 100% on board with him.

 

 

It's only his 2nd year as GM, I'll give him time since he's doing so much better than Grigson is in only two seasons. 

[ztboiler]

2 hours ago, DougDew said:

You're talking about leadership.  I get it.  But that only goes so far if the talent is mediocre.  His main job is to get the pieces first, and replace the ones that leave.  I think we should judge him on the performance of his main job, which is way too early to tell.

 

What I can speculate is this, he's put himself into a bit of a hole by using #1 picks on a FS and a G, when our LT and #1 WR will need replacing soon.  So far, he's benefited from the 4 most important positions on offense being given to him by his predecessor, QB, LT, #1 WR, and C.  He's going to have to replace 2 of those while also improving the overall quality of the team, in the process of changing schemes. 

 

How he talks about all of that in pressers is one of the least of my concerns.

Now C is one of the 4 most important positions on the roster?

[DougDew]

33 minutes ago, ztboiler said:

Now C is one of the 4 most important positions on the roster?

Not roster.  I said offense.  You can quibble about RT, but C is probably more important than G.  I guess you could consider everydown TE being more important, but Ballard doesn't have to find one of those either.   The O was stacked for him coming in. 

 

Franchise QB, LT, #1WR, C, TE.  He'd have to probably replace each one of those with a 1st round pick.  Doyle probably a 2nd.

[Dingus McGirt]

This comment thread is nearly as painful as the never-ending funeral of last week.

[crazycolt1]

40 minutes ago, ztboiler said:

Now C is one of the 4 most important positions on the roster?

C only handles the ball 100% of the time. That's all, no big deal.

[ztboiler]

2 hours ago, DougDew said:

Not roster.  I said offense.  You can quibble about RT, but C is probably more important than G.  I guess you could consider everydown TE being more important, but Ballard doesn't have to find one of those either.   The O was stacked for him coming in. 

 

Franchise QB, LT, #1WR, C, TE.  He'd have to probably replace each one of those with a 1st round pick.  Doyle probably a 2nd.

Reading comprehension fail on my part there, my apologies...even still, you just made a solid case for C being less vital than stated.  For my money both G spots are more vital because DCs can scheme for 1 on 1 match ups with interior rushers against Gs.  Also RT is kind of obvious as more important.  TE is too if you get an impact guy.

2 hours ago, crazycolt1 said:

C only handles the ball 100% of the time. That's all, no big deal.

Logical fallacy 

[crazycolt1]

29 minutes ago, ztboiler said:

 

Logical fallacy 

You may overlook the job of a center and his importance but he also run blocks, pass blocks and protects the QB from pressure up the middle. He must also deliver the ball to the QB in the shotgun.  Nah, your right. The C position is of no concern.

      Oh I forgot, the C position normally calls the formation. We know that means nothing.

[NewColtsFan]

2 hours ago, DougDew said:

Not roster.  I said offense.  You can quibble about RT, but C is probably more important than G.  I guess you could consider everydown TE being more important, but Ballard doesn't have to find one of those either.   The O was stacked for him coming in. 

 

Franchise QB, LT, #1WR, C, TE.  He'd have to probably replace each one of those with a 1st round pick.  Doyle probably a 2nd.

 

“The offense was STACKED for him coming in.”?!?

 

WTH?!?

 

1.   His franchise QB was badly hurt the day he signed on and there was no guarantee he’d ever be the same.

 

2.   Three of the five OL spots were giant question marks at best.  

 

3.    The running back position was bare.

 

4.    There was little behind T. Y. Hilton at WR.

 

Would you care to amend those remarks?   Because they’re flat-out wrong.

 

[BR-549]

4 hours ago, stitches said:

Lol, you guys are so weird. Why do you need to project whatever makes sense to you on me and my thoughts about Ballard and the Colts. I've never been impatient with this team. Like I need to have been desperate to make the playoffs in order to not like Simon being cut... (which I don't - I don't mind him getting cut as I said in the very post you are quoting). It's also weird that you think my point is any less valid if I thought we were going to make the playoffs. 

 

I've held from before we fired Pagano that this is not a season for big expectations. Here's from like... 4 days ago:

 

 

Now try again without the condescension. 

 

I've come away from this thread thinking that people can't handle even the mildest of perceived criticism of Ballard. 

Its not Ballard, Grigson, Pagano, Frank, Irsay or anyone else.  Its the nature of this forum.  

 

Every thread starts out the same ... generally good interaction, and then one post gets a member's feathers ruffled and the rest of the thread is turned into attacks on statements, opinions or thoughts of another member or members - sometimes it even becomes personal.  Usually there is a little productive interaction trickled in but, mostly unhealthy conversation, and full blown in your face of "you are wrong and I am right" and there is no other opinion allowed. 

 

It really gets old, which is one of the reasons I stopped hanging around as much. Be damned if anyone is allowed to have their own opinion and not get ridiculed or made to feel bad for expressing themselves. 

 

Its okay to disagree, but disagree and move on (I am not speaking to any one member, just generally making a statement).  STOP TRYING TO CHANGE PEOPLE, we are who we are.

 

I wouldn't enjoy being a mod for this forum .... at all.  Constant babysitting. 

[csmopar]

6 hours ago, DougDew said:

I like his presser's, don't get me wrong. 

 

Nobody is expecting him to fix it in one season like his predecessor did, but maintaining it when you're picking 25 and below is not that easy.  QB, LT, #1WR, and (probably) top 5 C are 4 first round draft picks he won't have to spend for a couple of years.  He has his franchise QB, so he could trade his high pick for more good picks. 

 

Where would he be if he had to stay put at #3 and draft Sam Darnold this year?

 

If the intent is to not win for a while to maintain high round draft picks, that's fine, but I doubt he's going to be open enough to say that in pressers.  He'll probably just say typical GM speak.

 

I know. but that said, he got the best OL in the draft, one we desperately needed. I say lets see how it plays out before we go too far. (He did trade back remember)

[AZColt11]

I think, much like the roster, it's going to take a few years before we really know what we have.  He has a plan, and that plan (as he has stated) is primarily to build via the draft.  That is not the quick fix and win now scenario a lot of people would like.  But I will say this, he is sticking to his guns, win or lose.  And we won't know on that for a while.