Jump to content
Jared Cisneros

Luck or Ballard, who is more important to the Colts?

Who is more important to our team  

104 members have voted

  1. 1. Who is more important to the Colts



Recommended Posts

3 minutes ago, Coltsman1788 said:

Bill Polian built Bills teams that went to 4 Super Bowls...then took an expansion Panthers team to respectability before moving on to Indy and presiding over the Manning era.  Six super bowl appearances across 3 franchises and 1 Lombardi. That’s one for you. 

 

Polian never did it with the same team. I didn't say Ballard won't go to an other, then-league-worst team after his Indy time, pick his Luck/Manning at 1/1 and build a new championship team around that guy again. :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Peterk2011 said:

 

You're right, he indeed built a second team. Two SB's in 22 years, great achievement. Still.... Manning went to 4 SBs, won 2 in 18 years.

In all fairness...Peyton is the only franchise QB to pull that off with two different teams.   So he is the exception rather than the rule.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Peterk2011 said:

 

Polian never did it with the same team. I didn't say Ballard won't go to an other, then-league-worst team after his Indy time, pick his Luck/Manning at 1/1 and build a new championship team around that guy again. :)

True but he is a good example of how a good GM can have success over a very long period of time.  He drafted 2 franchise quarterbacks in an era of success spanning from Jim Kelly to Peyton Manning.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, Coltsman1788 said:

In all fairness...Peyton is the only franchise QB to pull that off with two different teams.   So he is the exception rather than the rule.  

That is the main reason why Peyton is top 3 ever. No QB will ever do that again either Imo.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23 minutes ago, Coltsman1788 said:

True but he is a good example of how a good GM can have success over a very long period of time.  He drafted 2 franchise quarterbacks in an era of success spanning from Jim Kelly to Peyton Manning.  

 

Sorry...   I’m not following?    Who drafted two franchise QBs?   

 

Not Polian, he drafted Peyton.   Luck was drafted on Grigson’s watch.

 

Who are you referring to?   

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, NewColtsFan said:

 

Sorry...   I’m not following?    Who drafted two franchise QBs?   

 

Not Polian, he drafted Peyton.   Luck was drafted on Grigson’s watch.

 

Who are you referring to?   

I’m talking about Bill Polian over his career.  Jim Kelly with the Bills.  Manning with the Colts. 

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Coltsman1788 said:

I’m talking about Bill Polian over his career.  Jim Kelly with the Bills.  Manning with the Colts. 

Nice point, Jim Kelly is a top 20 QB ever with ease :thmup:. He was great and a hall of famer. 

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, 2006Coltsbestever said:

Nice point, Jim Kelly is a top 20 QB ever with ease :thmup:. He was great and a hall of famer. 

Thanks...yeah technically the Bills drafted Kelly in 83 and held his rights.  Kelly opted to play for the USFL for awhile and wanted to sign with the LA Raiders.  However it was Polian that finally was able to convince Kelly to sign with the Bills.  Here is a good article about it...

 

https://www.timesreporter.com/article/20150730/SPORTS/150739882

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Not saying this is a spite against Ballard because of the crap roster and the circumstances of how soon Brisett was entrenched into the starting lineup, but we did only win 4 games without Luck

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, CR91 said:

Not saying this is a spite against Ballard because of the crap roster and the circumstances of how soon Brisett was entrenched into the starting lineup, but we did only win 4 games without Luck

I like Brissett but we would be 7-9 maybe 8-8 if lucky with him starting this season. Luck gives us a plus 4 IMO and a chance at the final 4 or a SB. I say 11-5 with Luck.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Coltsman1788 said:

I’m talking about Bill Polian over his career.  Jim Kelly with the Bills.  Manning with the Colts. 

 

Turns out, Polian didn’t draft Kelly.  Polian happened to be the Bills GM when Kelly joined Buffalo in 1986.

 

But Kelky was drafted in the famous QB draft of 83 with Elway and Marino.   Polian didn’t join Buffalo for three more years.   Some guy I never heard of, Pat McGruder, was the Bills GM in 83.   Turns out, it was his only year as the Bills GM.  Kelly was in the USFL for a few years before coming to Buffalo in 86.

 

I never knew any of this until you answered my last post.   I thought I’d look it up and that’s what I found....

 

Go figure...  

 

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, NewColtsFan said:

 

Turns out, Polian didn’t draft Kelly.  Polian happened to be the Bills GM when Kelly joined Buffalo in 1986.

 

But Kelky was drafted in the famous QB draft of 83 with Elway and Marino.   Polian didn’t join Buffalo for three more years.   Some guy I never heard of, Pat McGruder, was the Bills GM in 83.   Turns out, it was his only year as the Bills GM.  Kelly was in the USFL for a few years before coming to Buffalo in 86.

 

I never knew any of this until you answered my last post.   I thought I’d look it up and that’s what I found....

 

Go figure...  

 

 

Exactly..if you read my post that was 3 posts before this one that I quoted from you will see where I pointed this out to ColtsBestever2006 and provided an article explaining all of that.    I anticipated you would bring that up sooner or later.  Lol.

 

 I too thought he was drafted by Polian initially and read up on it some more after responding to your post.  Very interesting indeed. Polian still was pivotal in bringing Kelly ultimately to Buffalo as he was the GM who finally convinced him to sign and built those good teams around him.   

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It’s so cute to have a fan base in love with their GM again...

 

Let’s say the Colts go 8-8 next year:

Luck’s still a great QB.  A franchise QB.

Ballard missed on some guys, but he can do better next year with some course correction.

 

Year after that Colts go 8-8:

Luck’s still a great QB.  A franchise QB.

Ballard’s a bum.

 

There’s your answer. That’s football 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, 2006Coltsbestever said:

Luck took a 2-14 team to 11-5 as a rookie with a crap roster with the exception of Reggie Wayne, Mathis, and TY Hilton. Most people had us winning 4 or 5 games that season. We won 11 because of #12.

 

And those three names singlehandedly contributed every bit as much to win many of those games... if you think #12 was the reason we best GB that year... If you think Bruce Arians wasn't a huge reason we won 11 games that year... 

 

#12 didn't single-handedly win those games. Period. Matt Hasselbeck did pretty well with that crap roster a few years later did he not? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Too hard of a choice for me.   Ballard is building a sold team that could win without Luck.   But without Luck, the team is not winning 10-11 games.   

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 hours ago, 2006Coltsbestever said:

Tom Brady isn't your average QB, he is one of the best ever if not the best of all-time. People see how great Belichick is and think he can plug in any QB and win SB's. No he can't, he can win a lot of games and proved that with Cassell in 2008 but winning 10 or 11 games in the regular season and winning SB's is a big difference. Take Brady away and Belichick IMO would probably only have 1 or 2 SB wins. Belichick is that great but Brady is super clutch in the playoffs. 

At first I was like "what kind of question is that, who would you rather have?" More I thought on tougher question to answer than meets the eye. But I agree, and that's why I used Brady as an example of 1 way to success and the 80's Redskins as total opposite. 2 different ways, both worked. How many SB's would Brady have "without" Belichick? Nobody knows..Its a tough choice on who would you rather have, the league has changed and a franchise QB is more important than ever. I like what Ballard is building and tho..   

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Myles said:

Too hard of a choice for me.   Ballard is building a sold team that could win without Luck.   But without Luck, the team is not winning 10-11 games.   

We hope the bolded is true, and we hope we never find out if it is true!

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, coltsva said:

We hope the bolded is true, and we hope we never find out if it is true!

I hope so too.   The team really feels like something we haven't had in a long, long time.  A solid team that can win without extraordinary play at the QB position.   However, Luck brings us even higher.  Pretty awesome time for fans of the Colts.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, coltsfanej said:

 

You said the value an owner sees in an employee is reflective in what they are paid. 

 

Meaning: you think Tom Brady is worth more than the HC/GM Bill Belichick because Bill makes a fraction (even at $10-13 million a year) of what Brady pulls from the franchise. 

 

And yes I am sure that Bill Belichick would disagree with you on that... 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Nice poll, 42-41 Luck. Can't be more even. I think most in here realize we have a great QB and a great GM. Lets enjoy the ride for the next decade.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Right now, I would be leaning more towards Chris Ballard. Luck can't win it all on his own and it's up to Chris Ballard to provide Luck with a Superbowl caliber roster.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 hours ago, ColtStrong2013 said:

 

You said the value an owner sees in an employee is reflective in what they are paid. 

 

Meaning: you think Tom Brady is worth more than the HC/GM Bill Belichick because Bill makes a fraction (even at $10-13 million a year) of what Brady pulls from the franchise. 

 

And yes I am sure that Bill Belichick would disagree with you on that... 

 

Webster's dictionary defines worth as -monetary value.

 

Cambridge dictionary defines worth as -having a particular value, especially in money. 

 

So again by definition, Brady is worth more than Belichick. 

 

That does not mean that I think he is more important to the team. 

 

Importance and impact to the team are not the sole determinants to value/worth . Value/worth is also determined by the market of the position. That's why average QBs are worth more on the open market than star RBs. Doesn't mean the star RB is less important to the team. Just means he's not worth $20 million a year. 

 

I don't think we are in the disagreement that you feel we are. Just believe we are using different definitions to worth and value. 

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 5/21/2019 at 9:41 AM, coltsfanej said:

 

Webster's dictionary defines worth as -monetary value.

 

Cambridge dictionary defines worth as -having a particular value, especially in money. 

 

So again by definition, Brady is worth more than Belichick. 

 

That does not mean that I think he is more important to the team. 

 

Importance and impact to the team are not the sole determinants to value/worth . Value/worth is also determined by the market of the position. That's why average QBs are worth more on the open market than star RBs. Doesn't mean the star RB is less important to the team. Just means he's not worth $20 million a year. 

 

I don't think we are in the disagreement that you feel we are. Just believe we are using different definitions to worth and value. 

 

 

 

 

Worth and value may be synonyms but they have different definitions bud. 

 

Your original post said value to the team. The regard that something is held to deserve. The importance or usefullness. Bellichick is going to be the boss in NE for his life if he chooses to do so. His usefullness is infinite. He makes significantly more than other Head coaches in the league. Tom brady isn't even in the discussion for highest paid qb in the league. Monetary talk in this regard is irrelevant. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 5/21/2019 at 9:41 AM, coltsfanej said:

Importance and impact to the team are not the sole determinants to value/worth . Value/worth is also determined by the market of the position. That's why average QBs are worth more on the open market than star RBs. Doesn't mean the star RB is less important to the team. Just means he's not worth $20 million a year. 

 

I don't think we are in the disagreement that you feel we are. Just believe we are using different definitions to worth and value. 

 

 

 

 

 

The literal title of this is who is more "important"... You brought money as an argument into this by stating you believed the value is reflected in their pay. I think you are confusing yourself here. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 5/19/2019 at 8:50 AM, mirobi48 said:

Both 

 

Well, as of this post, the poll is tied 43-43, so I think you might be right.  haha

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, ColtStrong2013 said:

 

Worth and value may be synonyms but they have different definitions bud. 

 

Your original post said value to the team. The regard that something is held to deserve. The importance or usefullness. Bellichick is going to be the boss in NE for his life if he chooses to do so. His usefullness is infinite. He makes significantly more than other Head coaches in the league. Tom brady isn't even in the discussion for highest paid qb in the league. Monetary talk in this regard is irrelevant. 

I was referring to definition of valuable being: 

Webster's 

a: having monetary value

b: worth a good price. 

 

You are right in there being other definitions as well when speaking of worth and value. 

 

But I do feel that pay is an important marker for how important a employer feels that you are. But definitely not the only factor. 

 

I only brought in compensation as evidence that could be considered.

 

 Other than that it's just a matter of opinion. And the only way one could prove it is for one to have more success without the other. Same as with Tom and Bill. Would they have won all those SBs without one over the other? We will never know. Maybe without Bill, Tom never gets a shot and is out of the league after a few years as a back-up. Maybe without Tom, Bill is ran out of town after a few disappointing seasons and neither become the legends they are today. There is no way of knowing for sure. So to me it's just a matter of opinion. 

 

But if you don't feel money is a factor that is fine with me. We all have different ways of looking at things, if we didn't this would be a pretty boring forum to visit. 

 

As with Luck and Ballard, I hope it is a long time before we have to find out which one is more important. But it is a fun question to consider. 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, coltsfanej said:

But if you don't feel money is a factor that is fine with me. We all have different ways of looking at things, if we didn't this would be a pretty boring forum to visit

 

I believe Money in this argument is comparing apples and oranges. You can't compare qb money to head coach money. Ever. It has to do more with the salary cap and the market than the value they bring to the team. There are some really poor qb's making as much or more than Tom Brady. 

 

I personally know employees of businesses that make more than the successors of the business (most of them family-ran businesses) solely because of the market and their longevity at the firm, not because what they bring to the table. They aren't less valuable to their parents in the business because they are paid less. It's the circumstances that the pay reflect. There are some really poor employees that are tenured in and making more than everyone else in businesses everywhere. They aren't more valuable, I promise you. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, ColtStrong2013 said:

 

I believe Money in this argument is comparing apples and oranges. You can't compare qb money to head coach money. Ever. It has to do more with the salary cap and the market than the value they bring to the team. There are some really poor qb's making as much or more than Tom Brady. 

 

I personally know employees of businesses that make more than the successors of the business (most of them family-ran businesses) solely because of the market and their longevity at the firm, not because what they bring to the table. They aren't less valuable to their parents in the business because they are paid less. It's the circumstances that the pay reflect. There are some really poor employees that are tenured in and making more than everyone else in businesses everywhere. They aren't more valuable, I promise you. 

And I totally agree with that from a productivity view point. I have had to pick up my share of slack in nursing left by nurses with years more of experience than myself. All the while they are making much more money.  So in that manner I would be more valuable/important to the unit/floor I was working, but the experience they brought when hired in made them a more valuable/worth more to the company and so started at a higher salary than I did.... 

 

And I agree it is a apples to oranges comparison. But if even an average orange costs $15-20 million while the best apple on the market can be had for $12million. Then the market dictates that apples are more valuable than oranges. Even if an apple a day keeps the doctor away and in that way would be more valuable to your health lol. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, coltsfanej said:

And I agree it is a apples to oranges comparison. But if even an average orange costs $15-20 million while the best apple on the market can be had for $12million. Then the market dictates that apples are more valuable than oranges. Even if an apple a day keeps the doctor away and in that way would be more valuable to your health lol.

 

If there wasn't a cap that drove up the price of an orange, then I would agree. But it isn't the case here. 

 

Apples and oranges alike have many health benefits making them both valuable if they are properly utilized. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Luck by a long shot.  

 

You could still trade Luck away for multiple firsts.  You think you could trade Ballard for that?  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Valpo2004 said:

Luck by a long shot.  

 

You could still trade Luck away for multiple firsts.  You think you could trade Ballard for that?  

 

It would be a nonstarter for both Ballard and Luck, so it's a moot point. Considering Ballard makes the trades for picks, I doubt he would consider trading himself to a team that is giving up so much for him to work with... haha

 

NY Jets- "Chris, we love trading with you... Would you consider accepting two first rounders?"

 

CB- "I'm listening... for whom?"

 

Jets- "Um, you." 

 

CB- "So Indianapolis gets two first rounders, and you get me in return. Why would I do that?" 

 

Jets- "Well you'll have a roster with Sam Darnold thanks to... you, for the 2018 draft trade. And Leveon Bell. Sound good?" 

 

CB- "2 first rounds and 3 second round picks lost in two years... for Me and Sam Darnold?"

 

Jets - "Yep." 

 

CB- "Nope."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We have had two top notch quarterbacks over the span of the last 

20 or so years that most franchises would drool over to have on

their teams, so someone please tell me how having a top tier QB 

is better than having a top tier GM after one title and two SB

appearances over that time span?

 

To me, having a GM pulling the strings toward a well balanced team

and managing the cap space correctly is worth more than one player.

 

We now have a QB friendly system in place, much like what the Pats

have had over that same span of years. The Eagles won a title with a 

back up QB with a QB friendly system also.

 

Rodgers and Brees has one title a piece with other big names such

as Marino having zero which makes my vote for Ballard much more

solid. :peek:

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 5/23/2019 at 2:01 PM, dodsworth said:

We have had two top notch quarterbacks over the span of the last 

20 or so years that most franchises would drool over to have on

their teams, so someone please tell me how having a top tier QB 

is better than having a top tier GM after one title and two SB

appearances over that time span?

 

To me, having a GM pulling the strings toward a well balanced team

and managing the cap space correctly is worth more than one player.

 

We now have a QB friendly system in place, much like what the Pats

have had over that same span of years. The Eagles won a title with a 

back up QB with a QB friendly system also.

 

Rodgers and Brees has one title a piece with other big names such

as Marino having zero which makes my vote for Ballard much more

solid. :peek:

 

 

ballard has zero titles, just saying

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We all know it takes the right GM the right Coach and the right QB to be a perennial SB contender. 

 

In my opinion it is a lot harder to find the tight Coach and right GM than it is to find the right QB. I feel like it is easier to measure the overall talent and leadership skills of a QB than it is to find a Coach and GM who work well together. A Coach who knows how to lead the entire team well. 

 

I voted GM. He has built this team to where everyone can lean on each other unlike we have seen before. Even when Manning was here there was only 1 year I can remember where both offense and defense did really well. And that was 2005 when we were undefeated until we faced Brees and the chargers. 

 

Ballard has built the most complete team I have ever seen in the Indy era. And that includes HC. 

 

Theres no GM in the league that I have faith could find a good QB like I do with Ballard. In the end i could see him trading 6 draft picks to move up to draft a starting caliber QB. 

 

Now I am of the opinion that Tom Brady is a system QB with a great GM/HC. We have seen several NE QBs have success in that system and go elsewhere and have little to no success. Unlike a lot of backups in this league. I'm not saying Brady is mediocre by any means. But he is a system QB nonetheless. 

 

My point is, I can see Ballard finding a QB who can fit THIS system. There is nothing wrong with system QBs. After all. Brady has how many rings? 

 

 

Also. I'm taking nothing away from Andrew who I believe is an elite QB. I am just saying having a GM who can assemble a scouting department like we have, coaches, and players like this, is most definitely more important than any QB. Sustained success. I will rejoice when I see Ballard stay here after Andrew retires, because I believe he is just that good. QBs retire a lot sooner than GMs do. 

 

In Ballard I trust. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 5/19/2019 at 11:31 AM, aaron11 said:

i was going by if we had to get rid of one and keep one now.  i would keep luck over ballard and it would not be a hard choice for me

 

its not that hard to find a decent GM

 

Name the decent GMs in the league then if that's true. I bet you could name more decent QBs tha  you could decent GMs. And it's funny, because all these decent GMs cant find franchise QBs. It's not that they dont exist. They just dont find them. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

One other point. The pool is much larger when  it comes to pro QBs. 

 

The pool is much smaller when it comes to GM choices. 

 

I'll say what Ballard has said. When you have more darts to throw at the board you will hit on more picks. I think the same analogy can be used when choosing a GM. There are far fewer darts to throw. 

 

How many GMs are in the hall of fame? How many QBs? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, NannyMcafee said:

 

Name the decent GMs in the league then if that's true. I bet you could name more decent QBs tha  you could decent GMs. And it's funny, because all these decent GMs cant find franchise QBs. It's not that they dont exist. They just dont find them. 

lots of teams have good gms, look it up your self

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, aaron11 said:

ballard has zero titles, just saying

Touche', you scores a point for this ^ but what will we differ on when both

Luck and Ballard win their first title together within the next 2 or 3 years? :thmup:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...