Where Is the Hate Coming From??

[SR711]

So here is my take on this 

 

As a diehard fan, I personally do not have any "hate" for job that specifically Ballard or Reich have done so far.   I have every reason to believe that they are right guys for their jobs to steer the franchise to future glory.  

 

That being said, I do think there is/was an element especially in the local media (read previous articles by Gregg Doyel and Stephen Holder) where specifically Chris Ballard has been anointed as a HOF GM when, in reality, this is his 1st time running a team and, therefore, he is going to make mistakes and whiff on roster building philosophies, moves, personnel decisions.  The key for him in this regard is that does he learn from it and apply it in the future or stubbornly stick with something when there is clear evidence it is not working with putting the team in the best position to win.  So far, the Vinatieri situation this season was a strike in that aspect.  It remains to be seen how the QB situation and Brissett is handled this offseason. 

 

One thing I would like to laid to rest is the babble coming out of our front office about solely building through the draft and acting as if free agency, trades using draft capital is completely useless.  No NFL team would be good if they draft poorly.  That is not even debatable.  However, the consistent winners (e.g. Pats, Chiefs, Ravens, Seahawks) supplement good drafts with opportunistic trades and FA signings.  No one, even the greatest GMs of all time, are going to nail the draft 100%.  At the end of the day, drafting is still an inexact science.  So to deny that and rely solely on the draft to improve a roster and fix holes will not lead to a good long term result. 

[CheezyColt]

3 hours ago, Myles said:

I must have missed them.   I don't see many with hate of Ballard.   Sure there will always be a few, but the vast majority are pleased with the current team.     The QB needs addressed.   If we have Brissett as the starter next season, I will not be happy with Ballard.   

There really is just a few.  They are just a very vocal minority.  They tend to post in almost every thread so it makes it seem like they are more numerous than they are.

[Dingus McGirt]

12 hours ago, The Oopty Oop said:

I feel like the majority on here had us at a 6-10 to 9-7 record to start the year after Luck retired which is right where we are at...I dont get the frustration.

The 5-2 start suckered folks.

[hoosierhawk]

8 hours ago, GoColts8818 said:

Honestly I think this is a bad year to be looking for a QB.  The only ones I am truly sold on is Burrow and no way he doesn’t end up a Bengal.  The idea of Tau interests me because If he comes out he will be coming back from injury so he might slide and he could be paired with someone like Jacoby who can mentor him.  I don’t like the idea of Jacoby being the starter but if he’s holding the job down until a rookie is ready I could live with it.

Don't quite understand the assertion by some that this is a bad year for QBs. Most all the draft reports and so called draft 'Experts' I read think it is a good to very good year for QBs. Guess time will tell but a franchise can't wait very long to finally pull the trigger on one.

[GoColts8818]

1 minute ago, hoosierhawk said:

Don't quite understand the assertion by some that this is a bad year for QBs. Most all the draft reports and so called draft 'Experts' I read think it is a good to very good year for QBs. Guess time will tell but a franchise can't wait very long to finally pull the trigger on one.

Yeah I am not saying they should wait.  I just don’t like most of the QBs coming out.  Then again I am not a scout or GM.  It’s up to those guys and sort through the holes and find the right guy.  Holmes, Watson, and, Jackson all had major “holes” coming out too and Holmes and Watson class especially was supposedly a bad year for QBs too.  

[waittilnextyear]

12 hours ago, WarGhost21 said:

Over the past few days, most of the forum talk I’ve seen mentioning Chris Ballard is saying that he makes bad picks and that he always trades down for second rounders that don’t do anything. I really don’t get it. We are just one draft removed from 2 All-Pro Rookies, both of which were acquired from him making a trade down. Just because not everyone hits one draft doesn’t make him suddenly incapable of making great selections and grabbing impact players. Even Rock Ya-Sin and Bobby Okereke from this class have made early huge impacts on the team, and still it seems that very few are still invested in the process. I’m honestly confused, and if someone could please enlighten me as to where all of this loss of faith is coming from, please tell me so I, and others like me, can understand!! Thanks, and let’s go smash this offseason!! Go Blue!

 

 You lost me at Ya-Sin and Okereke making huge impacts. Just wow!
 You believe this so you will never understand.
   Overall, Rock was pretty bad. He may become solid-good. Okereke does look promising. No more.
  Wilson, Hooker, Lewis look like misses right now. Banogu - so so.
  Reich was very familiar with Jacoby's intellect and skill set before the season started. And it is correct to be optimistic and behind his team at all times.
   Will they ethusiastically be selling Jacoby to the guy that writes the checks? 
  If they want to bet the franchise and their jobs on JB, i suggest they read up on 
 P.T. Barnum to get their sales pitch over the top. lol 
 

[Dogg63]

11 hours ago, Superman said:

 

Not saying that, but those who do tend to be the loudest, and they like to repeat themselves in multiple threads, making it hard to just ignore them.

Speaking of which, where's EastStreet been lately?

[WarGhost21]

41 minutes ago, waittilnextyear said:

 

 You lost me at Ya-Sin and Okereke making huge impacts. Just wow!
 You believe this so you will never understand.
   Overall, Rock was pretty bad. He may become solid-good. Okereke does look promising. No more.
  Wilson, Hooker, Lewis look like misses right now. Banogu - so so.
  Reich was very familiar with Jacoby's intellect and skill set before the season started. And it is correct to be optimistic and behind his team at all times.
   Will they ethusiastically be selling Jacoby to the guy that writes the checks? 
  If they want to bet the franchise and their jobs on JB, i suggest they read up on 
 P.T. Barnum to get their sales pitch over the top. lol 
 

Ya-Sin and Okereke both took their rookie lumps, but for much of the season Rock looked like our top or second best corner, with great potential. Watching the All-22 shows that he is actually a quality corner, so I’m almost certain you’re just listening to the critics and doing next to no research of your own. As for Okereke, he looks like a lesser Darius Leonard, with them being almost indistinguishable on the field much of the time. 

 

Wilson was a miss, yes, but we have to remember that we went into that draft going off of Grigson’s scouting profiles, not his own. Hooker is not great, but he’s good enough to make opposing QBs think twice about throwing it deep. He may miss a couple here and there, but he makes more plays deep than he doesn’t, and has improved in the box. As for Lewis, it sucks that he’s injured a lot, but he has shown promise when healthy, so not really a miss. Banogu is a rookie, and he’s performed rather admirably, and is at least a high quality backup. 

 

Sure, keeping Brisset may have not been the best move, but give me one name that was available that would have been a definite upgrade over him, and remember that they would have had to learn the scheme midway through the season. 

[SOMDColtsfan]

Hind sight is 20/20 but sometimes it seems GM's will pass up on players we fans think they should have drafted. The Xavier Rhodes, Landon Collins types. The Colts traded that #26 pick to Washington who then took Montez Sweat, 7 sacks - 2 forced fumbles in 2019, and came on strong to end the year. The Colts got Rock Ya Sin and a high 2nd round pick. Sweat had a great rookie combine running the 40 yd in 4.41. Still too early to see who won that deal, Ya Sin showed flashes and the 2nd rd pick isnt on the team yet. 

[colts8718]

On 12/29/2019 at 9:29 PM, Fisticuffs111 said:

I wouldn’t want any other guy GM’ing the Colts. I’ve said what could be construed as some anti-Ballard things recently (which isn’t my intention), but I think he’s far and away the best man for the job and hope he’s here for years to come.

Ballard was handed a roster from the great Ryan Grigson he is doing fine Maybe some of these fans want Grigson back.

[John Hammonds]

21 hours ago, Dingus McGirt said:

The 5-2 start suckered folks.

I think the 2018 season 10-6 results suckered people.

 

In 2017, we went 4-12 and we deserved it.  We had very little talent, and of what we had, 9 starters were in IR.

We shouldn't have gone 10-6 in 2018.  We shouldn't have improved so quickly, that everyone breathlessly picked us as a darkhorse superbowl team.  But when you have Andrew Luck, well...

 

In 2018, we added enough talent that we should have gone from 4-12 to about 7-9 last year.  And this year, going 7-9 again, this time without Luck, is actually about right.  We have enough talent on this team to beat most of the teams worse than us, and surprise some teams that are better than us.  But we are only 2 years from that 4-12 team.  We've added a TON of rookies, most of which have become starters, or are playing significant roles.  They're still growing.  Still learning to play the game at this level.

 

What did we actually expect at this time?  A superbowl?

[Breeze]

I like the roster at this point.  Even with the multitude of injuries, it’s been fairly interchangeable with similar players at specific positions.  Most spots are filled with players on rookie contracts, who will now have another year of experience going into 2020.  They were competitive in almost every game with backups at many key positions (including QB and WR).  

Not sold on Brissett as the future, but I can only speculate that Kelly had to put in a ‘prove you can stay out of trouble’ year before getting a real shot and having the team plan their future around him (we just went down that road with another QB).  They did pay him extra to be on the team, so it’s obvious they like him.

Anyway, I’m excited about the future.  We have the money to retain our ‘hits’, say goodbye to our ‘misses’, and maybe grab a couple other teams ‘hits’.

[coltsva]

23 hours ago, GoColts8818 said:

Yeah I am not saying they should wait.  I just don’t like most of the QBs coming out.  Then again I am not a scout or GM.  It’s up to those guys and sort through the holes and find the right guy.  Holmes, Watson, and, Jackson all had major “holes” coming out too and Holmes and Watson class especially was supposedly a bad year for QBs too.  

But a great year for detectives!

[BleedBlue4Shoe86]

Just thought I would leave this hear for those getting upset.

 

Via ESPN

 

2019 record: 7-9
Average age of starters in 2019: 26.6 (5th youngest)
Projected 2020 cap space: $93,473,804 (No. 2)
Big-ticket free agent: Eric Ebron
Low-key important free agent: Anthony Castonzo

 

Priorities this offseason: Either give Jacoby Brissett another season in hopes that a contract year and a healed-up knee will return him to early-2018 form or reunite Philip Rivers with Frank Reich from their Chargers days. But closely evaluate quarterbacks in the draft class, just in case. Indy needs a top-shelf pass-rusher and a wide receiver opposite T.Y. Hilton, but it is in good shape overall. "Chris Ballard is one of the most well-respected GMs," one AFC scout said. "The Colts are pointed in the right direction."

[Myles]

4 minutes ago, BleedBlue4Shoe86 said:

 

 

Priorities this offseason: Either give Jacoby Brissett another season in hopes that a contract year and a healed-up knee will return him to early-2018 form or reunite Philip Rivers with Frank Reich from their Chargers days. But closely evaluate quarterbacks in the draft class, just in case. Indy needs a top-shelf pass-rusher and a wide receiver opposite T.Y. Hilton, but it is in good shape overall. "Chris Ballard is one of the most well-respected GMs," one AFC scout said. "The Colts are pointed in the right direction."

I would like to see him to early 2018 form too.  He was the back up QB then.

[aaron11]

7 minutes ago, BleedBlue4Shoe86 said:

early-2018 form

wasnt impressed with that tbh.  i think we can do better than jacoby at his best

[Superman]

On 12/30/2019 at 6:15 AM, SR711 said:

One thing I would like to laid to rest is the babble coming out of our front office about solely building through the draft and acting as if free agency, trades using draft capital is completely useless.  No NFL team would be good if they draft poorly.  That is not even debatable.  However, the consistent winners (e.g. Pats, Chiefs, Ravens, Seahawks) supplement good drafts with opportunistic trades and FA signings.  No one, even the greatest GMs of all time, are going to nail the draft 100%.  At the end of the day, drafting is still an inexact science.  So to deny that and rely solely on the draft to improve a roster and fix holes will not lead to a good long term result. 

 

That's a mischaracterization of the front office's position, though. They've signed several free agents, with mixed results. They are doing exactly what you're saying in bold.

 

I think people are not accepting that this roster is still under development. Not only in player acquisition, but also player development. Still relying on a lot of young guys, still establishing a culture and an identity. And still need more players at critical positions.

 

For me, any criticism of Ballard that includes the team's record is missing the mark. When he took the job, everyone believed Luck would be able to play in 2017. Instead, Luck missed the season, and took time getting up to 100% in 2018. Then, the team starts gearing up to really compete because with Luck, the sky's the limit, even with an incomplete roster. But he retired, and our ceiling was lowered dramatically. It's hard to imagine a GM having his legs cut out from under him more than Ballard has in his first three seasons, and most of the drama isn't a result of any of his own decisions (unless you blame him for considering McDaniels, but the snake move was almost unprecedented). 

 

Now, I still think Ballard should be graded on the basis of his decisions and their results, and I agree that some have anointed him as a great GM prematurely (it helps when your predecessor is considered one of the worst of all time), but I think we're just barely getting into range to truly evaluate Ballard's work. And the fact that, in Year 1, he was working with someone else's staff and scouts, drafting for a lame duck coaching staff, kind of influences my thinking on his start anyways. 

 

If Ballard proves to be a stubborn denier of the benefit of free agent supplementing and trading for players, then I'll be with you. That was my biggest issue with Polian. I don't think Ballard is, to this point.  

[Myles]

Ballard certainly hasn't had an obstacle free road.    Boy, if AC retires and JB is the starter, I'm going to have a hard time getting excited for the 2020 season.

 

I still give Ballard a B+ in the job he did.   The team had no depth at any position when he took over.  He immediately fixed the O-line.   Attempted to fix the pass rush.  Some injuries have made that a bit of a fail.  I won't blame him for the receiver issues as I thought the crew going into this season was a good one:

Hilton

Funchess

Fountain

Rogers

Cain

Ebron

Doyle

Cox

Hines

[DougDew]

3 hours ago, colts8718 said:

Ballard was handed a roster from the great Ryan Grigson he is doing fine Maybe some of these fans want Grigson back.

Fans just have that narrative stuck in their head.

 

The Colts changed schemes, both on offense and defense.  The defensive roster Ballard inherited was moot anyway, since the scheme change required different players.  It was his choice to change the roster.  It wasn't a function of inheriting a bunch of bad players. 

 

On offense, he inherited universally good players at very important positions, like QB, LT, C, the TE he just resigned, and field stretching WR.   

[Blueblood23]

23 hours ago, WarGhost21 said:

Ya-Sin and Okereke both took their rookie lumps, but for much of the season Rock looked like our top or second best corner, with great potential. Watching the All-22 shows that he is actually a quality corner, so I’m almost certain you’re just listening to the critics and doing next to no research of your own. As for Okereke, he looks like a lesser Darius Leonard, with them being almost indistinguishable on the field much of the time. 

 

Wilson was a miss, yes, but we have to remember that we went into that draft going off of Grigson’s scouting profiles, not his own. Hooker is not great, but he’s good enough to make opposing QBs think twice about throwing it deep. He may miss a couple here and there, but he makes more plays deep than he doesn’t, and has improved in the box. As for Lewis, it sucks that he’s injured a lot, but he has shown promise when healthy, so not really a miss. Banogu is a rookie, and he’s performed rather admirably, and is at least a high quality backup. 

 

Sure, keeping Brisset may have not been the best move, but give me one name that was available that would have been a definite upgrade over him, and remember that they would have had to learn the scheme midway through the season. 

Looks like they could have traded for Tannehill. 

[Superman]

Just now, DougDew said:

It wasn't a function of inheriting a bunch of bad players. 

 

On offense, he inherited universally good players at very important positions, like QB, LT, C, the TE he just resigned, and field stretching WR.   

 

The players he inherited on defense were bad, and they're all gone. I think Geathers is the last holdover, and he got phased out of the defense and will likely be gone by next season. None of the players that left are performing anywhere else. The defense was bad because we didn't have good players.

 

On offense, he inherited five good players, out of 11. The most important one retired. The second most important one is considering retirement. 

 

The roster was bad, because Grigson built a bad roster. There's no arguing that.

[Superman]

2 minutes ago, Blueblood23 said:

Looks like they could have traded for Tannehill. 

 

In March?

[Pacergeek]

This team has more holes than a slice of Swiss cheese. Ballard seriously traded out of the first round for Rock Ya Sin. Instead of drafting a good WR in Round 1, we are stuck with another CB bust. 

[Myles]

1 minute ago, Pacergeek said:

This team has more holes than a slice of Swiss cheese. Ballard seriously traded out of the first round for Rock Ya Sin. Instead of drafting a good WR in Round 1, we are stuck with another CB bust. 

Way too early to tell.  He also got us the #34 pick, so let's wait and see what we get.  

[DougDew]

23 minutes ago, Superman said:

 

The players he inherited on defense were bad, and they're all gone. I think Geathers is the last holdover, and he got phased out of the defense and will likely be gone by next season. None of the players that left are performing anywhere else. The defense was bad because we didn't have good players.

 

On offense, he inherited five good players, out of 11. The most important one retired. The second most important one is considering retirement. 

 

The roster was bad, because Grigson built a bad roster. There's no arguing that.

I didn't say the players were good, nor that the roster wasn't bad. 

 

I said that, basically, giving Ballard a pass on his current roster or his current performance because of the "bad players he inherited" is hogwash.

 

He chose to change schemes.  The moment he made that decision, all defensive players outside of all-pros became moot.  He's building his defensive roster from the ground up because of scheme change, not because of what he did or did not inherit.

 

On offense, he fixed the oline by adding 2 players.  He added a 4th round RB, who is probably not a lot better than the vet FA he let go to BUFF.  He certainly didn't have to go far to make the offensive roster acceptable.

 

[stitches]

8 minutes ago, DougDew said:

I didn't say the players were good, nor that the roster wasn't bad. 

 

I said that, basically, giving Ballard a pass on his current roster or his current performance because of the "bad players he inherited" is hogwash.

 

He chose to change schemes.  The moment he made that decision, all defensive players outside of all-pros became moot.  He's building his defensive roster from the ground up because of scheme change, not because of what he did or did not inherit.

 

On offense, he fixed the oline by adding 2 players.  He added a 4th round RB, who is probably not a lot better than the vet FA he let go to BUFF.  He certainly didn't have to go far to make the offensive roster acceptable.

 

 

I disagree with this one. None of the defensive players he inherited have played well anywhere else in the league after they left. This is NOT because of a scheme change. They were not playing well in our previous scheme they were drafted/acquired for, they are not playing well for any other team in the league that has targeted them after they left and they weren't going to play well had they stayed with us. This is NOT on Ballard. The talent he inherited was straight up horrible. If anything the talent he had made it easier for him to change scheme, not the other way around. 

[Coffeedrinker]

On 12/29/2019 at 8:18 PM, WarGhost21 said:

Over the past few days, most of the forum talk I’ve seen mentioning Chris Ballard is saying that he makes bad picks and that he always trades down for second rounders that don’t do anything. I really don’t get it. We are just one draft removed from 2 All-Pro Rookies, both of which were acquired from him making a trade down. Just because not everyone hits one draft doesn’t make him suddenly incapable of making great selections and grabbing impact players. Even Rock Ya-Sin and Bobby Okereke from this class have made early huge impacts on the team, and still it seems that very few are still invested in the process. I’m honestly confused, and if someone could please enlighten me as to where all of this loss of faith is coming from, please tell me so I, and others like me, can understand!! Thanks, and let’s go smash this offseason!! Go Blue!

It's a big reason why I'm glad the fans don't run the team.  Over the last couple of weeks I've read on this forum that the Colts should:

Fire the GM

Fire the HC

Fire the OC

Fire the DC

Go to a 3-4 defense

Throw more deep passes

Throw more short passes

need to replace everyone in the secondary

Need to replace everyone on the dline

Need 4 or 5 new receivers

Run the ball more 

Run the ball less

And yes I have even read where someone on this forum suggested trading Nelson.

 

In summary, fan is short for fanatical.... not logical.

[stitches]

Just now, Coffeedrinker said:

It's a big reason why I'm glad the fans don't run the team.  Over the last couple of weeks I've read on this forum that the Colts should:

Fire the GM

Fire the HC

Fire the OC

Fire the DC

Go to a 3-4 defense

Throw more deep passes

Throw more short passes

need to replace everyone in the secondary

Need to replace everyone on the dline

Need 4 or 5 new receivers

Run the ball more 

Run the ball less

And yes I have even read where someone on this forum suggested trading Nelson.

 

In summary, fan is short for fanatical.... not logical.

I'm not going to accept this slander! The Colts definitely need to run less and throw more deep passes! 

 

[DougDew]

15 minutes ago, stitches said:

 

I disagree with this one. None of the defensive players he inherited have played well anywhere else in the league after they left. This is NOT because of a scheme change. They were not playing well in our previous scheme they were drafted/acquired for, they are not playing well for any other team in the league that has targeted them after they left and they weren't going to play well had they stayed with us. This is NOT on Ballard. The talent he inherited was straight up horrible. If anything the talent he had made it easier for him to change scheme, not the other way around. 

Even if they did play well, they would not be here.  He let his own signing Simon, walk because of scheme change.  He traded Anderson because of scheme change.  Mathis and Vontae got old.  It happens, not to mention Vontae wasn't the same corner when in zone.  And Grigson fielded his defense by signing mid priced FAs, so that strategy is not going to have a lot of players turnover.  But it helps to go to the playoffs early.

 

All GMs get hired on the heels of the last one getting fired.  They got fired for a reason, because the roster isn't up to par.

 

Ballard has not had to continually work with some sort of unique, one-off, Grigson inflicted albatross for the past three years.   

 

Still blaming the last one is simply comfort thinking, IMO.  Probably thought we'd have a SB appearance after three years because the new GM was a genius. (or maybe thought it would only take three years to show just how really really bad the previous GM was)

 

[Yoshinator]

44 minutes ago, Pacergeek said:

This team has more holes than a slice of Swiss cheese. Ballard seriously traded out of the first round for Rock Ya Sin. Instead of drafting a good WR in Round 1, we are stuck with another CB bust. 

Marquise Brown and N'Keal Harry were the only 1st round receivers and Harry sucked. We could of taken AJ Brown or Deebo Samuel at 34 though, Mecole Hardman at 46, or Terry Mclaurin at 59. Ballard may of screwed up at WR, though I blame Reich here because he was in love with Campbell.

[John Hammonds]

15 minutes ago, DougDew said:

I didn't say the players were good, nor that the roster wasn't bad. 

 

I said that, basically, giving Ballard a pass on his current roster or his current performance because of the "bad players he inherited" is hogwash.

 

He chose to change schemes.  The moment he made that decision, all defensive players outside of all-pros became moot.  He's building his defensive roster from the ground up because of scheme change, not because of what he did or did not inherit.

 

On offense, he fixed the oline by adding 2 players.  He added a 4th round RB, who is probably not a lot better than the vet FA he let go to BUFF.  He certainly didn't have to go far to make the offensive roster acceptable.

 

I'm going to both agree with you and disagree with you.  Can I do that?

 

I agree with you that Grigson built a 3-4 defense with good free agents.

LB D'Qwell Jackson

S Mike Adams

CB Vontae Davis

DE Cory Redding

LB Jerrell Freeman

LB Erik Walden

Many of these guys had pro bowl years when they played with us.

But Grigson did not do well with drafting for that defense.

OLB Bjorn Werner

NT David Perry

S T.J. Green

CB D'Joun Smith

DE Henry Anderson (injury prone)

The bottom line is that eventually the free agent veterans all got old at the same time, and the drafted new blood wasn't any good.  By the time Ballard took over, the cupboard was empty.  (That's the part where I disagree with your post.)

 

In Ballard's first year, he still had the same DC and the same 3-4 defense.  So he brought in guys that could help.

OLB John Simon

NT Al Woods

DE Johnathan Hankins

 

In Ballard's second year, they changed DC's to Eberflus, and changed the scheme to a modified Tampa-2.  Which, as you said (and I agree with you), required a different set of players with a different skill set.

OLB Darius Leonard

DL3T Denico Autry

MLB Anthony Walker

LB Bobby Okereke

And they're still building it.  As you said, from the ground up.  We're not done yet.

So, I both agree and disagree.  Yes, the cupboard was bare.  But also, yes, we changed defenses, too.

[Superman]

41 minutes ago, DougDew said:

I didn't say the players were good, nor that the roster wasn't bad. 

 

I said that, basically, giving Ballard a pass on his current roster or his current performance because of the "bad players he inherited" is hogwash.

 

He chose to change schemes.  The moment he made that decision, all defensive players outside of all-pros became moot.  He's building his defensive roster from the ground up because of scheme change, not because of what he did or did not inherit.

 

On offense, he fixed the oline by adding 2 players.  He added a 4th round RB, who is probably not a lot better than the vet FA he let go to BUFF.  He certainly didn't have to go far to make the offensive roster acceptable.

 

 

Nah, this argument is hogwash. 

 

If the defensive roster was any good, even a wholesale scheme change would not have resulted in replacing 25 players in two years. And none of those 25 players are contributing on other teams around the league. They were bad. Grigson built a bad roster.

 

Even if Ballard hadn't pushed forward with a scheme change, we still would have needed a completely new defense.

 

It's also downright crazy to suggest that Marlon Mack is not better than Frank Gore. Just stop.

 

And what Grigson tried and failed to do for five years, Ballard did in Year 2. He spent two top 40 picks on OL to fix a sore spot on this roster. That's two top 40 picks that didn't go toward defensive playmakers, or a #2 receiver.

 

Ballard inherited a trash roster, because Grigson built a trash roster. And then the best and most important player on the roster retired before the start of Year 3.

 

Edit: Henry Anderson is contributing for the Jets. So one of Grigson's defensive holdovers is contributing around the league.

[Yoshinator]

2 minutes ago, John Hammonds said:

I'm going to both agree with you and disagree with you.  Can I do that?

 

I agree with you that Grigson built a 3-4 defense with good free agents.

LB D'Qwell Jackson

S Mike Adams

CB Vontae Davis

DE Cory Redding

LB Jerrell Freeman

LB Erik Walden

Many of these guys had pro bowl years when they played with us.

But Grigson did not do well with drafting for that defense.

OLB Bjorn Werner

NT David Perry

S T.J. Green

CB D'Joun Smith

DE Henry Anderson (injury prone)

The bottom line is that eventually the free agent veterans all got old at the same time, and the drafted new blood wasn't any good.  By the time Ballard took over, the cupboard was empty.  (That's the part where I disagree with your post.)

 

In Ballard's first year, he still had the same DC and the same 3-4 defense.  So he brought in guys that could help.

OLB John Simon

NT Al Woods

DE Johnathan Hankins

 

In Ballard's second year, they changed DC's to Eberflus, and changed the scheme to a modified Tampa-2.  Which, as you said (and I agree with you), required a different set of players with a different skill set.

OLB Darius Leonard

DL3T Denico Autry

MLB Anthony Walker

LB Bobby Okereke

And they're still building it.  As you said, from the ground up.  We're not done yet.

So, I both agree and disagree.  Yes, the cupboard was bare.  But also, yes, we changed defenses, too.

Exactly what I was thinking. Nice summary of the situation! 

[WarGhost21]

6 minutes ago, Jared Cisneros said:

Marquise Brown and N'Keal Harry were the only 1st round receivers and Harry sucked. We could of taken AJ Brown or Deebo Samuel at 34 though, Mecole Hardman at 46, or Terry Mclaurin at 59. Ballard may of screwed up at WR, though I blame Reich here because he was in love with Campbell.

Yeah, I would have rather had AJ Brown over Campbell. The dude is already a bona fide star in the league. However, we can’t be so quick to judge Campbell, as he missed some time due to a freak injury, and even when healthy didn’t fit with Brisset’s style of short passing. Campbell was brought in for Luck, and we can’t hold it against our FO that he retired and left us with Brisset

[stitches]

1 minute ago, DougDew said:

All GMs get hired on the heels of the last one getting fired.  They got fired for a reason, because the roster isn't up to par.

Ballard has not had to continually work with some sort of unique, one-off, Grigson inflicted albatross for the past three years.   

 

The albatross of Grigson's tenure was a roster with zero talent worth keeping on the defensive side of the ball. This is not a contract albatross, but it's a roster albatross in a different way - namely you still have to fill 11 positions for starters and at least 11 more playable defenders for a rotation and it's not easy to do. 

 

Quote

 

Still blaming the last one is simply comfort thinking, IMO.  Probably thought we'd have a SB appearance after three years because the new GM was a genius. 

 

Earth calling forum.  Earth calling forum.

 

I'm not blaming Grigson for where the roster is 3 years after he left(his job was done 3 years ago). But it's definitely a mitigating factor for how you evaluate Ballard. BTW I still think we have more talent than people want to admit because they are throwing a fit because of the ugly ending of the season. We finished 7-9 with bottom 5 QB performance in the league that forced Frank to call suboptimal game. And we still could have easily ended up in the playoffs even with this type of QB performance had several coin flips landed differently. I still think this roster is in a good shape AND what's more important - majority of the roster is young and is expected to improve in the future. IMO this roster with Luck(and the new kicker) is very likely a 12-4 or 13-3 type of roster. 

 

Now, even though I like the roster it still has some very important holes that MUST be filled or we are not going anywhere. The QB is the easiest to pinpoint and it's the most important and has the most influence on the outcomes of games. I think this is what ultimately Ballard will be judged on in a couple of years. It won't matter at all how solid his drafts are if he drafts a bust at QB IMO. Very few new GMs survive drafting a bust at QB. We need better weapons for whoever the new QB is... we need a 3T. OMG do we need a 3T! And I don't mean - we will draft a big DE from college and move him inside. I mean we need a legitimate gap penetrating explosive interior lineman that can win from inside and create pressure. We still need CB1 IMO. Rock might turn into a serviceable corner, and Kenny is great in the slot, but IMO we still don't have our CB1 on the roster. 

[Superman]

2 minutes ago, Jared Cisneros said:

Marquise Brown and N'Keal Harry were the only 1st round receivers and Harry sucked. We could of taken AJ Brown or Deebo Samuel at 34 though, Mecole Hardman at 46, or Terry Mclaurin at 59. Ballard may of screwed up at WR, though I blame Reich here because he was in love with Campbell.

 

Harry didn't suck, he was hurt. 

[Yoshinator]

1 minute ago, WarGhost21 said:

Yeah, I would have rather had AJ Brown over Campbell. The dude is already a boba fide star in the league. However, we can’t be so quick to judge Campbell, as he missed some time due to a freak injury, and even when healthy didn’t fit with Brisset’s style of short passing. Campbell was brought in for Luck, and we can’t hold it against our FO that he retired and left us with Brisset

Yeah, he's incomplete right now due to a number of reasons. We'll just have to hope he makes that jump year 2. If there's a positive, this draft is full of tall, physical receivers while Campbell is that speedy, slot guy. So we can focus on the strength of this WR class.

[John Waylon]

Passing up AJ Brown is starting to feel like 

[Yoshinator]

2 minutes ago, Superman said:

 

Harry didn't suck, he was hurt. 

He sucked in limited time, kinda like Campbell. They are on the same level to me at this point right now.

[Yoshinator]

1 minute ago, John Waylon said:

Passing up AJ Brown is starting to feel like 

Peter always does that on Family Guy!