Jump to content
Indianapolis Colts
Indianapolis Colts Fan Forum

Look at what San Francisco has done in 3 years


Recommended Posts

  • Replies 181
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

You can't even compare the two.  The stud DL the 49ers have had significant contributions from picks taken before Lynch and Shanahan even got there.  Armstead and Buckner were both drafted before the

Don't you think losing a pro bowl QB before the start of the season might be part of the problem?     

Doesn't hurt when you have five first round picks on your dline

6 minutes ago, hambone35 said:

We are going into 3rd year with Reich, and Ballard together, SF has done it they wasn’t afraid to get free agents etc... So where do you believe we will be? No reason we should not be there!

The Niners went 4-12 last year by virtue of Jimmy Gs torn ACL and got themselves the #2 overall pick.

 

Lynch did a terrific job with Bosa, Deebo Samuel, Jalen Hurd and Dre Greenlaw all making nice contributions as rookies.

 

And, as you pointed out some free agent additions on top of what was already a pretty nice rebuild that Lynch had underway. 

 

SF is set up to be really good for a long time....and Lynch deserved to win the Executive of the Year award hands down.

  • Like 4
  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
55 minutes ago, hambone35 said:

We are going into 3rd year with Reich, and Ballard together, SF has done it they wasn’t afraid to get free agents etc... So where do you believe we will be? No reason we should not be there!

 

Doesn't hurt when you have five first round picks on your dline

  • Like 6
  • Thanks 3
Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, hambone35 said:

We are going into 3rd year with Reich, and Ballard together, SF has done it they wasn’t afraid to get free agents etc... So where do you believe we will be? No reason we should not be there!

 

Are we seriously using the 9ers as an example after Luck retired???:troll:

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, hambone35 said:

We are going into 3rd year with Reich, and Ballard together, SF has done it they wasn’t afraid to get free agents etc... So where do you believe we will be? No reason we should not be there!

49rs drafted in the top 10 4 of the past 6 years.   That means they also drafted high in the other rounds.  Not sure that is a model you want to follow.  With Luck, we probably finish 11-5 or 12-4.   So we pretty much would nearly be there now.  

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Shadow_Creek said:

 

Are we seriously using the 9ers as an example after Luck retired???:troll:

 

The Luck excuse is officially over.

 

Ballard knows Luck is not part of this team.

He has a top 15 pick. 

He has cap space (in part due to Luck leaving).

 

Relevant to the topic, the 49ers knew they needed a QB so they got one via trade. If Ballard CHOOSES to ignore a QB in the draft, trade and/or free agency the results are on him and have nothing to do with Luck.

  • Like 1
  • Haha 2
  • Confused 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, crazycolt1 said:

Don't you think losing a pro bowl QB before the start of the season might be part of the problem? 

 

 

But Reich and Ballard called Brissett a top 20 QB. According to you they know more than the fanbase. So was that just a lie (we all know the answer)? You can't blindly trust the FO, then make excuses when something goes wrong. We called this from the start, and apparently he's not smarter than 31 other GM's (especially the Texans and Titans) and that's all that matters.

  • Like 2
  • Thanks 1
  • Confused 1
  • Sad 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, crazycolt1 said:

Don't you think losing a pro bowl QB before the start of the season might be part of the problem? 

 

 

No, its not part of it at all.  Not when compared to the 49ers, where Jimmy G only threw like 11 passes and didn't have to carry the roster.  That's a big part of the OPs point.

  • Haha 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
26 minutes ago, Jared Cisneros said:

But Reich and Ballard called Brissett a top 20 QB. According to you they know more than the fanbase. So was that just a lie (we all know the answer)? You can't blindly trust the FO, then make excuses when something goes wrong. We called this from the start, and apparently he's not smarter than 31 other GM's (especially the Texans and Titans) and that's all that matters.

 

What did you want Reich and Ballard to say when Luck retired? "JB sucks, there's no way we can win!" "Guys we might as well give up." "Let's tank for Tua!" They said what needed to be said when the franchise QB retired a week before the season started. They couldn't show panic and fear. There is no way you can plan for a player like Andrew Luck just retiring like he did. Before we start critiquing Ballard about the QB position let's at minimum give him this off season to address the issue. How many teams do you think could have handled their starting QB retiring one week before the season and still be in the playoff picture until the last 2 weeks of the season? Could the Texans? What about Green Bay? How about the Seahawks? What if Tom Brady had retired one week before the season started do you honestly think that Jarrett Stidham would have led them to the 3 seed? The Colts had to deal with a very rare situation and to be honest, I think they did about as good as possible. 

 

Do you honestly think that the GM's for the Texans and the Titans are better than Chris Ballard? I can't think of anything they have done that would set them apart as being better than Chris Ballard. At least give him this off season to address the issue before breaking out the torches and pitchforks!
 

  • Like 7
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, aaron11 said:

they have three top 10 picks on their d line, how are we supposed to follow that model?

 

we spent our high picks on the oline to protect luck and we still need offense now.  

Yeah, and many are wanting to get an extend the play scrambling QB in the mold of Mahomes.  Doing so would render spending our high picks on Nelson and Smith a semi waste of capital.

 

Since we spent all of the expensive capital on Nelson and Smith in 2018, we should be wanting pocket passers like Eason or Fromm at pick 34.  Or the next Derrick Henry, LOL.

  • Haha 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, DougDew said:

Yeah, and many are wanting to get an extend the play scrambling QB in the mold of Mahomes.  Doing so would render spending our high picks on Nelson and Smith a semi waste of capital.

 

Since we spent all of the expensive capital on Nelson and Smith in 2018, we should be wanting pocket passers like Eason or Fromm at pick 34.  Or the next Derrick Henry, LOL.

Mahomes throws from the pocket just as much as Luck did 

  • Like 2
  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Freenyfan102 said:

Ballard is a Polian clone and never going to spend the money on players we actually need.

Agree 100 %. His history shows that. Like overpaying for devin funchess when other teams were not even interested in him

 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, jvan1973 said:

Mahomes throws from the pocket just as much as Luck did 

That may be a fact, but that's not what gives Mahomes his identity.  We're being drawn towards wanting more of a broken play, play maker.

 

Luck was known for getting killed in the pocket, which is why Ballard drafted a G at 6 and a G/T at 35.  To "fix" the Oline and to quiet the narrative that a poor oline is what got him injured.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, jvan1973 said:

Mahomes throws from the pocket just as much as Luck did 

 

Yep, this article touches on it a bit:

 

https://www.kansascity.com/sports/nfl/kansas-city-chiefs/article238511543.html

 

This one gives the stats for Mahomes inside and outside the pocket, and surprisingly, they are very close. Plus, teams that design plays outside the pocket are also succeeding more.

 

https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/teams-are-excelling-when-their-qbs-leave-the-pocket-can-that-continue/

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Everyone that's talking about how high they picked is missing the point. The Jags pick in the top 5-10 every year, and they ALWAYS pick in the top 5-10. The Pats pick near the bottom every year, and they ALWAYS pick near the bottom. It's scouting, the Jags pick high because they pick crap on a stick. The Pats pick low because they don't. We need to scout really well, but if it was me I'd follow that model and sure up the D-line..

Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, DougDew said:

No, its not part of it at all.  Not when compared to the 49ers, where Jimmy G only threw like 11 passes and didn't have to carry the roster.  That's a big part of the OPs point.

 

 

But you've also got to look at where the 49'ers have been drafting compared to the Colts. John Lynch hasn't been below the top 10 in picks yet in the 1st round. In his 3 drafts he has had the 3rd, the 9th, and the 2nd pick of the 1st round. In the same period Chris Ballard has had 1 pick in the top 10 of the first round (a pick which he absolutely nailed). Ballard has had the 15th, the 3rd (6th after Jets trade), and the 26th. And no matter what you want to say Andrew Luck retiring DOES factor in. I'm sure if he would have known that Luck was retiring he would have approached last year's draft and free agency differently. Our roster and approach to the draft and free agency was based on Andrew Luck playing QB last season.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, ColtJax said:

Everyone that's talking about how high they picked is missing the point.

i think where they picked is relevant.  the dline was built on cant miss prospects like bosa and armstead

 

if you dont pick them high you get projects like turay and lewis and hope you can develop them.  these guys wont all pan out

 

the patriots do it differently than most teams, but most teams dont have a tom brady or one of the best coaches to ever 

Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, Mel Kiper's Hair said:

 

 

But you've also got to look at where the 49'ers have been drafting compared to the Colts. John Lynch hasn't been below the top 10 in picks yet in the 1st round. In his 3 drafts he has had the 3rd, the 9th, and the 2nd pick of the 1st round. In the same period Chris Ballard has had 1 pick in the top 10 of the first round (a pick which he absolutely nailed). Ballard has had the 15th, the 3rd (6th after Jets trade), and the 26th. And no matter what you want to say Andrew Luck retiring DOES factor in. I'm sure if he would have known that Luck was retiring he would have approached last year's draft and free agency differently. Our roster and approach to the draft and free agency was based on Andrew Luck playing QB last season.

What positions has Lynch drafted with those high picks?   Any Gs or one dimensional FSs? (on the heels of the Colts drafting a C)

 

That explains a lot about why we have been slow to achieve.

  • Confused 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, DougDew said:

What positions has Lynch drafted with those high picks?   Any Gs or one dimensional FSs? (on the heels of the Colts drafting a C)

 

That explains a lot about why we have been slow to achieve.

hooker was drafted to play in chucks scheme to be fair. the idea was that when facing man coverage teams will take shots to try and beat the CBs and that opens the door for hooker to run in and make a play

 

when facing a cover 2 you dont take many shots to the free safety area and he doesnt have the freedom to follow the play now

Link to post
Share on other sites
46 minutes ago, DougDew said:

What positions has Lynch drafted with those high picks?   Any Gs or one dimensional FSs? (on the heels of the Colts drafting a C)

 

That explains a lot about why we have been slow to achieve.

 

Very short sighted, as always. Expect nothing less from you. Lynch got there in 2017, much like Ballard did in 2017.

 

Lynch:

2017 - Solomon Thomas (No.3) - hit and miss

2018 - Mike McGlinchey (No.9)

2019 - Nick Bosa (No.2)

 

Ballard:

2017 - Malik Hooker (No.15) - hit and miss

2018 - Quenton Nelson (No.6)

2019 - trade back

 

Lynch got 2 guys for his DL and 1 OT in Round 1 in his 3 years while Ballard got a FS and OG, plus traded back last year. Sitting at No.2 and No.3, his choices were Bosa and Solomon Thomas. Bosa has been a great contributor but Thomas has been far more miss than a hit. The DL picks from prior to when Lynch got there - Armstead and Buckner are now seasoned into their 4th and 5th years and it shows because the DL position, compared to the DE position, takes more time to season because you deal with more than just 1-on-1s inside. Bosa gets the 1-on-1 enough times because there is talent all along the DL that was drafted before him. That is why Freeney and Mathis got double teams because nobody inside demanded double teams in the Polian era, that is just how DL play works.

 

Lynch drafted a Notre Dame tackle, we drafted a Notre Dame guard, both have been successful. The trenches need to be fortified, Ballard always says, so the OL pick was completely justified and has helped our OL tremendously, and has been a big part of balance on our offense, little did we know our Pro Bowl QB would retire in a couple of years after Ballard got here.

 

So, objectively speaking, Lynch's pick of Solomon Thomas has not panned out but his predecessor's picks of Armstead and Buckner along with his pick of Bosa combined has panned out for the 49ers. Ballard's pick of Hooker has not panned out like it should have but the OG pick panned out real good. For what it is worth, 49ers did draft a FS named Eric Reid at No.18 in 2013, close to the No.15 where we got Hooker, and Jimmie Ward at No.30 in 2014, and Ward is still with the 49ers. They have been good but nothing spectacular.

 

In other words, it took several years of DL picks for the 49ers to reap the benefits now. The key difference is FA moves that Lynch made - Jimmy G at QB, Richard Sherman at CB, Kwon Alexander at LB, Tevin Coleman at RB, Dee Ford at DE that have put them over the hump, IMO on top of the maturing DL picks from before Lynch got there. How many first round DL picks did we get from Grigson, your favorite? 1 bust named Bjoern Werner in 4 years? I also do not know if Pagano had any saying in the drafting of Malik Hooker either, just don't know but it is reasonable to assume he was drafted with that D in mind. 

 

At some point, however, Ballard's reluctance to play free agency will catch up with him as not all holes can be filled with the draft. 49ers are like the Jaguars where the draft picks and FA moves all came together in 2017 for a great run but they had inferior coaching and inferior QB play, neither of which are problems the 49ers have, and that helps with sustained winning, and probably why the 49ers will sustain a level of excellence for more years.

  • Like 2
  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, aaron11 said:

hooker was drafted to play in chucks scheme to be fair. the idea was that when facing man coverage teams will take shots to try and beat the CBs and that opens the door for hooker to run in and make a play

 

when facing a cover 2 you dont take many shots to the free safety area and he doesnt have the freedom to follow the play now

This isn't an attack or defense of the pick.  The reality is that when you change schemes, it sets your rebuild back on the time line.  That's basically the topic of the thread. And now we have to draft a bunch of other players around him to get that pick 15 investment we made. 

 

And what we have right now as an identity as a team is an oline that can produce rushing yards and give the QB a 5 second pocket.

 

Wanting a playmaker, outside the pocket creator, seems like another scheme fit problem that would only set the time line back another year or two.

 

Frankly, as far as QBs go, I'm hoping that pocket passers like Eason and Fromm really ball out this off season and make them worthy of a trade (up or down) into the bottom of the first round.

Link to post
Share on other sites
34 minutes ago, chad72 said:

 

Very short sighted, as always. Expect nothing less from you. Lynch got here in 2017, much like Ballard did in 2017.

 

Lynch:

2017 - Solomon Thomas (No.3) - hit and miss

2018 - Mike McGlinchey (No.9)

2019 - Nick Bosa (No.2)

 

Ballard:

2017 - Malik Hooker (No.15) - hit and miss

2018 - Quenton Nelson (No.6)

2019 - trade back

 

Lynch got 2 guys for his DL and 1 OT in Round 1 in his 3 years while Ballard got a FS and OG, plus traded back last year. Sitting at No.2 and No.3, his choices were Bosa and Solomon Thomas. Bosa has been a great contributor but Thomas has been far more miss than a hit. The DL picks from prior to when Lynch got there - Armstead and Buckner are now seasoned into their 4th and 5th years and it shows because the DL position, compared to the DE position, takes more time to season because you deal with more than just 1-on-1s inside. Bosa gets the 1-on-1 enough times because there is talent all along the DL that was drafted before him. That is why Freeney and Mathis got double teams because nobody inside demanded double teams in the Polian era, that is just how DL play works.

 

Lynch drafted a Notre Dame tackle, we drafted a Notre Dame guard, both have been successful. The trenches need to be fortified, Ballard always says, so the OL pick was completely justified and has helped our OL tremendously, and has been a big part of balance on our offense, little did we know our Pro Bowl QB would retire in a couple of years after Ballard got here.

 

So, objectively speaking, Lynch's pick of Solomon Thomas has not panned out but his predecessor's picks of Armstead and Buckner along with his pick of Bosa combined has panned out for the 49ers. Ballard's pick of Hooker has not panned out like it should have but the OG pick panned out real good. For what it is worth, 49ers did draft a FS named Eric Reid at No.18, close to the No.15 where we got Hooker in 2013, and Jimmie Ward at No.30 in 2014, and Ward is still with the 49ers. They have been good but nothing spectacular.

 

In other words, it took several years of DL picks for the 49ers to reap the benefits now. The key difference is FA moves that Lynch made - Jimmy G at QB, Richard Sherman at CB, Kwon Alexander at LB, Tevin Coleman at RB, Dee Ford at DE that have put them over the hump, IMO on top of the maturing DL picks from before Lynch got there. I also do not know if Pagano had any saying in the drafting of Malik Hooker either, just don't know. 

 

At some point, however, Ballard's reluctance to play free agency will catch up with him as not all holes can be filled with the draft. 49ers are like the Jaguars where the draft picks and FA moves all came together in 2017 for a great run but they had inferior coaching and inferior QB play, neither of which are problems the 49ers have, and that helps with sustained winning.

Why getting personal, did I ruin some ongoing narrative you have convinced yourself of?    I'm talking about the three year timeline, which is the topic of the thread, and I included Ballard's predecessor's choice.

 

Check the bolded above, the players you raised as being difference makers.  Did Lynch or his predecessor use significant capital to acquire a LG, FS, or C?  Even 4 or 5 years ago.  Apparently, even the guy who got fired at SF didn't make that mistake.

 

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

A pocket passer or a make plays from outside the pocket guy. Why is it one or the other? I'm hoping Ballard is looking for a QB who can use the time Oline gives him to make plays from the pocket, but when things break down can also make plays from outside the pocket.

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, coltsva said:

A pocket passer or a make plays from outside the pocket guy. Why is it one or the other? I'm hoping Ballard is looking for a QB who can use the time Oline gives him to make plays from the pocket, but when things break down can also make plays from outside the pocket.

 

Yep. Didn't we just have one in Andrew Luck that used the time but also made plays outside the pocket when things broke down? I don't see why they have to be mutually exclusive. 

  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Mitch Connors said:

 

The Luck excuse is officially over.

 

Ballard knows Luck is not part of this team.

He has a top 15 pick. 

He has cap space (in part due to Luck leaving).

 

Relevant to the topic, the 49ers knew they needed a QB so they got one via trade. If Ballard CHOOSES to ignore a QB in the draft, trade and/or free agency the results are on him and have nothing to do with Luck.

 

The luck excuse ended at the end of this year, that is true, but when evaluating this team, in it's current spot, and this past season, the Andrew excuse is as valid as any other reason. If ballard does nothing to address this, then people can start grumbling. Until then, it is a bit premature Imo. 

  • Like 4
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, DougDew said:

That may be a fact, but that's not what gives Mahomes his identity.  We're being drawn towards wanting more of a broken play, play maker.

 

Luck was known for getting killed in the pocket, which is why Ballard drafted a G at 6 and a G/T at 35.  To "fix" the Oline and to quiet the narrative that a poor oline is what got him injured.

 

No. He drafted them because they were the best players available in his opinion.   

 

Also,  Luck ran just as much as Mahomes does. 

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

That explains a lot about why we have been slow to achieve.

 

Slow to achieve?  We just went 7-9 without our franchise QB.  The 49ers went 4-12 without their franchise QB...

 

It's entirely possible that if our DLine (Turay) stayed healthy, we might have won an extra game here or there and made the playoffs, then won the AFCCG with our QB only having to throw the ball 8 times thanks to a strong running game (#5) and defense.  We already beat KC once this year (in KC), we could have done it again.  :thmup:

 

19 minutes ago, DougDew said:

Why getting personal, did I ruin some ongoing narrative you have convinced yourself of?

 

I think you're using this thread to add to your ongoing narrative you've convinced yourself of about Ballards' 1st-round picks.  :nono:

  • Like 2
  • Haha 1
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.


  • Thread of the Week

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • I certainly understand the Ingram intrigue but I'd have to go with Kerrigan here. His body has a lot more left in the tank than Ingram and his body is as healthy as can be due to Washington's dominant young d-line. Kerrigan could certainly give us 1-2 years of above average play! 
    • I remember it like yesterday, then read the reasons shortly after the selection, and they made sense.  Edge played at The U, which ran the stretch, and the Colts were running it as well.  Edge also had fewer miles on his legs, due to being in running back by committee for most of his career there.  Lastly, Edge was the better receiver and pass blocker.    I sometimes wonder if Ditka thought about making that insane offer to the Colts first? 
    • I don't care how he tested (especially this year, when all those pro-day tests are under serious question)... I care how he plays and how he looks on tape. Players that didn't test off-the-charts are some of the best playmakers in football - Mahomes ran 4.82 with 30 inch vertical. I'd take him over any of the best athletes in the league making plays on the move. With that said... I don't see Mac Jones in similar light even though they tested very similarly. I don't think he's stuck in mud in the pocket. But I do not think he has enough mobility to scramble when needed. He will be one of the worst scrambling starting QBs in the league IMO. I think him scrambling will be extremely rare in the league. I just don't think he has the mobility and physical talent to do it while launching the ball downfield.    I like him too. But there are levels to this thing. I like him as a late first-second round QB. I think he can be a good productive QB in the right system(Shannahan system for example). I don't like him enough to give up 3 1st round picks + 3d for him, though. This is my whole contention here. He's just not THAT type of player IMO. Lance and Fields are. 
    • You may end up being right, but I hope that we add some talent here   As a HUGE Ohio State fan....  I WANT Lewis to step up....  He seemed to improve a bit, but, in my opinion there needs to be a talent influx on the DE   I have a recurring nightmare of Patrick M........ getting 30 seconds to throw...
    • Also, just because I'm starting to feel some kind of way about this, Mac Jones is getting short changed these days. He's a really good prospect, and people are treating him like he's an unathletic bum with no arm.   Blake Bortles went #3 in 2014. Sam Darnold went #3, and Josh Rosen went #10 in 2018. None of them were unable to succeed due to athletic shortcomings. Mac Jones tested just as good, if not better, than all of them. (Bortles was actually pretty good as a scrambler, despite his mediocre testing.) I already used the Jared Goff comparison; he went #1 in 2016, and went to the SB in 2018. Mac Jones tested as good as Goff.   He doesn't have super speed or quickness, but he's not stuck in mud. He moves well enough to stay alive in the pocket, and he has enough movement ability to scramble when needed. He doesn't have a cannon of an arm, but his arm is not deficient. He's very good from the pocket, he processes well, not a one-read thrower, very accurate, and tough.    If Bortles, Darnold and Goff could go top five in the last 7 years, so can Mac Jones. Of course, he needs to be better than them to live up to that draft status, but again, their issues weren't about lacking athleticism.    Just saying, again, the anti-Mac stuff is getting a little overboard. I like Fields and Lance better, but Mac Jones being desirable isn't entirely outrageous.
  • Members

    • Shive

      Shive 2,299

      Moderators
      Joined:
      Last active:
    • twfish

      twfish 1,127

      Senior Member
      Joined:
      Last active:
    • DeepseaColt

      DeepseaColt 3

      New Member
      Joined:
      Last active:
    • Knuckles79

      Knuckles79 76

      Member
      Joined:
      Last active:
    • ColtsGermany

      ColtsGermany 310

      Member
      Joined:
      Last active:
    • cdgacoltsfan

      cdgacoltsfan 644

      Senior Member
      Joined:
      Last active:
    • stitches

      stitches 8,444

      Senior Member
      Joined:
      Last active:
    • WoolMagnet

      WoolMagnet 3,223

      Senior Member
      Joined:
      Last active:
    • ColtV

      ColtV 243

      Member
      Joined:
      Last active:
    • bWild

      bWild 25

      Member
      Joined:
      Last active:
×
×
  • Create New...