Jump to content
Indianapolis Colts
Indianapolis Colts Fan Forum

Is Ballard just Meh?


Jdubu

Recommended Posts

21 minutes ago, jameszeigler834 said:

First of all if he was capable of playing at MVP level for a whole year then ya worth paying the money but the reality is he sucked he cant hit the broad side of a barn.


That’s not the point. The point is that if he played well and you extended him in the offseason prior, you have a high-performing QB at a very good price instead of having to pay him a lot more than that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 227
  • Created
  • Last Reply
22 minutes ago, DougDew said:

Meh is in the eye of the beholder as to what it means.  I don't think he's meh, but several replies here just fail to see reality.

 

He did NOT inherit a bad situation.  Unlike most GMs, he inherited a team that was 8-8 at its five year worst.

 

He did NOT inherit a terrible roster.  Some in the fan base who judge everything on how strong the Oline is keep saying that Ballard inherited a bad roster just because he inherited a bad oline.  In fact, by the contracts he's about to hand out, he inherited a top 5 LT and a top 5 C, so saying that the oline was bad may not even be accurate.   Not to mention he just resigned Clark who may be finally developing over that big guy Ballard drafted his first year.  Ballard inherited a QB who held the ball too long looking for the chunk play.

 

Ballard inherited a bad defense and a bad defensive scheme.  Ballard himself set his timeline back by making moves to satisfy that scheme.  He signed Hankins and Simon, then cut them when he changed schemes.  He cut a good player, Henry Anderson, simply because he was not a scheme fit.  He drafted Hooker, who some fans defend the pick, was drafted to play in the 34 man, not our 43 zone....and no....our 43 man deep zone cover 1 was never the intent, but has been an after thought, IMO.

 

Ballard switched schemes, so whatever roster he inherited and spent capital adding to himself is moot because the players would have all been churned by now because of the scheme change.

 

Ballard owns this defense.  Its tough to say that he is languishing under the lingering albatross the previous GM gave him.  Whatever albatross there may be, Ballard added to it himself by the decisions he made his first year here.

 

The QB situation was an unfortunate set back.  Not his fault, kind of like a pandemic.  But his response so far was to sign his backup to a very big contract before the backup even showed much.  Now he's now signed a 38 year old vet to an expensive contract because the unproven backup has shown he never deserved the contract.

 

The Colts offensive skill positions are probably worse than when he got here, considering we have one TE (the other one he signed flamed out), still no #2, and TY is probably a step slower.

 

The defense is coming along by making good decisions about value and player selection.  Took pick 13 to make a big step, and that's not unusual or special.  The offense needs to improve the QB and skill positions.  I assume they will be addressed this draft.

 

He inherited a good center and LT the other 3 spots where filled with guys who either no longer play in the NFL or are on the roster bubble.  They where not even good backups.

 

Clark was drafted by Grigson.

 

Skill position is probably better than you realize.  Everyone forgets about Paris Campbell or acts like he is a busy just because he didn't have a big rookie year.  Wide receivers take time to develop and Campbell wasn't asked to do a lot.

 

TE I Grant has not improved.

 

Defense is way better.  Hooker is a better safety than anyone who played here under Grigson save for maybe the one year that Bethea played under Grigs.  Heck even Geathers is better than anyone who played safety under Grigs save for Bethea and we are getting rid of Geathers.

 

Our LB are better than anyone who played under Grigson.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

31 minutes ago, Restored said:

 

Exactly.

 

Let's say JB came in and played at an MVP-type level the whole season and the Colts didn't extend him in the offseason prior. At that point, the Colts are looking at having to pay a substantial amount of money (albeit deservedly so) to keep him.

 

Rather, had the Colts extended him in this scenario, they would have been in a much better position financially with a QB that has performed exceedingly well.

It would buy them 1 year, 1! Could have done the exact same thing under your theory and just tagged him and paid the same over the 2 seasons. He took risk, gambled and lost that bet. Again, didn’t cripple the team, just has not managed the QB spot well since arriving. Luck threw the curve ball and CB whiffed on that challenge. He has certainly hit homers on other aspects, it’s just this has been his area of concern(QB), just like it was Grigsons flaw (one of many) Is that he didn’t fix the oline ( and for those lacking comprehension skills, CB’s issues aren’t the oline). 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Jdubu said:

Exactly!! Just because I’ve pointed out where I’ve seen flaws, it is posted nowhere in my post that says he is awful, he should be fired or I wished we had Grigson back. I’m not a rah rah guy and dont paint with rainbow colors. I know it was a long post but to the couple of posters who read the post and then felt it stated he didn’t fix the oline or that he sucks, can’t comprehend what they read.  They’ve predetermined that it’s not fair to say anything negative about CB or they don’t care for this posters style so it’s automatically a post they won’t like. I’m broad shouldered. I’ll survive that lol. 

I really like both Ballard and Reich, but I've been plenty critical about different aspects of both guys. Some on the board are in worship mode lol, and that's fine. I've stuck up for both on different topics, and slammed them for other things. Neither have been close to perfect, but like you said, not calling them bad, or saying they need to be fired lol. I just prefer to look at the whole picture and be able to discuss both good and bad. Objective > worship... 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Restored said:

 

How could he have had a better pulse on Luck's situation over three years? Outside of maybe a few players and possibly Luck's family, no one and I mean NO ONE had any idea Luck was going to retire when he did.

That's exactly a problem. If you've ever managed a large organization, or even just a medium one, you know that you have individuals that are key to your success (high performers). While you strive to treat everyone the same, you know that your business's success can be overly dependent on just a few people, and you know you have to treat those folks a bit differently, and do everything you can to understand where they're at (happiness, contentment, etc.). 

1 hour ago, Restored said:

Paying that much for a backup for a season is fine when he is still capable of winning you games should something happen to Rivers. Sure, that $15 million could go to another position but I don't have any problems with it given that it's only for this coming season. Keep in mind you can still trade him or release him as well and still not have any long-term ramifications either way. I agree that they probably thought JB was better than he actually was and maybe thought Frank's system could help him ascend but it clearly only worked for about 7 games.

Paying him that much is no big deal if they had planned to sit on the money. It is a big deal if they weren't, and it keep them from paying for another impact player, or even a few quality depth guys. He's getting close top DE or DT money, as much or more than tier one WR and CB money, etc.. It's not a long term impact, but it's a significant one year impact.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, ColtStrong2013 said:


High B for me. Had Andrew not retired, he’d be talked about as the top GM in the league. That was a restart button on the rebuild, which added a few more years. His ability to pull the trades that he has is top notch, and it’s because when he calls, good gm’s listen. He creates value for both parties, and that’s how good trading is done. Most teams don’t know how, and it shows.

If you look back at all his trades and FA signings, they are certainly not all perfect, and certainly some are debatable and/or deserve criticism. One of his latest (Hairston) yielded no value even though Hairston started a decent amount of games, and was basically 3rd in snaps at CB. Whatever the terms were for the conditional pick, they were bad. You can look at his use and tell the Jets manipulated his snaps/games. I do love the Buckner trade, but we did absolutely pay a premium both in draft capital and $. 3T has been overlooked for too long.

1 hour ago, ColtStrong2013 said:

He’s also drafted well. His one draft that had him picking at a premium netted 5 starters, possibly 6 with the 34th this year being a domino effect for that trade. He’s playing Madden in real life, he just has to figure out the QB room, which again wasn’t part of his plan when he signed up here...  his “misses” aren’t big enough to justify that kind of negative response, IMO. To each their own opinion though... 

Drafts haven't been perfect either. He's had some great picks for sure, but he's also had questionable ones too. I expect starters out of the first two rounds, and I expect pro bowlers out of top 15. He's also had some great luck in the later rounds. That said, given the poor state of the roster, it was much easier to look good. Now that the roster talent is better, it will become tougher to upgrade. Overall I love most of it. Probably the thing I like least was his taking four 2nd/3rd round DEs over three years that were all projects/situational guys, that really haven't netted us a true starter yet. It's all a crap shoot, I get it. He's done great some, not so great on others. This year will be big for him.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 hours ago, Zoltan said:

 

Are you serious? Ballard has way improved our OL, this thread seems like a joke. People get mad when he doesn't spend during Free Agency, now people are mad because he spent money on a QB and DT which filled our biggest holes.

 

Now on the Drafts, no front office hits on every pick its impossible, they'll have some good drafts and bad drafts the key is to have more good then bad.

 

He wasn't saying Ballard didn't fix the OL...he was using Grigs not being able to do it as a comparison to Ballard and the QB position. It's written awkwardly.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Jdubu said:

I’ll stand firm on the virus take still. I won’t rehash that. 
 

you still seem to have the comprehension of a 2nd grader at best as well. So please take your little high horse, elitist self absorbed fandom and remove my stupidity from your notifications list. Spare yourself the drivel I spew out. 

What’s wrong with my reading comprehension?    You’re the one who literally wrote that Ballard has failed to fix the O-line as other GM’s had also failed.   That is not only 100 percent false,  the exact opposite is true.   The Colts are now recognized as having a top-5 O-line and 3 of the 5 players were acquired by Chris Ballard.   I’m not even sure you understand what you write. 
 

Your list is filled with errors, like the one I just demonstrated.  It’s filled with half-truths, distortions and omissions.  Most of all, it’s filled with opinion.  But very few facts for a post of that length.

As for me being an elitist AND a second grader...   thanks!  That’s a pretty neat trick to pull off!  And a first for me!   But hey...   I’ve been called much worse by much better.   But hey, you’re entitled to your opinion.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

51 minutes ago, EastStreet said:

I really like both Ballard and Reich, but I've been plenty critical about different aspects of both guys. Some on the board are in worship mode lol, and that's fine. I've stuck up for both on different topics, and slammed them for other things. Neither have been close to perfect, but like you said, not calling them bad, or saying they need to be fired lol. I just prefer to look at the whole picture and be able to discuss both good and bad. Objective > worship... 

 

To this board (and the mods) credit...Colts Forum is probably the most objective message board for Colts fans out there. The Colts subreddit has been taken over by groupthink (certain types of upvoted for no reason and others downvoted en masse)...and it has a contingent of Binder Blinders...though it seems to be getting better in some ways.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, shastamasta said:

To this board (and the mods) credit...Colts Forum is probably the most objective message board for Colts fans out there. The Colts subreddit has been taken over by groupthink (certain types of upvoted for no reason and others downvoted en masse)...and it has a contingent of Binder Blinders...though it seems to be getting better in some ways.

Boards have all types. Most have their vocal extremes, and a lot of middle folks. I've limited the # of boards I post on to only one per team lol, and even at that, I really only take the time to post on 2 boards these days. I don't post for my baseball team anymore at all, and rarely for my College or Pro Basketball teams anymore. All boards have a personality lol. I like this one most days. My biggest dig, is that it's too mess (too many threads). Seems we get a thread every time someone scratches their nose, or tweets, and repeat threads on the same topic way too much. I've gotten used to it, so no biggee... 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Valpo2004 said:

 

If JB played well he becomes a FA with all the leverage and the Colts none.

 

Yes it cost us some money but that is something we have plenty of.

 

It protected us from possibly of giving JB the biggest contract in the league just to prevent him from walking.

 

Colts had the franchise tag...which they would exercised if they needed more time to hash out the contract. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Jared Cisneros said:

I know that, and I love Buckner. My issue is Buckners age combined with our QB situation. Rivers will only last another year or two at a high level, which combined with Buckner, makes us a win-now team. We don't have a 1st round pick to take a QB to develop, so anything we take is going to be in the Eason, Fromm, Gordon category. Rivers, Brissett, and Kelly's contracts all run out next year. So as of now, we have no QB beyond this year. When we have a drafted QB ready to compete, Buckner could be 30. Rivers is a temporary, win now solution that delays the development of a franchise QB, and it's going to cost us Nelson, Leonard and Buckners best years. Not sure we can win with Rivers right now. I'm also not sure how we're going to draft a decent QB this year. We literally might put it off a year which will cause us to start a rookie two years from now, and not be competitive for three years if Rivers can't take us to a title.

I dont get the whole draft a qb and let him develop.  Name a qb that was drafted for the sole purpose of developing.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Valpo2004 said:

 

He inherited a good center and LT the other 3 spots where filled with guys who either no longer play in the NFL or are on the roster bubble.  They where not even good backups.

 

Clark was drafted by Grigson.

 

Skill position is probably better than you realize.  Everyone forgets about Paris Campbell or acts like he is a busy just because he didn't have a big rookie year.  Wide receivers take time to develop and Campbell wasn't asked to do a lot.

 

TE I Grant has not improved.

 

Defense is way better.  Hooker is a better safety than anyone who played here under Grigson save for maybe the one year that Bethea played under Grigs.  Heck even Geathers is better than anyone who played safety under Grigs save for Bethea and we are getting rid of Geathers.

 

Our LB are better than anyone who played under Grigson.

I'm not going to do the usual excuse making by judging Ballard's performance by always comparing it to Grigson.  Ballard can stand on his own.

 

The oline was not as bad, nor the cause, of as much of the problems as the pancake lovers want to pretend.  Funny, but Luck didn't seem to have as many setbacks and problems moving the ball when Reggie was healthy...IOW, a decent #2.  Arguably in his early years, Luck had a worse Oline when AC was the only non mid level vet on it and he didn't have as many issues.  That's because we had two decent TEs, Ahmad Bradshaw, TY and Reggie, not to mention Donnie Avery for a year.  Currently, our crop of skill players is not as good.

 

The fact that Hooker is better than Adams, arguably only, has nothing to do with as to whether or not switching to a 43 zone the year after a 34 man FS was drafted high, was a self inflicted result.

 

However someone wants to judge Ballard, he has no Grigson albatross with which to use as any excuse.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Grading Ballard at this point is a kind of nuanced thing and who the heck wants nuance? The record has been "meh", but you've got to frame it properly. The team was gutted aside from a few nice parts (and one obvious Blue Chip that retired) when he took over. The lines are both far better than we Colts fans are used to. There hasn't been too many glaring errors like a Trent Richardson move, the drafts have been solid. 

He's doing what on paper so many football people preach. Don't reach, don't overspend, create depth ect.

 

The thing of it is when he drafts a QB the clock is on as most people can follow that. You could surmise that he's not going to put himself on the QB clock until it's necessary. It gives him time to do the rest of the roster and there's no massive commitment to the wrong guy by doing what he's doing with Rivers.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, EastStreet said:

What does it mean to you?

I don't know what it means to him, but I'll tell you my thoughts.

 

I dont think a guy you draft in the 1st round(as the 3 listed above), is a development qb.

 

Sitting a year vs developing is 2 different things. 

 

Developmental is drafting someone in mid round that you put multiple years in hoping he can reach his potential.(I understand Rodgers set more than one year, but will fall under my description below.)

 

These 1st round guys are more developed, just need a little time to adjust to the NFL. Still obviously need to work on things, but immediate expectations are higher. 

 

 

I dont know if any of that made sense? Lol but thats my thoughts

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Jdubu said:

If he played as well as you hoped in giving him the nice contract, wouldn’t you want him signed into a new 5 year contract? It was an early offering of two years, didn’t need to do it but it wasn’t crippling to the team, it was just unnecessary 

 

The answer is yes IMO. Maybe not 5 years...but in the event he performed at a very high level...it's 95% likely his current contract would have been renegotiated to some big multi-year extension...so that one year would have been nothing more than a symbolic starting point (and at a $21M cap hit...a pretty high starting point). The franchise tag would have served the same purpose.

 

Thinking about this pragmatically...it's hard to imagine any scenario where JB heads into next season as the starting QB under his current contract. Either he performs at a high level...and gets an extension...or he doesn't...and a change is needed. I can't see Ballard going another season with a QB he wasn't sure about (and as we now know...he wasn't willing to).

 

So the trade off really didn't make sense. The Colts took a gamble and gt'd money early (attaching a not small amount of future cap space)...to the idea that JB would be worth a huge extension...with the risk that if you whiff is that you are either you end up with a dead cap hit...or you keep JB and he counts $21M against the cap.

 

I have argued against that deal since it happened...as it did not make sense from a football or business standpoint. And now we can judge it on the results...and it was a fail.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 minutes ago, EastStreet said:

What does it mean to you?

Developmental is the intent of total over hauling a player.  Mahommes was a top 10 player.  I doubt Reid traded up with idea of developing him.  He knew he could play in the NFL and he  built an offense around his talents.  Rodgers was slated to go as high as #1.  He fell because teams didnt need a qb in that draft.  Lamar was drafted with the intent of building an offense around him based on his skill set.  I bet when these trams drafted these 3 players, they were pretty confident they could play in the NFL. Developmental picks, r guys u pick way later in the draft. Just my 2 cents

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, Jdubu said:

Learn comprehension skills before criticizing my post or move on. It’s contrasting how Grigson had in fixing the line and how CB is now having difficulties finding the right QB. And if I can’t criticize CB for making poor choices so far on his QB selection process, what good is a forum where fans get to state their views? Don’t be so sensitive on CB criticism. 


in my defense you did write it weirdly, and you can criticize CB but I can also criticize the people who just seem to hate on every move. Especially when you see some people say he needs to do something, then criticize him for doing what they said they wanted him to do. 


Im not being sensitive, I just hate hypocrisy, sounds like though you are being sensitive to my criticism haha

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, w87r said:

I don't know what it means to him, but I'll tell you my thoughts.

 

I dont think a guy you draft in the 1st round(as the 3 listed above), is a development qb.

 

Sitting a year vs developing is 2 different things. 

 

Developmental is drafting someone in mid round that you put multiple years in hoping he can reach his potential.(I understand Rodgers set more than one year, but will fall under my description below.)

 

These 1st round guys are more developed, just need a little time to adjust to the NFL. Still obviously need to work on things, but immediate expectations are higher. 

 

I dont know if any of that made sense? Lol but thats my thoughts

I understand your opinion, but don't necessarily agree.

 

I absolutely think a 1st round guy can be a developmental QB. A lot of GMs draft QBs, not because they are ready, but because of traits. And GMs are always "reaching" at QB. A system QB like Mahomes is the perfect example. He was seen by most analysts as a boom or bust prospect, and projected him to go very late 1st to somewhere in the 2nd. Many called his selection as a reach. They talked about him as a product of "system" and questioned his decisions. Jackson was also seen as a guy who needed a ton of development as a passer, and frankly he still needs development as a passer.

 

In short, there are typically very few "ready now" QBs. Burrow is probably closest to that this year. Tua as well, but Burrow is far more prototypical. All the rest, need development, and that includes those drafted early because of traits. You can literally look back at every draft and see it. And there are "levels" of development. Some guys might need only a little polish and adjust to NFL speed, while others come from "system" offenses that need to learn a whole new scheme. Others need to work on mechanics, footwork, and the basics.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

43 minutes ago, Moosejawcolt said:

Developmental is the intent of total over hauling a player.  Mahommes was a top 10 player.  I doubt Reid traded up with idea of developing him.  He knew he could play in the NFL and he  built an offense around his talents.  Rodgers was slated to go as high as #1.  He fell because teams didnt need a qb in that draft.  Lamar was drafted with the intent of building an offense around him based on his skill set.  I bet when these trams drafted these 3 players, they were pretty confident they could play in the NFL. Developmental picks, r guys u pick way later in the draft. Just my 2 cents

Disagree. There are many levels and development. A total overhaul is to the level of "project". Mahomes was seen as a system guy with questionable decision making. He was far from ready now, and post draft, many called it a huge reach. See my previous post/reply to W87r for additional.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, EastStreet said:

That's exactly a problem. If you've ever managed a large organization, or even just a medium one, you know that you have individuals that are key to your success (high performers). While you strive to treat everyone the same, you know that your business's success can be overly dependent on just a few people, and you know you have to treat those folks a bit differently, and do everything you can to understand where they're at (happiness, contentment, etc.). 

 

Very familiar with organizational treatment of key employees and how it all works. Again, no one knew or really had any idea that Luck was considering retiring until (according to what Ballard has said) about a week or two before he actually did it. Great employees that you are dependent on sometimes just up and quit with little to no indication prior. It happens.

 

 

Quote

Paying him that much is no big deal if they had planned to sit on the money. It is a big deal if they weren't, and it keep them from paying for another impact player, or even a few quality depth guys. He's getting close top DE or DT money, as much or more than tier one WR and CB money, etc.. It's not a long term impact, but it's a significant one year impact.

 

Let's look at it another way. Had JB performed exceedingly well and the Colts were forced to do a deal this offseason instead of the last, their ability to bargain becomes severely hampered. Not to mention the deal that they structured allows them to move on after this season, when key players like TY Hilton, Marlon Mack and others are set to hit free agency. This is all without saying that the Colts are still likely to deal or release JB anyway.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, Jdubu said:

It would buy them 1 year, 1! Could have done the exact same thing under your theory and just tagged him and paid the same over the 2 seasons. He took risk, gambled and lost that bet. Again, didn’t cripple the team, just has not managed the QB spot well since arriving. Luck threw the curve ball and CB whiffed on that challenge. He has certainly hit homers on other aspects, it’s just this has been his area of concern(QB), just like it was Grigsons flaw (one of many) Is that he didn’t fix the oline ( and for those lacking comprehension skills, CB’s issues aren’t the oline). 

 

I wouldn't say he hasn't managed it well. I think he's done about as good of a job that you could ask when your franchise QB retires two weeks before the season starts. He went with a younger player that flashed some potential but didn't commit long-term.

 

I think if there is any test to determine how he can manage the QB spot, it will be seen this coming season. Will the Rivers signing pan out? Will he ship JB or keep him? What about Kelly? The draft? A lot of questions centered around the team's most important position that should be this year.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Restored said:

 

Very familiar with organizational treatment of key employees and how it all works. Again, no one knew or really had any idea that Luck was considering retiring until (according to what Ballard has said) about a week or two before he actually did it. Great employees that you are dependent on sometimes just up and quit with little to no indication prior. It happens.

That's why I said it's important to keep your finger on the pulse. I make it my business, and I make it the director's and manager's business under me to know what is going on. To me, having zero clue about Luck until that late in the game tells me someone wasn't doing their job. He talked about years of emotion on the topic.

Just now, Restored said:

Let's look at it another way. Had JB performed exceedingly well and the Colts were forced to do a deal this offseason instead of the last, their ability to bargain becomes severely hampered. Not to mention the deal that they structured allows them to move on after this season, when key players like TY Hilton, Marlon Mack and others are set to hit free agency. This is all without saying that the Colts are still more than likely to deal or release JB anyway.

That's just it. He didn't perform exceedingly well, and frankly many did not expect him too. There's nothing in his past that signals he'd be much more than a game manager type QB. He's never been good at reads/progressions. He's never been good at the deep ball. He's always held the ball long and took too much time to process. He's never had a prolific season even in college in a weak division. If anyone expected him to flip the switch on all of those basic things, they weren't being realistic. "Leadership" only goes so far.

 

And if anyone thought he was going to so great that he demanded a huge price this year after finishing out his old contract, again, not realistic. In short, they wanted to be "nice" and "safe". It didn't work out. And I'd say the odds of dealing or releasing JB just got a lot smaller.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, EastStreet said:

That's why I said it's important to keep your finger on the pulse. I make it my business, and I make it the director's and manager's business under me to know what is going on. To me, having zero clue about Luck until that late in the game tells me someone wasn't doing their job. He talked about years of emotion on the topic.

 

That's speculative at best. For all we know, Ballard and Frank could have been talking to Luck every single day and Luck could've still kept it a secret. There's a lot of missing information that we don't have to and to think that they weren't doing their job because they didn't know is a stretch. But what we do know is that some Luck's closest football friends didn't have a clue he was even considering this. Matt Hasselbeck reportedly contacted Adam Schefter after he broke the news and thought he was lying because he had no idea that Luck was planning to retire.

 

Quote

That's just it. He didn't perform exceedingly well, and frankly many did not expect him too. There's nothing in his past that signals he'd be much more than a game manager type QB. He's never been good at reads/progressions. He's never been good at the deep ball. He's always held the ball long and took too much time to process. He's never had a prolific season even in college in a weak division. If anyone expected him to flip the switch on all of those basic things, they weren't being realistic. "Leadership" only goes so far.

 

And if anyone thought he was going to so great that he demanded a huge price this year after finishing out his old contract, again, not realistic. In short, they wanted to be "nice" and "safe". It didn't work out. And I'd say the odds of dealing or releasing JB just got a lot smaller.

 

Sure, in hindsight you can say that they shouldn't have extended him but that's not the point. The point is that the Colts were hedging their bets without committing long-term, which makes it a solid move. If JB came in and did well, the Colts are sitting with a good QB at a fair price. If he didn't perform well (which he didn't), they aren't on the hook for more than another season. Plus, there's always a level of uncertainty each offseason and the Colts had no real way to gauge that they could have possibly landed Rivers that far in advance nor know what draft options they could have. So yes, JB was the "safe" option but it was definitely the right one at the time given the circumstances. I still think releasing him is a viable option but I am not sure how much they could get on the trade market at this point.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 hours ago, Zoltan said:

 

Are you serious? Ballard has way improved our OL, this thread seems like a joke. People get mad when he doesn't spend during Free Agency, now people are mad because he spent money on a QB and DT which filled our biggest holes.

 

Now on the Drafts, no front office hits on every pick its impossible, they'll have some good drafts and bad drafts the key is to have more good then bad.

I think it's more a victim of poor grammar and punctuation.  The sentence should have read, "Much like Grigson, WHO couldn't fix the oline..."  It's the same type of mistakes made through the entire post. 

 

And as far as fixing the QB situation, that comment is pretty laughable.  I guess he was supposed to find a franchise signal caller 2 weeks before the season opener after the franchise signal caller quit the NFL.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Restored said:

 

That's speculative at best. For all we know, Ballard and Frank could have been talking to Luck every single day and Luck could've still kept it a secret. There's a lot of missing information that we don't have to and to think that they weren't doing their job because they didn't know is a stretch. But what we do know is that some Luck's closest football friends didn't have a clue he was even considering this. Matt Hasselbeck reportedly contacted Adam Schefter after he broke the news and thought he was lying because he had no idea that Luck was planning to retire.

Everything is speculative and opinion. In short, we can agree to disagree, I'm just unable to buy that someone can be emotionally traumatized for years from what Luck called the cycle of injury, the FO underestimating it or has zero clue about it, failed to see behavioral signs, and then have zero clue when it happens. 

1 hour ago, Restored said:

Sure, in hindsight you can say that they shouldn't have extended him but that's not the point. The point is that the Colts were hedging their bets without committing long-term, which makes it a solid move. If JB came in and did well, the Colts are sitting with a good QB at a fair price. If he didn't perform well (which he didn't), they aren't on the hook for more than another season. Plus, there's always a level of uncertainty each offseason and the Colts had no real way to gauge that they could have possibly landed Rivers that far in advance nor know what draft options they could have. So yes, JB was the "safe" option but it was definitely the right one at the time given the circumstances. I still think releasing him is a viable option but I am not sure how much they could get on the trade market at this point.

You're weighing the "hedging" very heavily. And you're discounting the failed evaluation aspects of it, not to mention the actual outcome. Again, we can agree to disagree. At the end of the day, the gamble/hedge failed.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, Zoltan said:


in my defense you did write it weirdly, and you can criticize CB but I can also criticize the people who just seem to hate on every move. Especially when you see some people say he needs to do something, then criticize him for doing what they said they wanted him to do. 


Im not being sensitive, I just hate hypocrisy, sounds like though you are being sensitive to my criticism haha

I thought I made it clear in the contrast of how each GM had their area of failure. It missed its intended mark, my bad. 
 

as for CB, I’ve not been a basher at all of him. I am currently questioning his handling of the QB situation since he arrived, that included his year 1 with Tolzein and then the rush to get JB, which was about all you could do at that point of the season. I then again have criticized his move to the 2 year deal but I’ve also pointed out along the thread that it hasn’t broken the back of the team but I felt it was highly unnecessary at that time to make it a 2 year gamble. Then the Hoyer deal. I mean if criticizing those moves aren’t allowed, what good is having a forum of different ideas?
 

CB has some warts, the question is reasonable to ask, is CB getting overhyped to a degree for coming in and doing something’s well right after a terrible GM left? I mean, everyone would have looked like a Cinderella after a Grigson like figure got the boot. Time will grade his moves in the near future. If he flails on finding a solid QB for the future, I don’t think just contending for playoff slots will give him Polian tenure, he will get replaced if he isn’t finding good success in the playoffs and winning a championship.  
 

as for being sensitive of you being sensitive to me, well now your being sensitive to my sensitivity to your sensitivity. So by default, I win the argument lol. 
 


 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

54 minutes ago, Jdubu said:

I thought I made it clear in the contrast of how each GM had their area of failure. It missed its intended mark, my bad. 
 

as for CB, I’ve not been a basher at all of him. I am currently questioning his handling of the QB situation since he arrived, that included his year 1 with Tolzein and then the rush to get JB, which was about all you could do at that point of the season. I then again have criticized his move to the 2 year deal but I’ve also pointed out along the thread that it hasn’t broken the back of the team but I felt it was highly unnecessary at that time to make it a 2 year gamble. Then the Hoyer deal. I mean if criticizing those moves aren’t allowed, what good is having a forum of different ideas?
 

CB has some warts, the question is reasonable to ask, is CB getting overhyped to a degree for coming in and doing something’s well right after a terrible GM left? I mean, everyone would have looked like a Cinderella after a Grigson like figure got the boot. Time will grade his moves in the near future. If he flails on finding a solid QB for the future, I don’t think just contending for playoff slots will give him Polian tenure, he will get replaced if he isn’t finding good success in the playoffs and winning a championship.  
 

as for being sensitive of you being sensitive to me, well now your being sensitive to my sensitivity to your sensitivity. So by default, I win the argument lol. 
 


 

 


Yeah I wasn’t targeting you with that post it was more to the broad population, that seems to never be happy with any moves

 

and I guess you do win lol

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I misunderstood the OPs post myself and had to reread it. I thought it strange that he used the word “meh” and yet the post seemed a complete hatchet job on the guy.  His mother dresses him funny and he has body odor. That’s like saying “ I’m so mad that I think he is just so-so at his job”. Of course, the usuals (pessimistic,  objective realists) came out of the woodwork to agree how bad our GM _________(fill in the blank) is. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

30 minutes ago, LockeDown said:

I misunderstood the OPs post myself and had to reread it. I thought it strange that he used the word “meh” and yet the post seemed a complete hatchet job on the guy.  His mother dresses him funny and he has body odor. That’s like saying “ I’m so mad that I think he is just so-so at his job”. Of course, the usuals (pessimistic,  objective realists) came out of the woodwork to agree how bad our GM _________(fill in the blank) is. 

I got the same vibes from it also. It reeked of distain. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So let me get this straight...Ballard has his franchise QB quit on him prior to the season starting and before the next draft and less than a week in FA he is being criticized for not having the situation resolved for the foreseeable future?  Talk about impatient. He signed the best QB that’s available this year.  I honestly believe that’s including those available in the draft. I believe all 4 of the top QBs in the draft have major bust written all over them. Maybe 1-2 will have some moderate success for 3-5 yrs but none of them are franchise guys.  I would not tie my future and career to any of them. Maybe I’m wrong and Ballard trades into the late first and grabs someone...who knows   

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, AwesomeAustin said:

So let me get this straight...Ballard has his franchise QB quit on him prior to the season starting and before the next draft and less than a week in FA he is being criticized for not having the situation resolved for the foreseeable future?  Talk about impatient. He signed the best QB that’s available this year.  I honestly believe that’s including those available in the draft. I believe all 4 of the top QBs in the draft have major bust written all over them. Maybe 1-2 will have some moderate success for 3-5 yrs but none of them are franchise guys.  I would not tie my future and career to any of them. Maybe I’m wrong and Ballard trades into the late first and grabs someone...who knows   

I think it's called over reaction. :dunno:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

We have a lot of good posters but about 20% in here are MEH IMO as in never satisfied, negative, or never happy.

 

Indianapolis franchise started in 1984

 

12 Divisional Round appearances = 1987, 1995, 1999, 2003, 2004, 2005, 2006, 2007, 2009, 2013, 2014, 2018. That is being in the Final 8.

 

5 AFC Title Game appearances = 1995, 2003, 2006, 2009, 2014

 

2 SB appearances = 2006, 2009

 

SB Champions in 2006

 

-because we weren't the Patriots some people are butt hurt. Go root for another team if you like cheaters. We have been in Indianapolis for 36 seasons and have made the Divisional Round 12 times, that means 1 in every 3 seasons we have been relevant. That is a pretty good ratio. Some people need to quit being spoiled baby's and enjoy what we have accomplished. We won a SB as well, many franchises have not.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, LockeDown said:

I misunderstood the OPs post myself and had to reread it. I thought it strange that he used the word “meh” and yet the post seemed a complete hatchet job on the guy.  His mother dresses him funny and he has body odor. That’s like saying “ I’m so mad that I think he is just so-so at his job”. Of course, the usuals (pessimistic,  objective realists) came out of the woodwork to agree how bad our GM _________(fill in the blank) is. 

 

1 hour ago, crazycolt1 said:

I got the same vibes from it also. It reeked of distain. 

No distain whatsoever. So if you and some others took it that way, sorry. 
 

I’ll be sure to point out that CB has cured the corona virus in my next posts so everyone can feel that it’s a more positive post. It’s clear here by the more softer kids on the forum that pointing out issues that are negative about CB, that isn’t tolerated here. 
 

last post in this thread for me. Maybe that will help others sleep better. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, 2006Coltsbestever said:

We have a lot of good posters but about 20% in here are MEH IMO as in never satisfied, negative, or never happy.

 

Indianapolis franchise started in 1984

 

12 Divisional Round appearances = 1987, 1995, 1999, 2003, 2004, 2005, 2006, 2007, 2009, 2013, 2014, 2018. That is being in the Final 8.

 

5 AFC Title Game appearances = 1995, 2003, 2006, 2009, 2014

 

2 SB appearances = 2006, 2009

 

SB Champions in 2006

 

-because we weren't the Patriots some people are butt hurt. Go root for another team if you like cheaters. We have been in Indianapolis for 36 seasons and have made the Divisional Round 12 times, that means 1 in every 3 seasons we have been relevant. That is a pretty good ratio. Some people need to quit being spoiled baby's and enjoy what we have accomplished. We won a SB as well, many franchises have not.

My friend if you think other team's boards are more positive.... I've got some doorknobs from China you might be interested in :-)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 3/21/2020 at 11:02 PM, Jdubu said:

So the QB spot is still a mess and CB appears to have either poorly judged JB or panicked into a high signing price. Now he signed to Hoyer to a ridiculous signing last year to mentor and help JB in the film room now neither of them are the answer. Did he panic and bring Rivers here too under a 1 yr deal with what follow up plan? No option for if Rivers does well, we keep him. Was Rivers that highly sought after that we couldn’t do a deal that gave either team control of next year or lower money this season? I’m seriously questioning his talent for this QB search at this point. Add into this how confused many are at how Kelly was handled last season. On the 53 but never active, kept when we needed a spot and we had 3 QB’s with Hoyer being the bad option of back up. Now what do we have in him and if nothing, why in the heck was he kept at the end of the season games when we could have cut him and kept Cain or brought in someone else, CB or WR? 
 

im tired and don’t have energy tonight to look but CB has signed guys to decent contracts and they failed or cut right early or drafted and cut. Desir, he was talked up, given some money and cut this year. We have Basham, Banner (gone), Wilson, looks to be gone. Hooker, looks like an a great player except first year. Hairston gone. Cain was talked about like a 5 star guy and he is gone. The whole kicker ordeal last season. What’s Tyquan Lewis? 
 

his free agent picks?
Hankins

Simon

Webb

slauson

I know I’m missing some and didn’t include our failed ones. 
 

he has had some nice draft picks for sure. Much like Grigs, he couldn’t fix the oline. Polian couldn’t fix the defense near his end. Now CB hasn’t been able to solve the QB situation and he seems like he panics with availability and he has overpaid and n other areas with contract concerns. If you overpay, better get some future control. 
 

Idk, I want to give him the benefit of the doubt and say he has had bad luck with 2019 being an absolute disaster in every way possible, he didn’t make good choices imho. If JB is his guy but couldn’t play well because of the knee, IR him, use your high paid back up. If he can’t play because he is bad, try your project guy or bring in another guy. He didn’t manage that well. 
 

The WR spot just got nothing from it. Ty hurt, DF hurt D. Fountain hurt, Cain cut, Ebron quit, kept a WR that was special teams at best that eventually got hurt. Just misfortune. 
 

at any point, just a lot of very concerning choices and odd decisions made by CB. If I were Irsay, I’d be like dude, you’ve spent my money like a 50/50 pot was on the line. You’ve guessed wrong a lot. I need to see you do better here this year. I’ve cut you a lot of checks. 

I totally disagree with you. I think CB has been the best thing that has happen to us in the last few years. Talk about the QB position. Yeah I'm sure he did believe in JB at first, but just like you mentioned all the names that CB didn't get right. All GM's are gonna make that mistake and take that risk. We will have to see, but I love the trade for Buckner and signing Rivers. JB is NOT the answer period! If we had drafted a QB (Which I didn't like any of them) we would be stuck for 3 to 4 year with them. I thought if CB would have done that he would have be panicking and making a bad decision. CB has build a pretty damn good D and a great O-Line, so yes we need to win asap. I believe we will make the playoffs with Rivers. If we don't then he goes and we finds another QB in FA or Draft. Yes we had Peyton and Luck but they don't come around often. Its the hardest position in sports. I think CB has done a GREAT job and looking forward to what he has coming. Feel blessed to be a COLTS fan...…. could be worst!  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Thread of the Week

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • we risk losing Paye and company in the next year or two… Right? 
    • Thats easy. Having great coverage. If noone is open the rush will get there.    Or, I wish we blitzed more like Spaignola does as QB's are considerably less accurate under duress.    The best offenses have QB's that get rid of the ball quickly which negates to a degree the pass rush.  Scholars here are buzzing madly about pressures. Joey Bosa had a crazy number of pressures but how many resulted in incompletions? He had 2 more sacks than Kwity and played roughly 175 more snaps.  Detroit's Hutchinson, in their playoff loss, had no pressures, no sacks, and 1 tackle as I recall. And a heckuva player. Truth is you better have really good ability at both, including highly intelligent fast players in the back seven.
    • Any news on the attempted talks with Blackmon?   Worst case scenario:  we don't sign Blackmon, or any other safety FA, miss out on what few guys there are in this very non-deep safety draft, and wind up going into the season with Cross and Thomas as our best two guys.  Ewwww.
    • My follow up is about what you think is the most cost-efficient way to acquire the needed players to make the defense work as designed.    As to your point about risk, I guess... If you think specific DE prospects just aren't that good, that's one thing. I'm definitely against propping up a prospect just because he plays a position of perceived need. But I would think that if the Colts take a DE at #15, they see him as a potential game changing pass rusher, and the expectation is for him to exceed what the guys on the roster have shown so far. No one can know for sure, but that's the nature of the draft.   At corner, I just think that a fundamental reason why the Colts prefer their zone heavy scheme is because it's easier to find corners who can excel at zone coverage. So there's less of a premium on the position in this scheme, and that's by design. I also don't think the top 4-5 corners in this class fit Ballard's preferred profile. (Side point: This is not conventional thinking, but I think the order of importance in this defense is 3T, Edge, Will, FS, then CB. I think the objective is to take away big plays, funnel routes to the middle, and have rangy playmakers at Will and FS who can create turnovers. I'm not saying that's how I would build a defense, but I think that's the intention. Which also influences my thinking on Ballard's preferences in the draft.)    The scheme element doesn't necessarily apply at WR, but I think the value at WR favors taking one on Day 2, and I think Ballard's appetite for second round WRs is well established. I'd be open to drafting a WR at #15, but I don't think the Colts will do it.   So if I was an oddsmaker, I'd favor the Colts going DE or DT at #15, just based on how I think the top of the draft will fall, and the players available. I think most fans prefer corner or WR, mostly because of perceived need, but I don't see that happening. Nothing would shock me, though.
    • Ballard on Free Agency:   “No doubt we looked into free agency in totality,” Ballard said. “I mean, we looked at everybody. It kind of worked out where it ended up being a lot of our own guys, which are all good players.”
  • Members

    • Horse Shoe Heaven

      Horse Shoe Heaven 250

      Senior Member
      Joined:
      Last active:
    • ColtStrong2013

      ColtStrong2013 3,233

      Senior Member
      Joined:
      Last active:
    • Smonroe

      Smonroe 6,202

      Senior Member
      Joined:
      Last active:
    • Superman

      Superman 20,309

      Moderators
      Joined:
      Last active:
    • KB

      KB 1,065

      Senior Member
      Joined:
      Last active:
    • coltsfanej

      coltsfanej 612

      Senior Member
      Joined:
      Last active:
    • Hawkeyecolt

      Hawkeyecolt 1,020

      Senior Member
      Joined:
      Last active:
    • SaturdayAllDay

      SaturdayAllDay 286

      Senior Member
      Joined:
      Last active:
    • IinD

      IinD 4,438

      Senior Member
      Joined:
      Last active:
    • Colts.com

      Colts.com 6

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