The past decade of drafting.

[dodsworth]

Ty, Kelly and Le Raven Clark are the only holdovers from the previous

regime's lack of drafting prowess. Move forward three short years, Ballard and company have stacked two excellent draft classes and a few good players from his 2017 first draft.

 

I haven't been more excited for upcoming drafts in the future.

In the past we may have found one quality player in the whole 

draft year, now we almost expect 4, 5 or 6 quality players to be picked

in any given draft. 

 

This is an awesome time to be a Colts fan! Bring on the draft!

[cdgacoltsfan]

Is Zack Banner still playing?

[Fluke_33]

5 minutes ago, cdgacoltsfan said:

Is Zack Banner still playing?

Yes.  Pittsburgh brings him in on special packages as an extra ol

[Scott Pennock]

Might be the only GM to have every draft pick from the last 3 years to still have every pick still in the league on a roster.

 

Basham and Hairston with Jets

Banner and Cain with Steelers

[NewColtsFan]

Before too long, there will be an anti-Ballard post...   remember,  some here think he’s only meh.....  

 

In 3....  2....  and 1....   

[CurBeatElite]

On 4/7/2020 at 2:28 PM, Scott Pennock said:

Might be the only GM to have every draft pick from the last 3 years to still have every pick still in the league on a roster.

 

Basham and Hairston with Jets

Banner and Cain with Steelers

 

And Jackson Barton on KC.

 

That is really remarkable.  

[Four2itus]

[Scott Pennock]

2 hours ago, CurBeatElite said:

 

And Jackson Barton on KC.

 

That is really remarkable.  

How could I forget the big man......he even got a ring!

[Myles]

On 4/7/2020 at 2:11 PM, dodsworth said:

Ty, Kelly and Le Raven Clark are the only holdovers from the previous

regime's lack of drafting prowess. Move forward three short years, Ballard and company have stacked two excellent draft classes and a few good players from his 2017 first draft.

 

I haven't been more excited for upcoming drafts in the future.

In the past we may have found one quality player in the whole 

draft year, now we almost expect 4, 5 or 6 quality players to be picked

in any given draft. 

 

This is an awesome time to be a Colts fan! Bring on the draft!

I sure hope it continues.   

If there is one obstacle, I would say that it is that his first few years, he had to find solid role players to build depth on this team.  Now that they are pretty solid, he may be tempted to shoot for the stars and take a chance on a player who could be great or could bust.  Maybe not though.  

[dodsworth]

47 minutes ago, Myles said:

I sure hope it continues.   

If there is one obstacle, I would say that it is that his first few years, he had to find solid role players to build depth on this team.  Now that they are pretty solid, he may be tempted to shoot for the stars and take a chance on a player who could be great or could bust.  Maybe not though.  

Ballard and his scouting team are very strict and unwavering in the draft

process so I don't believe they will be taking very many chances on 

sketchy players.

 

This draft should be about finding maybe a couple starters and the rest 

for depth and development for the future. We are in good hands. 

[CurBeatElite]

3 hours ago, Scott Pennock said:

How could I forget the big man......he even got a ring!

C'mon man!!!

[BornHoosier]

Still scratch my head today that a former OL, couldn't sniff an OL if it hit him in the buttocks.  This is Irsay's biggest failure IMO and I think he even knows it as he set this team back 5 yrs & ruined arguably the best qb prospect since Elway.  It's our destiny to accept that 2 number one overall picks didn't even come close to the success of a 6th rd lick.  Proves that this league is more than one guy and depends on a front office to determine success.  

[Moosejawcolt]

On 4/7/2020 at 12:11 PM, dodsworth said:

Ty, Kelly and Le Raven Clark are the only holdovers from the previous

regime's lack of drafting prowess. Move forward three short years, Ballard and company have stacked two excellent draft classes and a few good players from his 2017 first draft.

 

I haven't been more excited for upcoming drafts in the future.

In the past we may have found one quality player in the whole 

draft year, now we almost expect 4, 5 or 6 quality players to be picked

in any given draft. 

 

This is an awesome time to be a Colts fan! Bring on the draft!

I think we have to  pull back the reigns a little on Ballard's drafting.  Remember, he tore down this roster which means most of his draft picks would automatically beslide into starting positions with little or no competition.  Let's see how these young guys develop 1st.  I am interested to c if guys like  Hooker, Sin, Willis, Campbell, Lewis, Wilson, Tell, Okereke,Turay and Banagou can take the next step.  

[crazycolt1]

17 minutes ago, Moosejawcolt said:

I think we have to  pull back the reigns a little on Ballard's drafting.  Remember, he tore down this roster which means most of his draft picks would automatically beslide into starting positions with little or no competition.  Let's see how these young guys develop 1st.  I am interested to c if guys like  Hooker, Sin, Willis, Campbell, Lewis, Wilson, Tell, Okereke,Turay and Banagou can take the next step.  

Well you can pull back the reigns all you care to but personally in his short time as a GM he has done an excellent job IMO. 

Like it or not Ballard was dealt a bad hand the minute Luck retired. Now he has this team heading in the right direction. He is not as predictable as most thought with these off season moves. 

His record for finding good if not great players in the draft speaks for itself. 

I don't know what the percentage is for players making a NFL roster is for all the GMs but Ballard's is in the top of the class. 

So if a couple of guys you listed don't pan out it won't change the fact that Ballard is a very good if not a great GM. 

Not every player drafted is going to turn out to be a good player for the teams that drafted them. The players that have been drafted by Ballard are all on a NFL roster with the exception of one. 

Is that a sign of a GM that needs the reigns to be pulled back on? 

 

[Moosejawcolt]

23 minutes ago, crazycolt1 said:

Well you can pull back the reigns all you care to but personally in his short time as a GM he has done an excellent job IMO. 

Like it or not Ballard was dealt a bad hand the minute Luck retired. Now he has this team heading in the right direction. He is not as predictable as most thought with these off season moves. 

His record for finding good if not great players in the draft speaks for itself. 

I don't know what the percentage is for players making a NFL roster is for all the GMs but Ballard's is in the top of the class. 

So if a couple of guys you listed don't pan out it won't change the fact that Ballard is a very good if not a great GM. 

Not every player drafted is going to turn out to be a good player for the teams that drafted them. The players that have been drafted by Ballard are all on a NFL roster with the exception of one. 

Is that a sign of a GM that needs the reigns to be pulled back on? 

 

Yes.....it is.   

[crazycolt1]

58 minutes ago, Moosejawcolt said:

Yes.....it is.   

Well then you have a problem

Jim Irsay is the only person qualified to pull the reigns of Ballard. 

[Moosejawcolt]

1 minute ago, crazycolt1 said:

Well then you have a problem

Jim Irsay is the only person qualified to pull the reigns of Ballard. 

U totally missed my point.  Night

[crazycolt1]

Just now, Moosejawcolt said:

U totally missed my point.  Night

No I didn't miss your point. 

There is nothing in Ballard's past that has caused alarm nor the negativity you seem to want to bring into the picture. So why bring it? 

[NewColtsFan]

2 hours ago, Moosejawcolt said:

Yes.....it is.   

Define having the reigns pulled in.....

 

What would you have not had Ballard do?

 

[DougDew]

The tunnel visioned bullheadedness displayed by comments that suggest NON Ballard-is-God comments are, by (biased) definition, the same thing as anti Ballard comments is simply astounding.  Its an overreach and oversell that's inherent in comments that are formed from bias.

 

The fact is, when a GM changes schemes, the new players are, by default, going to play whether or not they are good.  In fact, a bad player that fits a new scheme may in fact be retained over a better player who fits the old scheme.  Its why good players like Henry Anderson and John Simon are no longer here....but why we continue to look for DT and EDGE help.

 

So measuring Ballard's drafting prowess by anything that has happened on defense is heavily tainted by the notion that the scheme changeover is going to give his new players more PT just because there is nobody else to play the position.....not because they are actually good.

 

The only thing Ballard has improved upon....talent wise...not the amount-of-PT-in-the-scheme wise, is the LB position and the Oline.  The TE position still stinks overall, the WR position is worse, and the RBs are no better than Ahmad Bradshaw or Frank Gore.

 

 

[dodsworth]

1 hour ago, DougDew said:

The tunnel visioned bullheadedness displayed by comments that suggest NON Ballard-is-God comments are, by (biased) definition, the same thing as anti Ballard comments is simply astounding.  Its an overreach and oversell that's inherent in comments that are formed from bias.

 

The fact is, when a GM changes schemes, the new players are, by default, going to play whether or not they are good.  In fact, a bad player that fits a new scheme may in fact be retained over a better player who fits the old scheme.  Its why good players like Henry Anderson and John Simon are no longer here....but why we continue to look for DT and EDGE help.

 

So measuring Ballard's drafting prowess by anything that has happened on defense is heavily tainted by the notion that the scheme changeover is going to give his new players more PT just because there is nobody else to play the position.....not because they are actually good.

 

The only thing Ballard has improved upon....talent wise...not the amount-of-PT-in-the-scheme wise, is the LB position and the Oline.  The TE position still stinks overall, the WR position is worse, and the RBs are no better than Ahmad Bradshaw or Frank Gore.

 

 

Ballard builds his team from the lines out or "inside out" which is why 

the skill positions are probably lacking a bit of punch under his vision.

He is building a smash mouth team that is strong up front that may not

have the flash or flare of high flying finesse football.

 

Given the two scenarios, I will back Ballard's vision every time. Now if

he starts drafting skill players early then it's a safe bet that he believes 

the lines and defense are solid.

[DougDew]

4 hours ago, dodsworth said:

Ballard builds his team from the lines out or "inside out" which is why 

the skill positions are probably lacking a bit of punch under his vision.

He is building a smash mouth team that is strong up front that may not

have the flash or flare of high flying finesse football.

 

Given the two scenarios, I will back Ballard's vision every time. Now if

he starts drafting skill players early then it's a safe bet that he believes 

the lines and defense are solid.

I understand.  In the useage of words better or worse, there is no real evidence to show that "building from the trenches" is any better than building from skilled positions, at least no reason to build one before the other.

 

I think if you look at the trajectory of our WL record, each time we added to the skill positions we did just as well, or better, than the times we added to the oline, so there is plenty of support to suggest that building the trenches is NOT the way to build a winning team.

 

IOW, instead of rotating WRs in and out of the roster every year, maybe we should rotate LGs in and out of the roster every year.

 

Personally, I think a team needs a good dispersion of talent everywhere, while trying to avoid having a concentration of talent anywhere.  Spending excessive capital to build and maintain the trenches will cause too much sacrifice of other positions.  

 

 

[crazycolt1]

1 hour ago, DougDew said:

I understand.  In the useage of words better or worse, there is no real evidence to show that "building from the trenches" is any better than building from skilled positions, at least no reason to build one before the other.

 

I think if you look at the trajectory of our WL record, each time we added to the skill positions we did just as well, or better, than the times we added to the oline, so there is plenty of support to suggest that building the trenches is NOT the way to build a winning team.

 

IOW, instead of rotating WRs in and out of the roster every year, maybe we should rotate LGs in and out of the roster every year.

 

Personally, I think a team needs a good dispersion of talent everywhere, while trying to avoid having a concentration of talent anywhere.  Spending excessive capital to build and maintain the trenches will cause too much sacrifice of other positions.  

 

 

The games are controlled by the players in the trenches. 

The 'skilled' positions cant do anything without the trench players doing their jobs and doing it well. 

Naturally you need talent at every position but the teams that win games in the playoffs and on to the super bowl are the ones who have the best trench players. 

You think it is a coincidence that teams who have the most talent in the trenches are the ones who continually reach the playoffs? 

[Moosejawcolt]

21 hours ago, NewColtsFan said:

Define having the reigns pulled in.....

 

What would you have not had Ballard do?

 

I am not criticizing his drafting or him as a GMup until this point 

  I just think we have to wait and see how his draft picks and free agent acquisitions pan out.  This is his 4th year as a GM and I think after this season we will have an excellent assessment of the work he has done so far. My one big reservation is him signing on to the style of defense he wants to run.   I just don't think it is a defense that stacks up well to very good or elite and.  When i was referring to reigning in,  I meant we have to hold back on calling him an elite GM.  Ballard is much like a qb.  It takes about 4 years till   u really know what u have.

[crazycolt1]

15 hours ago, DougDew said:

 

The only thing Ballard has improved upon....talent wise...not the amount-of-PT-in-the-scheme wise, is the LB position and the Oline.  The TE position still stinks overall, the WR position is worse, and the RBs are no better than Ahmad Bradshaw or Frank Gore.

 

 

So the TE position stinks? Tell that to pro bowl player Doyle. 

With the vastly improved O-line we don't need a RB that is a super star. That is proved by the ranked Colts running game. Besides, you are under valuing Mack big time. 

[NewColtsFan]

2 hours ago, Moosejawcolt said:

I am not criticizing his drafting or him as a GMup until this point 

  I just think we have to wait and see how his draft picks and free agent acquisitions pan out.  This is his 4th year as a GM and I think after this season we will have an excellent assessment of the work he has done so far. My one big reservation is him signing on to the style of defense he wants to run.   I just don't think it is a defense that stacks up well to very good or elite and.  When i was referring to reigning in,  I meant we have to hold back on calling him an elite GM.  Ballard is much like a qb.  It takes about 4 years till   u really know what u have.

Thanks.   Wasn’t sure what you’d say, but you made a strong, fair argument.  Good post!   Much appreciated!     

[Superman]

13 hours ago, Moosejawcolt said:

I am not criticizing his drafting or him as a GMup until this point 

  I just think we have to wait and see how his draft picks and free agent acquisitions pan out.  This is his 4th year as a GM and I think after this season we will have an excellent assessment of the work he has done so far. My one big reservation is him signing on to the style of defense he wants to run.   I just don't think it is a defense that stacks up well to very good or elite and.  When i was referring to reigning in,  I meant we have to hold back on calling him an elite GM.  Ballard is much like a qb.  It takes about 4 years till   u really know what u have.

 

I agree, I think more time is needed to really see whether Ballard is good at this or not. I'm a huge fan, I think he's good at a lot of the elements of running the football ops, and no doubt he's been a breath of fresh air. But the fundamental element is player acquisition, and it takes time to know whether his drafting and the staff's developmental process are as good as they need to be to build a program that will have sustained success.

 

If I push back on people calling young players busts after a couple of bad games, I can't crown a GM before we even know whether his draft picks are working out or not.

 

I have little problem with the defensive scheme they're using. I think there are a lot of different ways to play this scheme, and the advantage is that it can be very simple, or more advanced. It's been simple so far primarily because we're plugging new players and a lot of young players in, and telling them to just go out and play fast. I get the feeling, based on some of the things the coaches have done and some of the players they've added (high draft picks, and free agency) that they want to be more multiple on the back end. So I don't think we've actually seen the full scheme. And I definitely don't think we've seen this scheme run to its full potential, given the injuries and replacement level players in the secondary, and the pedestrian pass rush so far.

 

And by the way, even though it's true that Ballard turned over the roster, thereby creating a need for young players to play, and it's true that it's premature to crown him as a great GM, I think it's still pretty obvious that he's on the right track. He had an excellent draft in 2018, just with Nelson and Leonard, not to mention the draft capital that continues to pay dividends.

 

He's disciplined and focused; it would have been easy to "go for it" going into 2019, but he stuck to his guns, was very judicious in free agency and focused on value and good players in the draft. He's been more aggressive this offseason, but still with a focus: he signed a QB, which was a clear need, and he took a big swing for a premium player at a premium position. The other moves so far are auxiliary, and with very low risk.

 

He's focused on the trenches. He spent some major capital in the draft, but all of a sudden the OL is really good, with the potential to be even better this year. The DL is still a work in progress, but the moves this offseason should pay major dividends. 

 

It also helps that he hasn't done anything stupid, like trading a first for a RB (especially a bad RB). At least, not yet. And while some people downplay it, media relations and culture are important. He appears to be nailing it in those areas.

 

Ballard is a long way from qualifying to be called a great GM. That should be reserved for guys who do it at a high level for a long period of time: Ozzie Newsome, Bill Polian, Kevin Colbert, Howie Roseman, Bill Belichick, etc. (Those guys have playoff teams more often than not, they build championship rosters, they draft foundational, HOF players at multiple positions, and they have years of success under their belts.) But I think there's a ton of evidence that he knows what he's doing, and I'm confident that he'll continue to prove himself.

 

TL;DR -- Ballard can't be called great yet because not enough time has passed, but he's doing a good job so far.

[DougDew]

22 hours ago, crazycolt1 said:

The games are controlled by the players in the trenches. 

The 'skilled' positions cant do anything without the trench players doing their jobs and doing it well. 

Naturally you need talent at every position but the teams that win games in the playoffs and on to the super bowl are the ones who have the best trench players. 

You think it is a coincidence that teams who have the most talent in the trenches are the ones who continually reach the playoffs? 

Skilled position players can do a lot with a QB who throws an accurate pass in three steps and less than three seconds.

 

My comment about the trenches is based upon the meathead type of outlook that sees a stout oline as the key to all things winning football.  Having a concentration of excess talent on the oline, that might be unusable when the QB releases the ball in less than 3 seconds, might sacrifice the ability to acquire a WR or RB who can catch that pass and score by himself.

 

I'm not sure that having the highest paid LT, the highest paid LG, and the highest paid C in the NFL, or close to it, is really model for consistent winning football.  Not that its a bad thing.

 

I'm sure everybody can pick out a team to support their opinion, like noticing that KC is not really known for their trenches.

[AZColt11]

Ballard has stuck to his guns.  He had vowed to build the OL.  He did that.  He is now building up the DL.  The rest will follow and I think he got a little bit lucky with the LB corp with Leonard and Walker being better than expected.  The "skilled" positions on offense are lacking a bit because he hasn't really focused as much in those areas.  You only have so many 1st and 2nd round picks.  But I think we'll see him address those with the two 2nd's this year.  

 

As for the record, we all know that an elite QB can make you look better than you really are.  We saw it with Peyton.  Then we saw it in 2018 with Luck.  All we need to see how much he affected the wins and losses is last season.  Big dropoff.  Unfortunately, Luck's don't grow on trees.  Ballard's fault?  Perhaps a little bit.  But I can't pin it ALL on him when that wasn't in the plans.  And unless he can pull off some kind of major trade he's not really in good position to get the future of the franchise this year either and he knows it, thus Rivers.  This tells me he's trying to at least stay the course until he's in position to get the future somewhere.

 

If he gets lucky again and one of the top 5 guys happens to fall to 34, then I'm sure he'll pull the trigger.  But he can't count on that, so he got the next best thing: and aging but solid vet who can at least make your team competitive and teach the younger guys in the room.  And I STILL have a difficult time believing that Brissett and his current contract will be on this roster come opening day.  I just do NOT believe he is going to spend way more than the next team in the league on the QB position.  I think either Brissett is going to restructure or else he'll be dealt.

[dodsworth]

On 4/11/2020 at 1:12 PM, DougDew said:

I understand.  In the useage of words better or worse, there is no real evidence to show that "building from the trenches" is any better than building from skilled positions, at least no reason to build one before the other.

 

I think if you look at the trajectory of our WL record, each time we added to the skill positions we did just as well, or better, than the times we added to the oline, so there is plenty of support to suggest that building the trenches is NOT the way to build a winning team.

 

IOW, instead of rotating WRs in and out of the roster every year, maybe we should rotate LGs in and out of the roster every year.

 

Personally, I think a team needs a good dispersion of talent everywhere, while trying to avoid having a concentration of talent anywhere.  Spending excessive capital to build and maintain the trenches will cause too much sacrifice of other positions.  

 

 

Ok Doug, we are just gonna have to disagree on this one. There is just

too much data to show that teams that are strong on the lines and control

the trenches move forward in the playoffs compared to soft/finesse

style teams. 

 

Peyton Manning would agree. Without Rex Grossman under center then

maybe he would have not brought a title back to Indy. 

 

No thanks to a the theory of offensive weapon heavy teams that

fold like a cheap lawn chair in post season. Been there, done that, 

and that blueprint doesn't work. 

[Lucky Colts Fan]

On 4/11/2020 at 8:28 AM, DougDew said:

The tunnel visioned bullheadedness displayed by comments that suggest NON Ballard-is-God comments are, by (biased) definition, the same thing as anti Ballard comments is simply astounding.  Its an overreach and oversell that's inherent in comments that are formed from bias.

 

The fact is, when a GM changes schemes, the new players are, by default, going to play whether or not they are good.  In fact, a bad player that fits a new scheme may in fact be retained over a better player who fits the old scheme.  Its why good players like Henry Anderson and John Simon are no longer here....but why we continue to look for DT and EDGE help.

 

So measuring Ballard's drafting prowess by anything that has happened on defense is heavily tainted by the notion that the scheme changeover is going to give his new players more PT just because there is nobody else to play the position.....not because they are actually good.

 

The only thing Ballard has improved upon....talent wise...not the amount-of-PT-in-the-scheme wise, is the LB position and the Oline.  The TE position still stinks overall, the WR position is worse, and the RBs are no better than Ahmad Bradshaw or Frank Gore.

 

I'm gonna try to take a step back from my natural inclination to disagree with you.  I'll try to view this from a neutral middleground.

 

The great thing about football being the ultimate team sport is that you can almost always find something to support your point, no matter what it is.  Someone can point to something and say "that's why Ballard is elite", while someone else can point to another thing and say "that's why Ballard isn't elite".  Someone can argue talent to make their point, and another can argue scheme to make their point, without either being wrong.

 

People saying it's too early to call Ballard great or elite aren't wrong.  If some people think they've seen enough to call Ballard great/elite this early in his career as a GM, they aren't necessarily wrong either, and hopefully Ballard proves them right in the long run.  

[crazycolt1]

11 hours ago, DougDew said:

Skilled position players can do a lot with a QB who throws an accurate pass in three steps and less than three seconds.

 

My comment about the trenches is based upon the meathead type of outlook that sees a stout oline as the key to all things winning football.  Having a concentration of excess talent on the oline, that might be unusable when the QB releases the ball in less than 3 seconds, might sacrifice the ability to acquire a WR or RB who can catch that pass and score by himself.

 

I'm not sure that having the highest paid LT, the highest paid LG, and the highest paid C in the NFL, or close to it, is really model for consistent winning football.  Not that its a bad thing.

 

I'm sure everybody can pick out a team to support their opinion, like noticing that KC is not really known for their trenches.

You act like there are Peyton Manning's growing on trees. 

[DougDew]

5 hours ago, crazycolt1 said:

You act like there are Peyton Manning's growing on trees. 

I'm sure  @NewColtsFan liked that comment.  His type of comment. 

 

LOL, Pretend somebody says something then criticize it just to pretend you won a debate.  Good one.  Obvious as heck, but good one.

 

A winning team doesn't need PM or Mahomes to win.  You need balance.  Not the highest paid left side of an oline.

 

I've been pretty consistent about not having a concentration of talent at any one position.  Even at QB, although that could be the one position a team could get away with it.

[Myles]

The Nelson pick saved the O-line and the Smith pick was a smart move as he can play 2 positions.   Ballard hasn't really infested much more in the line.  The O-line would have really paid dividends if Luck hadn't retired.  We now have a very good running game because of that O-line too.  We'll see what it does with Rivers running the offense.  I'm excited.  

[Myles]

15 hours ago, Lucky Colts Fan said:

 

 

 

People saying it's too early to call Ballard great or elite aren't wrong.  If some people think they've seen enough to call Ballard great/elite this early in his career as a GM, they aren't necessarily wrong either, and hopefully Ballard proves them right in the long run.  

I agree.   I would say that he has been doing great.   But it is not known if he IS great yet.  Good start though.  If Buckner allows the defense to perform as it should, it'll be interesting.  

[crazycolt1]

4 hours ago, DougDew said:

I'm sure  @NewColtsFan liked that comment.  His type of comment. 

 

LOL, Pretend somebody says something then criticize it just to pretend you won a debate.  Good one.  Obvious as heck, but good one.

 

A winning team doesn't need PM or Mahomes to win.  You need balance.  Not the highest paid left side of an oline.

 

I've been pretty consistent about not having a concentration of talent at any one position.  Even at QB, although that could be the one position a team could get away with it.

@NewColtsFandidn't put those sarcastic words in my mouth. Why bring him up?

It was a response to what you said. 

The Chiefs won the super bowl by having Mahomes. 

We don't have a Mahomes type of QB and they don't grow them on trees either. 

[NewColtsFan]

1 hour ago, crazycolt1 said:

@NewColtsFandidn't put those sarcastic words in my mouth. Why bring him up?

It was a response to what you said. 

The Chiefs won the super bowl by having Mahomes. 

We don't have a Mahomes type of QB and they don't grow them on trees either. 

Doug took a shot at me because I gave you a like for your Manning comment. That’s the only reason.   I’ve stayed out of the Doug discussion up to now...   I suspect I’ll chime in later today.

[crazycolt1]

2 minutes ago, NewColtsFan said:

Doug took a shot at me because I gave you a like for your Manning comment. That’s the only reason.   I’ve stayed out of the Doug discussion up to now...   I suspect I’ll chime in later today.

[Moosejawcolt]

On 4/11/2020 at 1:33 PM, crazycolt1 said:

The games are controlled by the players in the trenches. 

The 'skilled' positions cant do anything without the trench players doing their jobs and doing it well. 

Naturally you need talent at every position but the teams that win games in the playoffs and on to the super bowl are the ones who have the best trench players. 

You think it is a coincidence that teams who have the most talent in the trenches are the ones who continually reach the playoffs? 

So please name me last year's  play off teams with what u consider elite talemt in the trenches? Also please name those players.  I will give u San Fran. 

[crazycolt1]

20 minutes ago, Moosejawcolt said:

So please name me last year's  play off teams with what u consider elite talemt in the trenches? Also please name those players.  I will give u San Fran. 

I made a comment I believe in. If you don't that's your prerogative.