Ballard's rebuild

[CR91]

With Geathers most likely not returning to the team, there is not a single defensive player from the Grigson era. The only players still here from the Grigson era are AC, Hilton, Doyle, and Kelly. 

[NewColtsFan]

Not everyone here is on board with this this viewpoint of what Ballard has done.

 

But the team Ballard inherited was mostly staffed by players who were not all that talented,  or all that skilled, or athletic, or quick or fast.     This was a complete re-build.   

 

And 4-5 years from now,  I suspect many of the faces we're looking at will be long gone too.

Ballard is going to continuously turn over the roster.   Churn the roster.    Always looking to upgrade.   Get younger, faster, more skilled --- everywhere.

 

It's going to be fascinating to watch.....

[AwesomeAustin]

Ballard has done a fantastic job rebuilding the roster.  Sadly, the QB didn’t pan out and now we must go through another rebuild while that is worked out.  

[John Hammonds]

6 hours ago, NewColtsFan said:

Not everyone here is on board with this this viewpoint of what Ballard has done.

 

But the team Ballard inherited was mostly staffed by players who were not all that talented,  or all that skilled, or athletic, or quick or fast.     This was a complete re-build.   

 

And 4-5 years from now,  I suspect many of the faces we're looking at will be long gone too.

Ballard is going to continuously turn over the roster.   Churn the roster.    Always looking to upgrade.   Get younger, faster, more skilled --- everywhere.

 

It's going to be fascinating to watch.....

I think that's the model for today's NFL.  With the way contracts work these days, you have to manage your team with a kind of modified college football format.  You have their rookie contract, which lasts about 4 years, just like a college player.  And, for the most part, you churn and churn and churn those players on a 4 year rotation.  Those players that shine beyond the churn, whether they're your players or someone else's, get contracts beyond the 4 years.  But otherwise, it's the 4 year churn.

I think CB adopted that format when he got here, because, let's face it, it was easy to.  He was building from the ground up.  We didn't have much of a team.  Other teams, like Miami, had to jettison everything in order get themselves into a position to be able to adopt this format.  You can see the Chargers doing the same thing this year by releasing Phillip Rivers and Melvin Gordon.  Over and over, teams are moving to this format.

 

By the way, the key to making the 4 year churn format work is to make sure you throw strikes on your draft picks.  This thing relies on your draft picks turning out right, to perform at a high level while they are on their rookie contract.  If your picks suck, then the format doesn't work at all.  And if the player you drafted has injury problems during their 4 year churn period (see: Kemoko Turay, Tyquan Lewis, Paris Campbell), their churn period is less effective.  If they remain healthy (see: Quentin Nelson, Darius Leonard), you get better value for the 4 years.  And if they do "ok", but they take time to develop (see: Rock Ya-Sin, Ben Banogu), their churn period isn't as effective.

 

I'm watching CB's model, and seeing what happens.  He, obviously, has taken a bit of a detour from the model this time around, probably at the request of Jim Irsay, to get his team into a "win now" scenario.  But with the 1-year / 2-year contracts, his risk at blowing up the overall format is low.

[Jackie Daytona]

What seems slightly different to me this year is, Ballard is setting up to have an insane number of FA following this season.  I know some will be extended, so.e they won't want to keep, etc.... And I've always loved roster flexibility looking to the future... But it seems like he's signing even higher percentages of 1yr. Deals than normal... Outside of AC..

 

Should re-read the thread, lol.... I do agree though that it seems a safe way for now to keep turning over roster.... You have the occasional guy who breaks out you have to pony up for, but you aren't stuck with six guys you are overpaying....I get it 

[crazycolt1]

6 minutes ago, John Hammonds said:

I think that's the model for today's NFL.  With the way contracts work these days, you have to manage your team with a kind of modified college football format.  You have their rookie contract, which lasts about 4 years, just like a college player.  And, for the most part, you churn and churn and churn those players on a 4 year rotation.  Those players that shine beyond the churn, whether they're your players or someone else's, get contracts beyond the 4 years.  But otherwise, it's the 4 year churn.

I think CB adopted that format when he got here, because, let's face it, it was easy to.  He was building from the ground up.  We didn't have much of a team.  Other teams, like Miami, had to jettison everything in order get themselves into a position to be able to adopt this format.  You can see the Chargers doing the same thing this year by releasing Phillip Rivers and Melvin Gordon.  Over and over, teams are moving to this format.

 

By the way, the key to making the 4 year churn format work is to make sure you throw strikes on your draft picks.  This thing relies on your draft picks turning out right, to perform at a high level while they are on their rookie contract.  If your picks suck, then the format doesn't work at all.  And if the player you drafted has injury problems during their 4 year churn period (see: Kemoko Turay, Tyquan Lewis, Paris Campbell), their churn period is less effective.  If they remain healthy (see: Quentin Nelson, Darius Leonard), you get better value for the 4 years.  And if they do "ok", but they take time to develop (see: Rock Ya-Sin, Ben Banogu), their churn period isn't as effective.

 

I'm watching CB's model, and seeing what happens.  He, obviously, has taken a bit of a detour from the model this time around, probably at the request of Jim Irsay, to get his team into a "win now" scenario.  But with the 1-year / 2-year contracts, his risk at blowing up the overall format is low.

Well said.

Fans of the newer NFL are subjected to the business side of the league too. 

Example : Clowney. he is peddling himself to the top bidder like a lot of players have done. 

Look at what has happened to the NBA. Yes they have a (so called) cap but the teams who are willing to pay the NBA league, circumvent the cap. So all it means is the rich get richer. The clout of the Larry Bird rule was the start.

   Personally, That is why I am a NFL fan. Every team has a chance and it changes from season to season. 

I think we have a GM who can work the system and so far has done an excellent job. He was dealt an enormous blow to the advancement of this team the day Luck retired. 

 

 

 

[WL2Colt]

I also like the NFL because of the fairly level playing field caused by the cap.  I almost like the off season better than the regular season!!

 

[throwing BBZ]

3 hours ago, John Hammonds said:

I think that's the model for today's NFL.  With the way contracts work these days, you have to manage your team with a kind of modified college football format.  You have their rookie contract, which lasts about 4 years, just like a college player.  And, for the most part, you churn and churn and churn those players on a 4 year rotation.  Those players that shine beyond the churn, whether they're your players or someone else's, get contracts beyond the 4 years.  But otherwise, it's the 4 year churn.

I think CB adopted that format when he got here, because, let's face it, it was easy to.  He was building from the ground up.  We didn't have much of a team.  Other teams, like Miami, had to jettison everything in order get themselves into a position to be able to adopt this format.  You can see the Chargers doing the same thing this year by releasing Phillip Rivers and Melvin Gordon.  Over and over, teams are moving to this format.

 

By the way, the key to making the 4 year churn format work is to make sure you throw strikes on your draft picks.  This thing relies on your draft picks turning out right, to perform at a high level while they are on their rookie contract.  If your picks suck, then the format doesn't work at all.  And if the player you drafted has injury problems during their 4 year churn period (see: Kemoko Turay, Tyquan Lewis, Paris Campbell), their churn period is less effective.  If they remain healthy (see: Quentin Nelson, Darius Leonard), you get better value for the 4 years.  And if they do "ok", but they take time to develop (see: Rock Ya-Sin, Ben Banogu), their churn period isn't as effective.

 

I'm watching CB's model, and seeing what happens.  He, obviously, has taken a bit of a detour from the model this time around, probably at the request of Jim Irsay, to get his team into a "win now" scenario.  But with the 1-year / 2-year contracts, his risk at blowing up the overall format is low.

 

  Detour?

NO, this is exactly expected. Draft, draft, save cap, spend cap to fill in the holes.

You can bet Irsay was behind the odd Brissett pay raise.

[AZColt11]

I like what CB is doing.  Yes, they will have a lot of FA next year, but I don't believe he needs to sign all of them.  Many of the guys he's signing are on short-term deals for a reason.  

 

Given the roster as it stands right now, there aren't nearly as many holes as when he took over.  I think if he gets some help for the WR/TE/QB corp in this draft he will have had about as good of an off-season as could be expected.  The future is the future and you can't rely on it.  All we know is what we have for THIS coming season.  And I like how it's setting up.

 

Injuries could be a factor but I like what I'm seeing on paper.

[richard pallo]

3 hours ago, John Hammonds said:

I think that's the model for today's NFL.  With the way contracts work these days, you have to manage your team with a kind of modified college football format.  You have their rookie contract, which lasts about 4 years, just like a college player.  And, for the most part, you churn and churn and churn those players on a 4 year rotation.  Those players that shine beyond the churn, whether they're your players or someone else's, get contracts beyond the 4 years.  But otherwise, it's the 4 year churn.

I think CB adopted that format when he got here, because, let's face it, it was easy to.  He was building from the ground up.  We didn't have much of a team.  Other teams, like Miami, had to jettison everything in order get themselves into a position to be able to adopt this format.  You can see the Chargers doing the same thing this year by releasing Phillip Rivers and Melvin Gordon.  Over and over, teams are moving to this format.

 

By the way, the key to making the 4 year churn format work is to make sure you throw strikes on your draft picks.  This thing relies on your draft picks turning out right, to perform at a high level while they are on their rookie contract.  If your picks suck, then the format doesn't work at all.  And if the player you drafted has injury problems during their 4 year churn period (see: Kemoko Turay, Tyquan Lewis, Paris Campbell), their churn period is less effective.  If they remain healthy (see: Quentin Nelson, Darius Leonard), you get better value for the 4 years.  And if they do "ok", but they take time to develop (see: Rock Ya-Sin, Ben Banogu), their churn period isn't as effective.

 

I'm watching CB's model, and seeing what happens.  He, obviously, has taken a bit of a detour from the model this time around, probably at the request of Jim Irsay, to get his team into a "win now" scenario.  But with the 1-year / 2-year contracts, his risk at blowing up the overall format is low.

I think you hit the nail on the head here.  We have now embarked on that 4 year churn strategy.  We need to keep hitting on most of our draft picks and if we really hit on a few we resign them.  If injuries problems effect a few or failed production we have to be ready with a replacement.  BTW I also think you can add Mack and Wilkens to the list of players with injury concerns.  Another benefit from this strategy is the possibility of adding comp picks when you don't resign a player at the end of their 1st. contract.  Extra picks to help with the replenishment of the roster.  It makes sense to me and I think this is where we are now.  So far so good really considering our QB issues.  Ballard was thrown a curve ball by Luck but I have confidence he will handle the challenge of finding a long term solution to the position.

[CR91]

17 hours ago, NewColtsFan said:

Not everyone here is on board with this this viewpoint of what Ballard has done.

 

But the team Ballard inherited was mostly staffed by players who were not all that talented,  or all that skilled, or athletic, or quick or fast.     This was a complete re-build.   

 

And 4-5 years from now,  I suspect many of the faces we're looking at will be long gone too.

Ballard is going to continuously turn over the roster.   Churn the roster.    Always looking to upgrade.   Get younger, faster, more skilled --- everywhere.

 

It's going to be fascinating to watch.....

 

While I do agree with everything you said, I'd also like to add how much Andrew masked the lack of talent on the roster and yet people want to suggest he wasn't a top tier QB when heathly

[indykmj]

CB has done an admirable job rebuilding the (picking a starting point) #8 

thru #35-ish spots on the roster. That upper-middle range is younger, more talented and, in theory, has more upside than when he took over.

 

The issue issue is the top-7 guys. Not enough truly elite (top 3 to 5 at the

position) players. Nelson is one. Buchner may be another. But that's it.

 

He has to find a way to get his hands on a few more,

[crazycolt1]

1 hour ago, indykmj said:

CB has done an admirable job rebuilding the (picking a starting point) #8 

thru #35-ish spots on the roster. That upper-middle range is younger, more talented and, in theory, has more upside than when he took over.

 

The issue issue is the top-7 guys. Not enough truly elite (top 3 to 5 at the

position) players. Nelson is one. Buchner may be another. But that's it.

 

He has to find a way to get his hands on a few more,

So you think it's an issue when draft picks in rounds 3-7 don't become all pro? 

Get real my friend. A player does not have to be a great player to contribute positive things for this team. Every team in the league have players that are rated average. Drafting two pro bowl caliber player with one of them being defensive rookie of the year is damn impressive. The reality is later round player are later round players for a reason. Every once in a while a player will over play his draft position but it's not the norm. 

   

   I don't know the exact number of draft picks Ballard has had but I read where everyone of them is on a roster except for one. That is very impressive no matter what you might think. Making an issue when there is no issue is nit picking. 

[HarryTheCat]

On 4/12/2020 at 2:18 AM, NewColtsFan said:

Not everyone here is on board with this this viewpoint of what Ballard has done.

 

But the team Ballard inherited was mostly staffed by players who were not all that talented,  or all that skilled, or athletic, or quick or fast.     This was a complete re-build.   

 

And 4-5 years from now,  I suspect many of the faces we're looking at will be long gone too.

Ballard is going to continuously turn over the roster.   Churn the roster.    Always looking to upgrade.   Get younger, faster, more skilled --- everywhere.

 

It's going to be fascinating to watch.....

Roster churn is a way of life in the NFL, and Ballard seems to understand this as well as any GM out there. The average length of an NFL "career" is only 3.3 years, so that means lots of roster changes every season. IF your roster has a core of a half-dozen guys who last five or more years, playing at a high level, you may have a team that can challenge for a playoff spot. The rest are just JAGs -- good enough to play, but not good enough (or lucky enough to avoid injuries) to last much beyond the average. 

[pacolts56]

Churn, churn, churn....

 

Didn’t the Byrds play that? 

[crazycolt1]

15 minutes ago, pacolts56 said:

Churn, churn, churn....

 

Didn’t the Byrds play that? 

Didn't Bob Dylan write that one? 

[Scott Pennock]

Ballard's rebuild is going great in my opinion. 100% of his draft picks from the 2017, 2018 and 2019 drafts are still on an active NFL roster and he has completely turned this team over building two different styles of teams for two different coaching staffs. This being the 4th offseason is similar to a rookie college coach now having all of "his" people and they go on a long run together.

 

Having said that, there should always be an asterisk though due to the sudden retirement of Andrew Luck - which may have set him back a year. Not a lot of coaches or GM's could rebound from that. Not too mention being dumped at the alter by that coach we won't name.....though I think we made out better in the long run with Frank.

 

With a solid core built on both sides of the ball I am confident that either this draft or next draft Ballard and Dodd's will find our next Franchise QB.

 

I mean Ballard helped build a team in Chicago that had Rex Grossman take them to a SB.....

 

Dodd's helped build the the team in Seattle that helped Russell Wilson go to multiple SB's.....

 

Ballard helped build a team in KC that surrounded Mahomes with enough talent to win a SB as well....

 

Surely between the two of them they can draft, trade and sign the right core of a team that a young, talented QB can grow with and lead to a SB win as well.....

[BornHoosier]

On 4/12/2020 at 10:30 AM, Shafty138 said:

What seems slightly different to me this year is, Ballard is setting up to have an insane number of FA following this season.  I know some will be extended, so.e they won't want to keep, etc.... And I've always loved roster flexibility looking to the future... But it seems like he's signing even higher percentages of 1yr. Deals than normal... Outside of AC..

 

Should re-read the thread, lol.... I do agree though that it seems a safe way for now to keep turning over roster.... You have the occasional guy who breaks out you have to pony up for, but you aren't stuck with six guys you are overpaying....I get it 

I really believe the reason for all these 1yr contracts is CB is paving the way for 3 extensions that will not be cheap.  Marlon Mack is first since his contract will be up but the big reason is he will extend both Nelson & Leonard to Franchise deals.  Once he gets these 3 guys locked up long term, he then knows how much is left to build around.  He doesn't want short term contracts to get in the way of the long term contracts is the #1 reason.

[indykmj]

14 hours ago, crazycolt1 said:

So you think it's an issue when draft picks in rounds 3-7 don't become all pro? 

Get real my friend. A player does not have to be a great player to contribute positive things for this team. Every team in the league have players that are rated average. Drafting two pro bowl caliber player with one of them being defensive rookie of the year is damn impressive. The reality is later round player are later round players for a reason. Every once in a while a player will over play his draft position but it's not the norm. 

   

   I don't know the exact number of draft picks Ballard has had but I read where everyone of them is on a roster except for one. That is very impressive no matter what you might think. Making an issue when there is no issue is nit picking. 

 

    Wow, they're all on the roster huh. You're right. That is monumentally

     impressive. 

 

        

[superrep1967]

On 4/12/2020 at 3:18 AM, NewColtsFan said:

Not everyone here is on board with this this viewpoint of what Ballard has done.

 

But the team Ballard inherited was mostly staffed by players who were not all that talented,  or all that skilled, or athletic, or quick or fast.     This was a complete re-build.   

 

And 4-5 years from now,  I suspect many of the faces we're looking at will be long gone too.

Ballard is going to continuously turn over the roster.   Churn the roster.    Always looking to upgrade.   Get younger, faster, more skilled --- everywhere.

 

It's going to be fascinating to watch.....

I agree it is going to be fascinating to watch and I believe in Ballard and his vision it’s great to be a Colts now. By The way I blame Grigson for a lot things and especially the early retirement of Luck because he never got him a line Grigson set this franchise back 5 years in my opinion. 

[crazycolt1]

22 minutes ago, indykmj said:

 

    Wow, they're all on the roster huh. You're right. That is monumentally

     impressive. 

 

        

No, they are not all on our roster. 

My point was Ballard has drafted players that make NFL rosters and a very high rate. Other teams have signed the players Ballard didn't consider good enough or not needed on our roster. 

Like I said, making an issue when there is no issue is nit picking. 

Maybe you can make a point that this team was lacking the talent and it was easy to find players to start his first year but then that don't explain the following years. So far Ballard has done an excellent IMO. Not every draft pick or free agent signing is going to work out but his success rate is pretty high. 

[CurBeatElite]

On 4/12/2020 at 1:18 AM, NewColtsFan said:

Not everyone here is on board with this this viewpoint of what Ballard has done.

 

But the team Ballard inherited was mostly staffed by players who were not all that talented,  or all that skilled, or athletic, or quick or fast.     This was a complete re-build.   

 

And 4-5 years from now,  I suspect many of the faces we're looking at will be long gone too.

Ballard is going to continuously turn over the roster.   Churn the roster.    Always looking to upgrade.   Get younger, faster, more skilled --- everywhere.

 

It's going to be fascinating to watch.....

 

Also, keep in mind, Ballard has an entirely different philosophy than Pagano and Grigson.  They were running a 3-4 D which needed players with much different skill sets than the D implemented now (not like we had the most talented players for a 3-4 D anyway, but the vast majority of players on the roster when Ballard came along did not fit his way of doing things).  

 

Perhaps more impressive, IMO, is Ballard's ability to build the OL.  Pagano and Grigs often stated that games are won in the trenches, yet they had an OL that had to have played a role in Luck's short career by forcing him to take a lot of sacks and often be running for his life the instant the ball got into his hands.  We had a pretty poor running game throughout the Pagano/Grigs era, as well.  Last year, even with a fairly one-dimensional offense w/ mediocre QB play, we were still a top 7 team in rushing in the league.  While Grigs talked about the need for a dominant OL, he never really did anything substantial about improving it (to his credit a few guys like Thornton and Holmes didn't pan out).  Ballard came in and didn't just talk about the need for a solid OL, he has built one of the best OL's in the league in a fairly short time.  

 

17 hours ago, indykmj said:

CB has done an admirable job rebuilding the (picking a starting point) #8 

thru #35-ish spots on the roster. That upper-middle range is younger, more talented and, in theory, has more upside than when he took over.

 

The issue issue is the top-7 guys. Not enough truly elite (top 3 to 5 at the

position) players. Nelson is one. Buchner may be another. But that's it.

 

He has to find a way to get his hands on a few more,

 

Leonard is also one of them.  Castonzo is also one of them.  Kelly may not be top 5 in the league at his position, but he's not too far off.  

 

47 minutes ago, indykmj said:

 

    Wow, they're all on the roster huh. You're right. That is monumentally

     impressive. 

 

        

 

All are still in the NFL.  I believe Gerri Green, who ended last year on our practice squad, is the only one who was not on an active roster to end last season.