Jump to content
Indianapolis Colts
Indianapolis Colts Fan Forum

Ballard will not force fixing the QB situation


Recommended Posts

http://www.nfl.com/news/story/0ap3000001109938/article/gm-ballard-will-not-force-drafting-colts-future-qb

 

I think if Love falls far enough like Seattle at 27 or SF at 31 then sure a trade up is possible still.

 

I'm hoping Love completely falls to 34 so we don't have to lose any picks but it wouldn't surprise me if Ballard loses out on him for not being aggressive enough.

 

I trust Ballard and hope he makes the right choice especially when it comes to the future at QB and beyond. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

All it says is he won’t draft a QB to early then where they have him and he has to be the right fit for the team. We really don’t know how he feels about the QB. Maybe after the draft we will get more insight on the position.  I am sure if Love is actually passed up when he is right there at our pick he will be asked a lot of questions.  

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Oh man, if Love fell to 34 and we passed I would legitimately laugh out loud.  We spent soooo much time and energy discussing him at 13 that if we passed on him in the 2nd I'd have to restart my brain, lol. I am/was on the Love train and wouldn't be mad if we traded up a bit for him, but this scenario would be hilarious.

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

Oh man, if Love fell to 34 and we passed I would legitimately laugh out loud.  We spent soooo much time and energy discussing him at 13 that if we passed on him in the 2nd I'd have to restart my brain, lol. I am/was on the Love train and wouldn't be mad if we traded up a bit for him, but this scenario would be hilarious.

I'd be more upset if he somehow fell to 44 and we passed 2x

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

Just because some of you think Love is the answer does not mean Ballard thinks that way. 

I have watched Love play a few games and quite a bit of tape and personally, I wouldn't want to put the Colts future on what I seen. 

Could I be wrong?  Of course. Like anything, the NFL is known to be unpredictable. 

  • Like 5
Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, danlhart87 said:

http://www.nfl.com/news/story/0ap3000001109938/article/gm-ballard-will-not-force-drafting-colts-future-qb

 

I think if Love falls far enough like Seattle at 27 or SF at 31 then sure a trade up is possible still.

 

I'm hoping Love completely falls to 34 so we don't have to lose any picks but it wouldn't surprise me if Ballard loses out on him for not being aggressive enough.

 

I trust Ballard and hope he makes the right choice especially when it comes to the future at QB and beyond. 

Just curious why you think we trade up. Ballard clearly said later in the interview, he wants more picks. No less. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
15 hours ago, Defjamz26 said:

I don’t think we can ascertain anything solid from that statement until after the draft or until he actually drafts a QB. 

Agreed. I took that statement as an indication that they're not going to take a QB just because they feel they need to draft one, but if the right one is within striking distance, we'll pull the trigger.

 

Despite this statement, I could still see a small trade up to get the right guy.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

I will not take one in the rain,

I will not take one on the train,

I will not trade picks up or down,

I will not trade them round the town,

I will not take one here or there,

I will not take one anywhere,

I will not take a quarterback,

I will not do it, that's a fact.

  • Thanks 1
  • Haha 4
Link to post
Share on other sites
15 hours ago, Defjamz26 said:

I don’t think we can ascertain anything solid from that statement until after the draft or until he actually drafts a QB. 

Regarding QB,

1. He said he didn’t know and that it could be 1 year or 2 years.

2. He has said he expects Rivers to play more than 1 year. 
3. Then he said he wanted more picks.

4. And he said giving up 13 for Buckner was an easy decision. 
 

What else does he have to say? 

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, LockeDown said:

Regarding QB,

1. He said he didn’t know and that it could be 1 year or 2 years.

2. He has said he expects Rivers to play more than 1 year. 
3. Then he said he wanted more picks.

4. And he said giving up 13 for Buckner was an easy decision. 
 

What else does he have to say? 

In Franks interview I got the impression he thinks Rivers is going to be here longer than one year. 

We don't know what Rivers and Ballard discussed about the situation longer than one year. It could be as simple as wait and see. 

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

Regarding QB,

1. He said he didn’t know and that it could be 1 year or 2 years.

2. He has said he expects Rivers to play more than 1 year. 
3. Then he said he wanted more picks.

4. And he said giving up 13 for Buckner was an easy decision. 
 

What else does he have to say? 

I watched the interview and noted all that. Doesn’t change anything. We can’t definitively say what Ballard will or won’t do at QB until this draft is over. All we know is that he won’t be drafting a QB at 13. Anything else is just heresy. There’s nothing else that shows clear evidence of what move he’ll make at QB if any.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Ballard has done a ton of preparations for the fanbase for no QB taken. At this point I think I will believe what he's signaling and I wouldn't expect us to take a QB high(or at all) this year. His statements sound a ton like he doesn't love any of the options. And if he picks one then great, that would be a pleasant surprise and a successful smoke screen.

  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

All I know is that all these GMs learn to speak so as to make a lie detector think that their lies are truths and their truths are lies. So yeah, he could be telling the exact truth, part of the truth, or a bald faced lie. Nobody but those guys know what they're really thinking. I doubt even their staffs know for sure.

 

About the only thing I do know is that under the current league rules, they all want the players they see as the top guys they're going to get to be first round picks, so as to control that fifth year option on them. That factor is HUGE to these franchises in the current environment. And most/all of them see the guys they're planning on being their quarterbacks for over a decade as among the top guys they're going to get. So piece that together however you wish.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

  • Thread of the Week

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • It's a pipe dream. It's not happening.
    • There’s a very easy pick for the Jaguars to make but let’s see if they make it lol.
    • Crap, sorry.   with the 129th pick, the Seahawks select:   Anthony Schwartz, WR, Auburn   If that doesn’t make Russell Wilson happy, then 7@€# him!   @crazycolt1and the Jags are aim the clock.
    • Watson started this recent public trade thing by stating that the organization has flawed hiring practices.  And I think he never debunked the idea that the current owner was a lot like his father, simply because he is his son.   Its not really about the next season or even the team's won loss record over the next three years.  Its bigger than that.  I think it would be smarter to not accommodate whiners, and in a legal manner, not set the precedent of accommodating someone who conducts detrimental actions that undermines the new coach and the authority structure of the organization.   If you accommodate Watson, you set the precedent that all whiners need to be accommodated or else you end up singling some out for disparate treatment.  This shows what a cancer players like Watson are to an entire organization.    And, I would think a player like that has limited trade value, despite the rumors.  I would  simply move on from him....forget he even exists...would be the less time consuming and smarter move.  If he wants to sit out, fine, but I'm drafting this spring with the idea that he's going to try to put me at a disadvantage and wait until after FA and the draft before he tells me he wont play next year.   There is some root of the problem that has yet to be revealed.   If its about making bad personnel decisions, resulting in a losing record, I get that....but the HC, OBrien who was responsible for those moves was fired months ago.  Seems like Watson and Watt are still holding some kind of grudge over something, or simply launching their marketing brand by grandstanding.   If I were the GM, I'd just ignore Watson until he apologized for those statements instead of honoring his wishes, and then if the team struggles, show to the whole world what people like that can do to a team, blame the teams failure's over a whiner sitting out the season too arrogant and stubborn to apologize for something he should not have said in the first place.       
  • Members

    • Mel Kiper's Hair

      Mel Kiper's Hair 2,147

      Senior Member
      Joined:
      Last active:
    • stitches

      stitches 7,994

      Senior Member
      Joined:
      Last active:
    • gspdx

      gspdx 598

      Senior Member
      Joined:
      Last active:
    • JackOLantin

      JackOLantin 45

      New Member
      Joined:
      Last active:
    • jvan1973

      jvan1973 5,314

      Senior Member
      Joined:
      Last active:
    • crazycolt1

      crazycolt1 7,354

      Senior Member
      Joined:
      Last active:
    • Twistedcolt

      Twistedcolt 0

      Rookie
      Joined:
      Last active:
    • CR91

      CR91 6,360

      Senior Member
      Joined:
      Last active:
    • Defjamz26

      Defjamz26 2,031

      Senior Member
      Joined:
      Last active:
    • coltsfanmurf

      coltsfanmurf 51

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