Jump to content
Indianapolis Colts
Indianapolis Colts Fan Forum

Ballard looking like a genius


Recommended Posts

46 minutes ago, Myles said:

Outside of QB, I think the team is better and deeper at every position than it was when Ballard took over.  

I agree.  But I would not have said that about the offensive skilled positions until we added Taylor and Pittman this past draft (Its not too early to tell that they will be better than what we've had there, IMO).  Ever since Reggie went down during the Grigson years, the RBs, WRs, and TEs have been a rotating bunch of JAGS outside of TY and Doyle (who almost doesn't count because of injury/availability issues) that extended into the early years of Ballard, IMO.

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 147
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

Drafting Taylor and Blackmon to replace Mack and Hooker...   Imagine if he didn't 

As far as Ballard goes I still say he's one of the best GMs in NFL

He inherited a team with a franchise level QB, and in Ballard's three seasons as GM prior to 2020, that QB played 16 games. Not to mention the other nonsense and drama that's happened. Ballard has bee

Posted Images

On 9/21/2020 at 10:06 PM, Two_pound said:

I've been saying for 3 years now Ballard has done an excellent job in comparison to other gms around the league. Hooker went down yesterday and not only did Blackmon play well but Odum also stepped in and had a solid game. This team is solid, the depth is very apparent, but you still have to go out and execute every week. I said it last week and I'll repeat it again, this team can win 14 games or they may only win 4. The Jest are so bad this should be a 45-10 laugher, BUT, remember people we lost to a very pathetic Jest team in 2018(with Andrew Luck at qb.) Hopefully we won't see a repeat of that performance.

If Ballard has done such an excellent job, when compared to other GM's, why isn't he winning? Drafting decently is one thing, but if you are not winning games, it doesn't matter how well you draft and trade. 

  • Like 1
  • Confused 1
  • Sad 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Horsey said:

If Ballard has done such an excellent job, when compared to other GM's, why isn't he winning? Drafting decently is one thing, but if you are not winning games, it doesn't matter how well you draft and trade. 

Mostly due to the QB position.    Also the team he inherited was thin at almost every position. He needed to build depth while fixing certain positions.  Without Luck to hide the flaws, he had a tough road.   Like I said earlier, fans who watch the games can tell that nearly every position is better than it was.  He has been very solid in his drafts.  

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

If Ballard has done such an excellent job, when compared to other GM's, why isn't he winning? Drafting decently is one thing, but if you are not winning games, it doesn't matter how well you draft and trade. 

 

He inherited a team with a franchise level QB, and in Ballard's three seasons as GM prior to 2020, that QB played 16 games. Not to mention the other nonsense and drama that's happened. Ballard has been dealt a rough hand to start his tenure as GM.

 

That said, the winning has to start this year. He's completely revamped the roster, he's chosen and invested in a QB (still a bridge, but Rivers was brought in to help elevate the offense, so Ballard and Reich will be judged on how this move plays out), and he's selected a coaching staff. The drama is done. Now it's time for results on the field. 

  • Like 7
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Myles said:

Mostly due to the QB position.    Also the team he inherited was thin at almost every position. He needed to build depth while fixing certain positions.  Without Luck to hide the flaws, he had a tough road.   Like I said earlier, fans who watch the games can tell that nearly every position is better than it was.  He has been very solid in his drafts.  

 

The inability to find a quality receiver behind TY has been a theme for seven years now. Ballard hasn't gotten that one right, yet. Not necessarily his fault -- Funchess got hurt, now Campbell is hurt -- but the results aren't there. TY got hurt last year, and there was little behind him; now TY is struggling to start this year, in Year 9 for him, and we don't know if anyone else will be able to fill the void. Even if TY turns it on, what else is there?

 

Just pointing out an area where Ballard needs a win. 

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, Superman said:

 

He inherited a team with a franchise level QB, and in Ballard's three seasons as GM prior to 2020, that QB played 16 games. Not to mention the other nonsense and drama that's happened. Ballard has been dealt a rough hand to start his tenure as GM.

 

That said, the winning has to start this year. He's completely revamped the roster, he's chosen and invested in a QB (still a bridge, but Rivers was brought in to help elevate the offense, so Ballard and Reich will be judged on how this move plays out), and he's selected a coaching staff. The drama is done. Now it's time for results on the field. 

 

I agree and Id add that not addressing QB is the same (or worse) as making a bad pick at the position. Herbert and Love were in play but Ballard chose to address the DT position instead. The team needed a QB, there were QBs to be had and he passed. As those guys continue to develop and start to play its a reflection on Ballard imo. 

 

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

 

I agree and Id add that not addressing QB is the same (or worse) as making a bad pick at the position. Herbert and Love were in play but Ballard chose to address the DT position instead. The team needed a QB, there were QBs to be had and he passed. As those guys continue to develop and start to play its a reflection on Ballard imo. 

 

 

Ehh, I don't really agree. 

 

Herbert went at #6. He wasn't really in play for the Colts, who had #13. And if you do move up and he's not right for you, that's definitely worse than passing on a QB who winds up being pretty good. I don't think a GM should operate from the stance that their favorite QB in the draft is going to become Patrick Mahomes; on average, first round QBs underperform, not overperform. So not addressing QB isn't worse, IMO, not when we're talking about giving up significant assets to get the guy you want.

 

Love hasn't played yet. Preliminary reports aren't thrilling. We'll see how he turns out, but the Colts still had a reasonable chance to get him, and chose not to make a move. He didn't pass on Love to grab a DT. 

 

And just to repeat myself, we don't know what Herbert and Love will wind up being. I like them both. I'm not heartbroken we didn't draft either of them. Time will tell whether I'm underselling this.

 

They chose to go with a veteran bridge QB, and see what happens. That has a chance to work for us for the next season or two, and then we'll see whether we have a guy that can take the reins. 

 

Lastly, 3T is super important for our team. It's become critical for any good defense, and we've literally never had game breaker at that position. If Buckner works out for us, that move will be a winner.

  • Like 3
  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Superman said:

 

The inability to find a quality receiver behind TY has been a theme for seven years now. Ballard hasn't gotten that one right, yet. Not necessarily his fault -- Funchess got hurt, now Campbell is hurt -- but the results aren't there. TY got hurt last year, and there was little behind him; now TY is struggling to start this year, in Year 9 for him, and we don't know if anyone else will be able to fill the void. Even if TY turns it on, what else is there?

 

Just pointing out an area where Ballard needs a win. 

 

 

Hopefully Pittman can make a reasonable impact this year. The Parris Campbell injury really hurt, he was top snap count leader Week 1, played very well and looked like a key component to our offense this year. Hypothetically per Week 1, if TY did get injured, a WR core of Pittman (X), Parris (slot) and Pascal (Z) would have been serviceable imo. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Superman said:

 

The inability to find a quality receiver behind TY has been a theme for seven years now. Ballard hasn't gotten that one right, yet. Not necessarily his fault -- Funchess got hurt, now Campbell is hurt -- but the results aren't there. TY got hurt last year, and there was little behind him; now TY is struggling to start this year, in Year 9 for him, and we don't know if anyone else will be able to fill the void. Even if TY turns it on, what else is there?

 

Just pointing out an area where Ballard needs a win. 

Yep, not really his fault. Between injury and QB woes, this isn't one of the things that worry me about Ballard. The effort has certainly been there, either by FA or draft.

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Superman said:

 

The inability to find a quality receiver behind TY has been a theme for seven years now. Ballard hasn't gotten that one right, yet. Not necessarily his fault -- Funchess got hurt, now Campbell is hurt -- but the results aren't there. TY got hurt last year, and there was little behind him; now TY is struggling to start this year, in Year 9 for him, and we don't know if anyone else will be able to fill the void. Even if TY turns it on, what else is there?

 

Just pointing out an area where Ballard needs a win. 

 I can’t agree with you there: the receivers, TEs and running backs, although unproven, have a lot of potential. I would argue they’re deeper than when he took over. Time will tell but I think you’re underestimating what we have in the passing game.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Ballard completely rebuild 98% of the roster in three years. I don't count 2017 because he didn't have his own coaching staff and had to deal with Pagano. Even with Andrew Luck retiring, Ballard never stopped building the Colts into the highly talented roster they currently have today. I don't think Ballard gets enough credit just like I don't think Andrew Luck got enough when he was carrying the Colts pitiful roster for multiple years on his back.

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites
41 minutes ago, coltsfeva said:

 I can’t agree with you there: the receivers, TEs and running backs, although unproven, have a lot of potential. I would argue they’re deeper than when he took over. Time will tell but I think you’re underestimating what we have in the passing game.

I'm optimistic too, but "potential" can be a trap. I like the measurables of the guys we have, but most are wildcards. And let's be honest, the "potential" we've had has been a bit stunted in terms of growth due to QB woes 2 of our last 4 years. But yes, we do have a lot of speedy athletic, although raw and small school guys at WR. TE is however another story. If we remove Burton from the conversation (he's not a traditional TE, and is more slot than anything), Doyle is the only proven, and MAC is the only one I see with legit potential. At RB, Taylor is the only legit true RB aside from Mack. Wilkins is good depth, but he's not bell cow between the Ts guy. He's a zone rushing back most effective on the edge. Great depth, and will look great later in games behind our OL, but not a #1. Hines is a great APB and is legit. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, EastStreet said:

I'm optimistic too, but "potential" can be a trap. I like the measurables of the guys we have, but most are wildcards. And let's be honest, the "potential" we've had has been a bit stunted in terms of growth due to QB woes 2 of our last 4 years. But yes, we do have a lot of speedy athletic, although raw and small school guys at WR. TE is however another story. If we remove Burton from the conversation (he's not a traditional TE, and is more slot than anything), Doyle is the only proven, and MAC is the only one I see with legit potential. At RB, Taylor is the only legit true RB aside from Mack. Wilkins is good depth, but he's not bell cow between the Ts guy. He's a zone rushing back most effective on the edge. Great depth, and will look great later in games behind our OL, but not a #1. Hines is a great APB and is legit. 

Assuming we come out of the 1st 7 games at 5-2 which is a likely outcome, we won't really find out what this team is made of until we play the Ravens and Titans.  

Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, Horsey said:

If Ballard has done such an excellent job, when compared to other GM's, why isn't he winning? Drafting decently is one thing, but if you are not winning games, it doesn't matter how well you draft and trade. 

But....but hes a genius!!! What is his record without Luck??  No hiding this year. It is year 4. This year will tell us how much talent we truly have on this team.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
37 minutes ago, 2006Coltsbestever said:

Assuming we come out of the 1st 7 games at 5-2 which is a likely outcome, we won't really find out what this team is made of until we play the Ravens and Titans.  

I agree we won't have to put in a "full" effort until the Ravens, I do think we'll have one sided challenges. Bears have a good D and will test us. Browns are a step up in O, but no reason to lose to them. Bengals are bad. Lions are bad. 

 

We should be 6-1 when we play the Ravens. And I like our chances at home. IMO, it's a good match up for us. Our D won't be able to play soft coverage though.

 

Jets - bad team with injuries piling up that should make them horrible. 

at Bears - Bad O, Good D

at Browns - Underrated on both sides of the ball, but we should win

Bengals - getting better, but still a bad team

Bye

at Lions - OK O, bad D

Ravens - Full game

at Titans - Full game

Packers - Full game

Titans - Full game

at Texans - Full game

at Raiders - Full game

Texans - Full game

at Steelers - Full game

Jags - Bad team

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

Yep, not really his fault. Between injury and QB woes, this isn't one of the things that worry me about Ballard. The effort has certainly been there, either by FA or draft.

 

Ultimately, it's results that matter. But yeah, I've understood his approach at WR to this point. I wasn't thrilled with guys like Ryan Grant or Kamar Aiken, but the roster was still under development at that point. Now he's used 2nd rounders in back to back years, and we're gonna need to see something out of it eventually.

 

1 hour ago, coltsfeva said:

 I can’t agree with you there: the receivers, TEs and running backs, although unproven, have a lot of potential. I would argue they’re deeper than when he took over. Time will tell but I think you’re underestimating what we have in the passing game.

 

I'm not writing anyone off. Just not giving anyone credit for potential. I'm talking about the lack of results. 

 

And this goes back several years. Since Reggie got hurt in 2013, we've been without a reliable #2. Hakeem Nicks, Donte Moncrief, Andre Johnson, Phillip Dorsett... fast forward to 2019 when it was Funchess and Campbell hurt most of the season, plus Deon Cain was supposed to be a factor and wound up on another team by midseason. 

 

We haven't been able to get a suitable running mate for TY in seven years, despite trying basically every pick in the book. And now, it's probably time to start thinking about TY's replacement. Even if he remains productive for a few more years, he won't be able to take the top of the defense like he could. 

 

Just sayin, it's not necessarily anyone's fault, it's not a specific failure or oversight, but the bag hasn't been filled. Yet. 

 

I like Pittman, Patmon is intriguing, Pascal is a good 3 or 4... but we gotta have somebody fill that void. 

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites
21 minutes ago, EastStreet said:

I agree we won't have to put in a "full" effort until the Ravens, I do think we'll have one sided challenges. Bears have a good D and will test us. Browns are a step up in O, but no reason to lose to them. Bengals are bad. Lions are bad. 

 

We should be 6-1 when we play the Ravens. And I like our chances at home. IMO, it's a good match up for us. Our D won't be able to play soft coverage though.

 

Jets - bad team with injuries piling up that should make them horrible. 

at Bears - Bad O, Good D

at Browns - Underrated on both sides of the ball, but we should win

Bengals - getting better, but still a bad team

Bye

at Lions - OK O, bad D

Ravens - Full game

at Titans - Full game

Packers - Full game

Titans - Full game

at Texans - Full game

at Raiders - Full game

Texans - Full game

at Steelers - Full game

Jags - Bad team

At Browns is a trap game if I can call it that. I hope we end up 6-1, that would almost be a shoe in for a 10 win season.

Link to post
Share on other sites
28 minutes ago, Superman said:

 

Ultimately, it's results that matter. But yeah, I've understood his approach at WR to this point. I wasn't thrilled with guys like Ryan Grant or Kamar Aiken, but the roster was still under development at that point. Now he's used 2nd rounders in back to back years, and we're gonna need to see something out of it eventually.

It's absolutely results that matter. But most get grace when it comes to injury (Campbell). We were seeing something out of PC, just keeps getting knocked out. Pittman is TBD. I liked the Pittman pick, but still wish we would have taken Claypool. I guess I just really liked we went for an early big-X type WR, given it's been lacking for a long time. 

 

I didn't like the Grant signing at all. Didn't really care for the Funch sign, but thought it was at least an attempt to address big-X. I was probably less happy with the $ than the person if I'm honest.

 

But like I said, I can't fault the effort, and can't really fault the "who" he went after. 

28 minutes ago, Superman said:

 

 

I'm not writing anyone off. Just not giving anyone credit for potential. I'm talking about the lack of results. 

 

And this goes back several years. Since Reggie got hurt in 2013, we've been without a reliable #2. Hakeem Nicks, Donte Moncrief, Andre Johnson, Phillip Dorsett... fast forward to 2019 when it was Funchess and Campbell hurt most of the season, plus Deon Cain was supposed to be a factor and wound up on another team by midseason. 

 

We haven't been able to get a suitable running mate for TY in seven years, despite trying basically every pick in the book. And now, it's probably time to start thinking about TY's replacement. Even if he remains productive for a few more years, he won't be able to take the top of the defense like he could. 

 

Just sayin, it's not necessarily anyone's fault, it's not a specific failure or oversight, but the bag hasn't been filled. Yet. 

 

I like Pittman, Patmon is intriguing, Pascal is a good 3 or 4... but we gotta have somebody fill that void. 

I agree on all of this too. One thing I'd add, is that the QB woes have impacted WR and TE development. That's no longer an issue, so we should be able to see some fruits of the labor this year, assuming the ones picked, are actually quality fruits lol. 

 

I'm good with TY and Pittman as outside guys even though we know TY may not be long term. I just hope we have someone else step up with PC out. I love Pascal, and he absolutely can be efficient at big-slot, but he's a 4-6 depth guy. I'd really love to get a look at Hines and Dulin running out of slot.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, Myles said:

Outside of QB, I think the team is better and deeper at every position than it was when Ballard took over.  

I think you could argue QB is at least deeper.  When he got her tolizen was the backup and whatever you think of Jacoby he’s better than him.  Add in Rivers, Eason, and, Kelly and it’s a lot deeper.  None of them are as good as Luck clearly but it’s deeper.

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

I agree we won't have to put in a "full" effort until the Ravens, I do think we'll have one sided challenges. Bears have a good D and will test us. Browns are a step up in O, but no reason to lose to them. Bengals are bad. Lions are bad. 

 

We should be 6-1 when we play the Ravens. And I like our chances at home. IMO, it's a good match up for us. Our D won't be able to play soft coverage though.

 

Jets - bad team with injuries piling up that should make them horrible. 

at Bears - Bad O, Good D

at Browns - Underrated on both sides of the ball, but we should win

Bengals - getting better, but still a bad team

Bye

at Lions - OK O, bad D

Ravens - Full game

at Titans - Full game

Packers - Full game

Titans - Full game

at Texans - Full game

at Raiders - Full game

Texans - Full game

at Steelers - Full game

Jags - Bad team

Dolphins just  hammered the Jags.  I do not have a lot of faith in this Colts team. I expect the offence to improve as the season goes along.   I have little faith in the scheme and less in Eberflus. 

  • Like 1
  • Sad 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, Moosejawcolt said:

Dolphins just  hammered the Jags.  I do not have a lot of faith in this Colts team. I expect the offence to improve as the season goes along.   I have little faith in the scheme and less in Eberflus. 

Honestly for me, the verdict is still out on both Reich and Flus. Giving Reich a pass given the QB situation last year, but his game plan week 1 was almost as bad as 2019 Miami. Giving Flus a pass for last year, but that ends this year after signing Buckner. 

 

I'm still chuckling over all the folks overreacting about our defense the first two games. Definitely reason for optimism, but we've not played good OLs or good teams. The OLs the nest two weeks aren't anything special either. No reason for us not to be #1 in team D after the first four weeks given the Os we're playing.

  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, EastStreet said:

Honestly for me, the verdict is still out on both Reich and Flus. Giving Reich a pass given the QB situation last year, but his game plan week 1 was almost as bad as 2019 Miami. Giving Flus a pass for last year, but that ends this year after signing Buckner. 

 

I'm still chuckling over all the folks overreacting about our defense the first two games. Definitely reason for optimism, but we've not played good OLs or good teams. The OLs the nest two weeks aren't anything special either. No reason for us not to be #1 in team D after the first four weeks given the Os we're playing.

That is why I have little faith in them.  Yea their O may improve as the season moves along. However, this D has the ability to make Trubisky look like Marino. I will never buy into as scheme as taking us deep into the playoffs or if we will even make the play offs. Im sorry, but the Jags game was a huge loss for me. Loss to a weaker divsion. Looked severely out coached on defence. This is suppose to b an easy defence for players to learn. The only problem it appears is that it is easy for the opposing offences to learn as well. Also the one thing I absolutely detest is this.  I hear about how hard Eberflus is on the players in grading them after each game. He throws out little  jabs eluding to a players lack of effort in practice and they need ro pick it up. Seriously what has he brought to this D as a coordinator?? I think he needs to be graded and after 2 years and 2 games....meh!!!

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

That is why I have little faith in them.  Yea their O may improve as the season moves along. However, this D has the ability to make Trubisky look like Marino. I will never buy into as scheme as taking us deep into the playoffs or if we will even make the play offs. Im sorry, but the Jags game was a huge loss for me. Loss to a weaker divsion. Looked severely out coached on defence. This is suppose to b an easy defence for players to learn. The only problem it appears is that it is easy for the opposing offences to learn as well. Also the one thing I absolutely detest is this.  I hear about how hard Eberflus is on the players in grading them after each game. He throws out little  jabs eluding to a players lack of effort in practice and they need ro pick it up. Seriously what has he brought to this D as a coordinator?? I think he needs to be graded and after 2 years and 2 games....meh!!!

Jags was a huge loss for me. But I'd say we were outcoached on both sides of the ball. On O, why throw it 100 times. Then next week we run 100 times. Just seems they try to get too cute, and forgo balance. 

 

On D, I disagree our D is easy to learn. Zones can simple, but can also be complex. All the hand offs, and read decisions, aren't all that simple. IMO, man is better for athletic guys, and zones for less athletic more cerebral. But I think it goes back to, like the O, a need for balance. There's absolutely a time for zone (soft or less soft), and a time for tight man. We just don't seem to use balance efficiently, making bad QBs look good. I was surprised Cousins and the MN OC didn't try the Jags gameplan.

Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, King Colt said:

The only "genius" ever attached to the Colts organization was Don Shula. Let's see how the Colts fare in the second half of this season before Ballard is declared a hero.

So you don’t think Peyton Manning and Bill Polian are football geniuses hunh?

Link to post
Share on other sites
20 hours ago, Superman said:

 

The inability to find a quality receiver behind TY has been a theme for seven years now. Ballard hasn't gotten that one right, yet. Not necessarily his fault -- Funchess got hurt, now Campbell is hurt -- but the results aren't there. TY got hurt last year, and there was little behind him; now TY is struggling to start this year, in Year 9 for him, and we don't know if anyone else will be able to fill the void. Even if TY turns it on, what else is there?

 

Just pointing out an area where Ballard needs a win. 

Agreed,  and I've been harping on this void for about 6 years.......prior to Ballard even getting here.  While AJ, Funchess, and even TE Ebron were talented guys brought in to contribute immediately, their short contracts suggested they were strategic place holders until something better came along.

 

And it never did.  Dorsett, Moncrief, Campbell (still hope but doubt it), nobody emerging from a pack of mid to late round draft choices has left that spot empty for years.  I am enthused about Pittman's ability to win that spot and MEANINGFULLY CONTRIBUTE from that spot for many years more so than at any time in the last 6 years.  

 

It would have been nice to get that second WR from a deep class last spring to sit behind TY, but it apparently didn't fall that way.

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 9/24/2020 at 11:03 AM, Horsey said:

If Ballard has done such an excellent job, when compared to other GM's, why isn't he winning? Drafting decently is one thing, but if you are not winning games, it doesn't matter how well you draft and trade. 

Don't feed the "new" troll, folks.

Link to post
Share on other sites
22 hours ago, Superman said:

 

The inability to find a quality receiver behind TY has been a theme for seven years now. Ballard hasn't gotten that one right, yet. Not necessarily his fault -- Funchess got hurt, now Campbell is hurt -- but the results aren't there. TY got hurt last year, and there was little behind him; now TY is struggling to start this year, in Year 9 for him, and we don't know if anyone else will be able to fill the void. Even if TY turns it on, what else is there?

 

Just pointing out an area where Ballard needs a win. 

It's not just WR that Ballard needs a win. His secondary has been very underwhelming the whole time he's been here and the picks in the secondary have been questionable. I loved the Hooker pick if we played single high, but if Ballard really wanted to play cover-2, that pick was a waste and by refusing his cheap 5th year option he pretty much admitted defeat there. Then Quincy Wilson turned out a horrible pick. Hairston was OK, but let go and no longer with the team. Rock still hasn't shown he can be a long-term stable presence, Khari and Blackmon look promising but again - still question marks there. Pretty much the only position in the secondary that looks secured and stable is a slot corner in Kenny Moore. Now, we do have young players that might improve and turn into a feature of this defense but none of them are surefire long-term starters. 

 

This is another area Ballard needs a win - DE. No idea if Houston will stay past this year and even if he stays at what level he will play, but outside pass-rushers is another area this team needs someone to hit. Ballard has invested tons in it. Basham, Kemoko, Lewis, Banogu ... all day 2 picks. Someone needs to hit! Otherwise we have nothing past this year. The Autry's of the world are nice bargains and stuff but if you want to play Tampa 2, you need quick pressure and not just nice rotational pieces. You need beasts that win fast.

 

QB, WR, DB, pass-rush... this team is severely lacking long-term solution at multiple incredibly important positions. IMO this is really the reason why we are not winning more even though I do think we have much more talent and better coaching than under the Grigson-Pagano era. Just the most important positions in football are not taken care of on this team. With Grigson-Pagano we had Luck, prime TY not missing games, hell, for a couple of years even Vontae Davis was SO MUCH BETTER than anything we have in the secondary right now... we had a roster bereft of talent past that and horrible coaching and horrible GM, but the positions on the team that bring most value and contribute most to wins were equipped with some elite talent. 

 

I am not blaming Ballard, he's spent the resourses to address most of those positions(and I love how he's handling the draft in general) and some of the players we are waiting on are young and very well might get there, but yeah... at some point we need some of those to hit.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
21 hours ago, Superman said:

 

Ehh, I don't really agree. 

 

Herbert went at #6. He wasn't really in play for the Colts, who had #13. And if you do move up and he's not right for you, that's definitely worse than passing on a QB who winds up being pretty good. I don't think a GM should operate from the stance that their favorite QB in the draft is going to become Patrick Mahomes; on average, first round QBs underperform, not overperform. So not addressing QB isn't worse, IMO, not when we're talking about giving up significant assets to get the guy you want.

 

Love hasn't played yet. Preliminary reports aren't thrilling. We'll see how he turns out, but the Colts still had a reasonable chance to get him, and chose not to make a move. He didn't pass on Love to grab a DT. 

 

And just to repeat myself, we don't know what Herbert and Love will wind up being. I like them both. I'm not heartbroken we didn't draft either of them. Time will tell whether I'm underselling this.

 

They chose to go with a veteran bridge QB, and see what happens. That has a chance to work for us for the next season or two, and then we'll see whether we have a guy that can take the reins. 

 

Lastly, 3T is super important for our team. It's become critical for any good defense, and we've literally never had game breaker at that position. If Buckner works out for us, that move will be a winner.

 

My point isn't that Herbert or Love is perfect for the Colts my point is at some point QB needs to be addressed - its literally inevitable. Ballard had the prime opportunity to address it this year with reasonable draft capital and he didn't (getting to 5 from 13 is way cheaper then from 23 or 26). Not addressing QB this year is, in fact, addressing the QB position.  No matter how valuable DT is to this team it will never be on the level as QB. In my mind, Ballard chose DT over QB and time will tell if that was right or wrong. 

 

One other thing, how many QBs work out in general? I think that's a copout response (not aimed at you, in general).

If you assume a quality starting QB lasts for 10 years that means the league only has room to incorporate 3 QBs per year - 3. To support that point, of the 32 QBs starting right now only 2 draft years are there more than 3 players starting QB that were drafted in the same year - 2018 and 2019 which are on rookie deals. Its not just QBs are hard to find, its hard to find spots for QBs.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 9/24/2020 at 1:55 PM, Superman said:

 

He inherited a team with a franchise level QB, and in Ballard's three seasons as GM prior to 2020, that QB played 16 games. Not to mention the other nonsense and drama that's happened. Ballard has been dealt a rough hand to start his tenure as GM.

 

That said, the winning has to start this year. He's completely revamped the roster, he's chosen and invested in a QB (still a bridge, but Rivers was brought in to help elevate the offense, so Ballard and Reich will be judged on how this move plays out), and he's selected a coaching staff. The drama is done. Now it's time for results on the field. 

I don't even count his 1st year which was 2017 (4-12). He didn't have the coach he wanted (Irsay chose to keep Chuck in 2017) and Luck was out for the year, plus our roster was awful due to Grigson. People counting that makes no sense. I count since 2018 and since then he is at least above .500 at 19-17 with a playoff win. Ballard even had McDaniels back out on him and Luck retire before the 2019 season. He has been dealt with all sorts of crap hands. Now if we don't make the playoffs this year then he deserves to be criticized IMO because this his fully his team with his coach at this point and Rivers is actually good.

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 9/20/2020 at 9:40 PM, Smoke317 said:

Buckner was a beast. Honestly, his numbers looked really good for an interior D lineman last week.  6 tackles. 4 solo. 1.5 tackles for loss.  He’s another sign that Ballard is on his game.  Taylor, Blackmon, Pittman, & Buckner all made plays today.  If Campbell is done for the season, watch out for Patmon being another new addition that contributes. Oh and Rodrigo was money in the bank...

Rodrigo was a good find, but that is more coach Reich seeing his potential than anything IMO. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, stitches said:

It's not just WR that Ballard needs a win. His secondary has been very underwhelming the whole time he's been here and the picks in the secondary have been questionable. I loved the Hooker pick if we played single high, but if Ballard really wanted to play cover-2, that pick was a waste and by refusing his cheap 5th year option he pretty much admitted defeat there. Then Quincy Wilson turned out a horrible pick. Hairston was OK, but let go and no longer with the team. Rock still hasn't shown he can be a long-term stable presence, Khari and Blackmon look promising but again - still question marks there. Pretty much the only position in the secondary that looks secured and stable is a slot corner in Kenny Moore. Now, we do have young players that might improve and turn into a feature of this defense but none of them are surefire long-term starters.

 

Lots of question marks in the secondary. For me, the questions start with the scheme. I don't think Ballard went into the 2017 draft planning to change the defense a year later; that's an assumption that people accept as fact, and I think that's undetermined. Still, Hooker would fit fine into the defense I assume we want to play (still don't know what exactly the scheme is meant to be), although the value for a mid first rounder isn't exactly there. Not a waste if Hooker plays well. Hooker's play never matched expectations after his knee injury, and declining the option was more an indication that he hadn't earned a new contract, not that he couldn't be a factor in the defense.

 

The other secondary picks had issues of their own -- Wilson not a great fit, but he didn't work hard enough, Hairston was a fifth and would have been fine, etc. -- but yeah, the DBs, especially outside corners, aren't where they should be yet. I don't have a problem with Rock, we'll see what happens with him. 

 

Also, I'm not sure how they value outside corners. Again, the scheme isn't clear to me. But if you're going to play Cover 2, investing a lot of draft capital and/or money into corners isn't in the cards.

 

Quote

This is another area Ballard needs a win - DE. No idea if Houston will stay past this year and even if he stays at what level he will play, but outside pass-rushers is another area this team needs someone to hit. Ballard has invested tons in it. Basham, Kemoko, Lewis, Banogu ... all day 2 picks. Someone needs to hit! Otherwise we have nothing past this year. The Autry's of the world are nice bargains and stuff but if you want to play Tampa 2, you need quick pressure and not just nice rotational pieces. You need beasts that win fast.

 

Agreed. But difference makers at DE are like QBs. Either you draft a stud early in the first, or you hope someone excels. Again, injury has hit us here. I really like Buckner and hopefully he'll make a huge difference for the outside guys, but we still need one of the young guys to step up. Probably better off here than at WR or CB, but still not great. So far, it's been a pass rush by committee approach. 

 

Quote

 

QB, WR, DB, pass-rush... this team is severely lacking long-term solution at multiple incredibly important positions. IMO this is really the reason why we are not winning more even though I do think we have much more talent and better coaching than under the Grigson-Pagano era. Just the most important positions in football are not taken care of on this team. With Grigson-Pagano we had Luck, prime TY not missing games, hell, for a couple of years even Vontae Davis was SO MUCH BETTER than anything we have in the secondary right now... we had a roster bereft of talent past that and horrible coaching and horrible GM, but the positions on the team that bring most value and contribute most to wins were equipped with some elite talent. 

 

I am not blaming Ballard, he's spent the resourses to address most of those positions(and I love how he's handling the draft in general) and some of the players we are waiting on are young and very well might get there, but yeah... at some point we need some of those to hit.

 

 

For me, it's QB. JB isn't that good, and he was the starter for 29 of the 48 games in Ballard's tenure, before 2020. Ballard didn't plan on JB being the starter in any of those games. Luck wasn't supposed to miss 2017, and he wasn't supposed to retire before 2019. Even in 2018, Luck was working his way back from injury, with a new coaching staff, and a not great group of receivers. 

 

We still need a long term solution at QB, but I'm okay with the approach so far. I don't think it's reasonable to get hung up on the win totals so far, primarily because of the QB situation, but that's not a legitimate excuse this season. 

 

I don't see Ballard making a big trade to get up to the top of the draft, so we better hope Rivers does enough over the next year or two, or hope Eason can play. Because I don't see us having a top five pick to draft a guy like Burrow or Herbert any time soon. 

 

In the meantime, Turay, Banogu, Lewis, Rock, Willis, Blackmon, Pittman, Patmon, Fountain, etc., need to show what they can do, and Buckner, Houston, TY, Doyle, etc., need to lead the way. 

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, King Colt said:

Correct. List their SB victories

Peyton has as many as Shula and Polian has one less in terms of wins and appearances in the Super Bowl.  You might not think they are football geniuses but you would be in the very small minority of those that don’t.

Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, stitches said:

 

QB, WR, DB, pass-rush... this team is severely lacking long-term solution at multiple incredibly important positions. IMO this is really the reason why we are not winning more even though I do think we have much more talent and better coaching than under the Grigson-Pagano era. Just the most important positions in football are not taken care of on this team. With Grigson-Pagano we had Luck, prime TY not missing games, hell, for a couple of years even Vontae Davis was SO MUCH BETTER than anything we have in the secondary right now... we had a roster bereft of talent past that and horrible coaching and horrible GM, but the positions on the team that bring most value and contribute most to wins were equipped with some elite talent. 

 

 

This is as close to reading things that I have been saying for some time now. 

 

WR, DB, PR are significant to the passing game, and we lack depth and probably top tier talent in those corps and have for years, extending into mid-Grigson tenure.

 

They are also EXPENSIVE positions.  Positional value matters.  While individual picks like Kelly and Nelson are great, and throw in a FS in between, back to back to back first round picks that repeatedly ignore positional value is going to leave a team short in the expensive positions down the road.  With TY slowing, we are there now. And we still need an expensive LT soon. 

 

Having all-pro players is always nice, but investing capital in all pro players in low-ish value positions makes it more difficult to find enough capital to accumulate higher value positions.  And now we need our 4th round QB to probably play above his draft position to avoid having to draft another QB high.

 

I think Ballard got a win with Buckner, and got good value with getting a 3 down RB (my projection) in Taylor and a competent #2 WR (my projection) in Pittman.  But he's going to have to allocate first round drat picks for a #1WR, a LT ,and a threatening DE over the next three years to make up for the Colts investing multiple first round picks in low value positions a few years ago.

 

And yes, the first 2 or 3 years Vontae Davis was here he basically played man and shut down the other teams #1WR.  That was a big deal that is missed very much.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

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

Create an account

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

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.


  • Thread of the Week

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • Nail biter for several reasons. Pre-game beers may be needed for the nerves.
    • If I had to guess, Rivers will be back on the books.
    • Typically to be a HOFer you have to be dominant for ~a decade.  Leonard and Q are ~2.5 years into their careers (about a quarter of the way there).  Leonard has not played 16 games in a season yet, which is somewhat concerning to me.  This year, while he and Q both look very good, I don't think either is deserving of an all-pro award.     So yes, very impressive that Q has been 1st team all-pro 2x and Leonard has a 1st and 2nd team all-pro under his belt.  That is very rare (Gale Sayers and Dick Butkus are the only other 2 teammates who made 1st team all-pro as rookies).  In no way am I knocking Q or Leonard, they're both critical pieces to this team and at the elite level in the NFL at their respective positions.  Labeling them as HOFers this early into their career is a bit of a stretch, though -- let's give them another 3.5-4 years to see if they're still healthy and performing at an all-pro level.  They're certainly off to a good start, but there are a lot of players who have made 2 all-pro teams in their career and are not HOFers (heck, LeRoy Butler was a 4x 1st-team all-pro and has been eligible for HOF induction for ~15 years and isn't in, Steve Wisniewski was 2x 1st team, 6x 2nd team and not in, etc.).  Also, the vast majority of HOFers were not first team all-pro as rookies.  These 2020 rookies are in perhaps the strangest year of the modern era, with limited training camps, no pre-season games, missing games due to COVID (see Taylor), etc.... Pittman, Taylor, Blackmon have all shown flashes of excellence and all have had their own obstacles on top of a weird off-season as rookies (Blackmon coming off injury getting thrown into starting line-up due to HOoker going down, Taylor having Mack go down and now missing a game on the COVID list, and Pittman with compartment syndrome).   No reason to expect any of them to be HOFers, but also no reason why if they stay healthy and continue improving that we don't start talking about them being at the HOF level in 4-5 more years.     In all honesty, it is way too early to tell if this class will stack up to the 2018 class.  We really won't know for another 4-5 years when we see which guys from the 2018 draft are given/not given contract extensions and when the current class is at the same point.      As far as just judging by rookie season alone, it's not unreasonable to think it won't be another >30 years before we see rookie teammates on the first team all-pro squad together (believe Butkus and Sayers was 1965).  That said, aside from Q and Leonard we got solid contributions from Smith and Hines on O, saw solid ST contributions from Franklin and Adams (with Franklin playing a minimal D role as a fill-in starter 2 games and Adams basically invisible on D), got very little from Turay and Lewis and basically nothing from Fountain, Cain.  Wilkins was OK as a 3rd RB and OK as a kick returner and our only UDFA who did anything noteworthy wad Odum as a solid STer and with a couple decent starts when he was needed due to injury.   Overall we had 4 of 11 picks (or 4 of 12 rookies who contributed) who really didn't do much as rookies (33% vs. 66% percent who contributed significantly in some aspect of the game).     So in short, the 2018 class as rookies had 2 studs (Q and Leonard), 2 guys who contributed solidly on O (Hines and Smith), 4 solid ST contributors (Odum, Adams, Franklin, Wilkins), 4 guys who really did nothing (Turay, Lewis, Cain, Fountain).   Three years later, we still have 2 studs (Q and Leonard), 1 very solid RT (Smith),  2 guys who are doing well in a RB rotation (Hines and Wilkins), 2 unknowns on the DL (Lewis and Turay - by far Lewis' best year, but he hasn't really been great), and 3 solid STers (Odum, Franklin, Adams and 4 if you count Hines).   Then we have Cain (gone) and Fountain (still pretty much doing nothing).  Again, about 2/3 of these guys are still contributing solidly in some way on the team, with the other 1/3 still unknown or not doing much (Turay started to come on last year and Lewis is recently coming on this year, so if they both continue, we may see 83% of that class as solid contributors moving forward).     The 2020 class as rookies -- we have 1 borderline stud (Blackmon), 2 very solid  O contributors (Taylor and Pittman), 3 very solid ST contributors (Rodgers, Glasgow, Blankenship), 1 guy who has been OK in a pinch as a backup or extra lineman (Pinter), 1 guy who has made the active roster after mostly being on the PS (Windsor - IMO, he's about as valuable to this year's team as Lewis was at the same point in 2018), 1 guy who has been very solid the past few weeks (Harris) and 2 guys (Eason and Patmon) who have been on the roster but inactive.  That puts us at 7 or 8 guys who have been solid contributors out of 11 as rookies (63% or 72%) and 3 or 4 guys (Eason, Patmon, Windsor, maybe Pinter) for a total of 27-36% of rookies who are not doing much at this point of the season (this could change moving forward if Pinter has to fill in for Kelly for a while and/or if Windsor takes on a bigger role down the stretch, it is not coincidence to me that he was activated the week we cut Day).  So right now, we're looking at 30-40% of our rookies not producing too much, but this could change to 20% (assuming Eason and Patmon don't play this year and Pinter and Windsor see increasing roles).     Overall, Ballard is >60% in both drafts in terms of having productive players as rookies.  It is very unlikely we'll see any team have 2 first team all-pros as rookies again in the near future (or ever).  We may see a DROY from the 2020 draft class like we saw in the 2018 draft class on this team.  Both Leonard and Blackmon have been criticized for being picked too early, etc... Ballard has proven those doubters wrong.     When we look back in a few years, if Eason is a franchise QB and Pittman and Patmon are a solid WR duo (perhaps Harris is still performing well), Taylor is a bellcow >1,200 yard rusher, Blackmon is an all-pro, Pinter is a starter (RG or RT), Rodgers is giving us a TD or more per year as a return guy, Glasgow is a solid STer, Hot Rod is a probowl K, and Windsor is still in the DL rotation and this draft could be better than the 2018 draft.  Again, too early to tell.  If we want to consider Buckner a part of the 2020 draft (the 13th pick), I think there's a good argument that the 2020 draft will exceed the 2018 draft.   Also, something to keep in mind -- our team was in very bad shape when Ballard took over.  In 2017, he was drafting for a team with a coach we pretty much all knew was going to be gone in a year.  In 2018, it was a lot easier to get significant playing time on the roster (at least IMO) because it was so bad.  In a short time, Ballard has put a lot of solid pieces together and this team is a much more difficult team to make the final roster, let alone get significant playing time as a rookie.     I agree with you on your Blackmon assessment.  It'd be cool if he got DROY... and he has made several key plays at critical times (e.g., forced fumble in OT last week)... but he's not perfect.  TBH, I think it was kind of disappointing that the long ball from Rodgers to MVS was not broken up near the end of the 4th quarter.  Blackmon was a step or two behind, but I think most very high end safeties would have broken that play up.     McDaniels dissing Ballard may have actually made Ballard's job easier.  I think Reich was the right guy for this team and after seeing Patricia fired from DET, and looking at stats of Belichick's coordinators who went on to head coaching jobs, they have a pretty poor track record.     Yes, I think Q and Leonard's play has been solid this year, but I don't think either of them deserve to be all-pros (at least not 1st team).  Won't be shocked if Q gets selected though, mainly because of his name and the fact Baldy and other reporters like to really focus on his positive plays.  He's been beaten more this year than I can remember (which is still not a lot) and has more holds than I remember in his first 2 years.     Agree, the most deserving of all-pro on this roster is Buckner (though, I can't see him getting the nod due to lack of stats and the fact that Donald and other interior DL in the league are playing at very high levels).  Second most deserving, IMO, is Hot Rod -- he's likely to be leading the league in points scored after tomorrow's game.  Just hit a big game winner.  Has a solid chance of ending the season >90% FG made and leading the league in points scored -- it'd be hard to vote against him for at least 2nd team K if he finishes the year >90% FG made and leads league in points.
    • I'm surprised we towards the middle on this (37). Thought we'd be lower.
  • Members

×
×
  • Create New...