Chris Ballard

[danlhart87 5,251]

Let me start off by saying I support Chris Ballard and his approach thus far.

 

Ballard's philosophy has often been seen as quantity over quality. He's dealt with this 2x now in past drafts and has shown pretty good success. 

 

I'm not sure the exact # yet but I believe 80% or more of Ballard's draftees are still active. 

 

That stat alone is the main reason even with the trade downs each year that I support him.

 

His slow methodical approach on building the Colts is certainly trending in the right direction right now but I am really hoping he takes the next step with solving the QB crisis in 21'.

 

What are your thoughts on Ballard?

Do you like him?

Do you hate him?

What do you wanna see different from him?

 

[chad72 13,517]

Great GM for roster depth and complete team.

 

However, high value positions like WR and pass rusher, definitely lacking in top notch talent drafted or seeing results on the field, it is like we have been waiting for a while for the next WR behind TY to produce. He cannot continue to draft like he has Andrew Luck anymore, hoping the QB will elevate those positions, even if we sign vet QBs in their home stretch. The QB, WR and pass rusher positions cover up roster depth blemishes faster than most positions. No wonder Polian was successful for so long with the draft and inferior depth on D and special teams.

 

We are at a cross roads w.r.t the QB position. We either double down on free agent/vet QBs while drafting for the future simultaneously and continue to do that for the next 2 years while drafting for the high value positions OR pull a big trade for a QB we think can be a franchise QB for 6-7 years.

[danlhart87 5,251]

1 minute ago, chad72 said:

Great GM for roster depth and complete team.

 

However, high value positions like WR and pass rusher, definitely lacking in top notch talent drafted. He cannot continue to draft like he has Andrew Luck anymore, hoping the QB will elevate those positions, even if we sign vet QBs in their home stretch. The QB, WR and pass rusher positions cover up roster depth blemishes faster than most positions. No wonder Polian was successful for so long with the draft and inferior depth on D and special teams.

 

We are at a cross roads w.r.t the QB position. We either double down on free agent QBs while drafting for the future simultaneously and continue to do that for the next 2 years OR pull a big trade for a QB we think can be a franchise QB for 6-7 years.

The top QBs will be gone by the time Colts pick so Colts have several options:

 

. Select best available OT or DE and re-sign Rivers. 

 

. Select best available OT or DE and start Eason and draft his backup late.

 

I hadn't done tons of research. Is there going to be a QB in 20s range to draft? One that would certainly start over Eason. Because if not you might as well start Eason.

[Nickster 642]

9 minutes ago, chad72 said:

Great GM for roster depth and complete team.

 

However, high value positions like WR and pass rusher, definitely lacking in top notch talent drafted or seeing results on the field, it is like we have been waiting for a while for the next WR behind TY to produce. He cannot continue to draft like he has Andrew Luck anymore, hoping the QB will elevate those positions, even if we sign vet QBs in their home stretch. The QB, WR and pass rusher positions cover up roster depth blemishes faster than most positions. No wonder Polian was successful for so long with the draft and inferior depth on D and special teams.

 

We are at a cross roads w.r.t the QB position. We either double down on free agent/vet QBs while drafting for the future simultaneously and continue to do that for the next 2 years while drafting for the high value positions OR pull a big trade for a QB we think can be a franchise QB for 6-7 years.

 

I don't understand this reasoning behind the WR position.  They made two very high draft choices the last 2 seasons at WR.  Campbell certainly has elite "talent", whether or not he will be a good pro is impossible to discern by his performance since he has been able to play so little.  I was skeptical of Pittman because of the speed numbers, but he was  a highly regarded prospect.  

 

I whole heartedly agree with what you say about being at the crossroads for the WR position.  I guess I just hope someone sells their soul so we can get a QB who plays like Charlie Daniels played the fiddle and Robert Johnson played the guitar. 

[danlhart87 5,251]

WR is a wait and see at this point. You can tell both Pittman and Parris have great potential its a matter of both staying healthy though .

[LJpalmbeacher2 1,932]

20 minutes ago, danlhart87 said:

Let me start off by saying I support Chris Ballard and his approach thus far.

 

Ballard's philosophy has often been seen as quantity over quality. He's dealt with this 2x now in past drafts and has shown pretty good success. 

 

I'm not sure the exact # yet but I believe 80% or more of Ballard's draftees are still active. 

 

That stat alone is the main reason even with the trade downs each year that I support him.

 

His slow methodical approach on building the Colts is certainly trending in the right direction right now but I am really hoping he takes the next step with solving the QB crisis in 21'.

 

What are your thoughts on Ballard?

Do you like him?

Do you hate him?

What do you wanna see different from him?

 

 

With Mack & Hooker injured and contracts expiring we may not have any draftees from his first draft on colts roster which was not that long ago. 

The QB position presently and going forward is not looking so rosey unless Eason, a 4th rd. Pick emerges , or a trade for a quality veteran happens.

Our receiving group is one of the weakest units in league and getting worse every year as TY ages.

And Ballard still has a overall losing record. Having said that our Defense is much improved,  it's  biggest weakness is the soft, big cushion philosophy they sometimes employ. 

After 4 years I dont think we're anywhere near the level of the elite teams like Pittsburgh, KC, Baltimore, Seattle, Tampa etc.... 

 

I'm not saying fire him or even he was a bad hire. I know he's not going anywhere and that's good 'caus I doubt we replace him with anyone who'll do better. He's  our man for the job.

But our team doesn't reflect what a lot of people here think/say of him..... not yet anyway. Lol

[twfish 2,208]

To me he is one of the greatest GM's currently in the league. He's gotten the raw end of the deal on somethings but has made incredible moves. I would like to see him become less stubborn at times with moves, seems like he is to loyal to players at times such as Brissett. There are definitely some areas of concern for me and I am still scratching my head at picks such as the Banogu pick in the 2nd round. All in all I am incredibly happy with him and his positives heavily outweigh any negatives. The next 2 years will be very crucial for his legacy though because IMHO the excuses stop after having 2 years to find the QB of the future but I do think he will go down as one of the Colts best GM's ever. 

[danlhart87 5,251]

8 minutes ago, LJpalmbeacher2 said:

 

With Mack & Hooker injured and contracts expiring we may not have any draftees from his first draft on colts roster which was not that long ago. 

The QB position presently and going forward is not looking so rosey unless Eason, a 4th rd. Pick emerges , or a trade for a quality veteran happens.

Our receiving group is one of the weakest units in league and getting worse every year as TY ages.

And Ballard still has a overall losing record. Having said that our Defense is much improved,  it's  biggest weakness is the soft, big cushion philosophy they sometimes employ. 

After 4 years I dont think we're anywhere near the level of the elite teams like Pittsburgh, KC, Baltimore, Seattle, Tampa etc.... 

 

I'm not saying fire him or even he was a bad hire. I know he's not going anywhere and that's good 'caus I doubt we replace him with anyone who'll do better. He's  our man for the job.

But our team doesn't reflect what a lot of people here think/say of him..... not yet anyway. Lol

Tampa Bay hasn't made playoffs in years and they are elite?

[danlhart87 5,251]

9 minutes ago, LJpalmbeacher2 said:

 

With Mack & Hooker injured and contracts expiring we may not have any draftees from his first draft on colts roster which was not that long ago. 

The QB position presently and going forward is not looking so rosey unless Eason, a 4th rd. Pick emerges , or a trade for a quality veteran happens.

Our receiving group is one of the weakest units in league and getting worse every year as TY ages.

And Ballard still has a overall losing record. Having said that our Defense is much improved,  it's  biggest weakness is the soft, big cushion philosophy they sometimes employ. 

After 4 years I dont think we're anywhere near the level of the elite teams like Pittsburgh, KC, Baltimore, Seattle, Tampa etc.... 

 

I'm not saying fire him or even he was a bad hire. I know he's not going anywhere and that's good 'caus I doubt we replace him with anyone who'll do better. He's  our man for the job.

But our team doesn't reflect what a lot of people here think/say of him..... not yet anyway. Lol

He found Mack and Hooker replacement in 20 draft so no worries there 

[shasta519 2,979]

I like Ballard...and I think he's a very good GM. He seems to be very strong in some areas...and not as strong in other. I do think he's overrated by some as well. He's certainly not infallible...as some (especially on the Colts sub reddit) would have you believe. But overall...a big step up from the previous GM. 

 

But while the Colts have built a pretty good team...it's all going to hinge on how QB is addressed long-term.

 

 

[LJpalmbeacher2 1,932]

1 minute ago, danlhart87 said:

Tampa Bay hasn't made playoffs in years and they are elite?

They are this year, a serious super bowl contender and built practically overnight. 

In fact I'm picking them to beat Steelers in SB.

[DougDew 4,363]

He's drafted well for the lower value positions in the middle of the field but has not added much young talent in the higher valued outside positions, both on offense and defense.  Some seem to be good prospects, but it has yet to be consistently displayed on the field. 

 

I can't give credit for what I think might be good players if only they weren't injured.  

[danlhart87 5,251]

3 minutes ago, LJpalmbeacher2 said:

They are this year, a serious super bowl contender and built practically overnight. 

In fact I'm picking them to beat Steelers in SB.

They would be the first team to play in their own stadium then.

[chad72 13,517]

32 minutes ago, Nickster said:

 

I don't understand this reasoning behind the WR position.  They made two very high draft choices the last 2 seasons at WR.  Campbell certainly has elite "talent", whether or not he will be a good pro is impossible to discern by his performance since he has been able to play so little.  I was skeptical of Pittman because of the speed numbers, but he was  a highly regarded prospect.  

 

I whole heartedly agree with what you say about being at the crossroads for the QB position.  I guess I just hope someone sells their soul so we can get a QB who plays like Charlie Daniels played the fiddle and Robert Johnson played the guitar. 

 

WR position - I see other WRs drafted in the same draft as Campbell contributing better than him. Ballard continually chose quantity over quality, trading down several times, passing on Montez Sweat, A J Brown, Deebo Samuel and possibly more in his quest for more darts on the board. I can see his philosophy but at some point, quality prevails. 

 

Let us hope we produce at that critical WR position, might need some insurance in the form of a 1 or 2 year deal with a free agent, it seems like. Funchess was supposed to be that, flopped. That is why Grigson kept investing in Donnie Avery, Hakeem Nicks, DHB, Andre Johnson etc. and missed on Dorsett. We will see, I guess. I am not getting my hopes up. In the time it took us to search for a good #2, our #1 is fading into a #2 in TY.

[richard pallo 3,105]

I like Ballard and I think he is one of the top GM's in the league.   Now that we are SB contenders again this year I think it's time for him to make a move at the deadline to position the team for the final run.  No reason not to.  We could use some help at a few positions so this is when the good GM's on contending teams make a move to help their teams.  I think we are there now.  

[shasta519 2,979]

7 minutes ago, twfish said:

To me he is one of the greatest GM's currently in the league. He's gotten the raw end of the deal on somethings but has made incredible moves. I would like to see him become less stubborn at times with moves, seems like he is to loyal to players at times such as Brissett. There are definitely some areas of concern for me and I am still scratching my head at picks such as the Banogu pick in the 2nd round. All in all I am incredibly happy with him and his positives heavily outweigh any negatives. The next 2 years will be very crucial for his legacy though because IMHO the excuses stop after having 2 years to find the QB of the future but I do think he will go down as one of the Colts best GM's ever. 

 

I will say...while Luck retiring was a raw deal...how many new GMs actually get to inherit a top tier franchise QB? Most teams make a change in the FO because they don't have that QB (and therefore the team is not good). So while having your QB retire abruptly is uncommon...it is not uncommon for a GM to have to solve the QB problem for a franchise...like Ballard will have to do.

 

I would also say that Ballard got a chance few GMs get. The 2017 team was a disaster...and it gave the Colts the #3 pick in a QB-heavy draft. Already having a QB on the roster (at the time)...Ballard was able to flip that pick into a huge amount of draft capital to accelerate the rebuild. In his first 3 drafts...he had SIX 2nd round picks to work with. And most people don't even begin to evaluate him until the 2018 season...which seems like a pretty good deal as well.

[Jared Cisneros 5,837]

Ballard is the best drafting GM in the league since 2018 IMO (the year he brought HIS scouts in). However, he's shown an inability to draft WRs and EDGE rushers so far, and we don't know if he is able to get us a franchise QB back post-Luck. I do think this team will be good for years to come with him as GM, but Ballard has to drop his mentality that the QB isn't the most important guy on the team. That's just not true, and it's extremely obvious with the Colts.

 

Otherwise, if he continues his drafts the way he currently does them, I want him as my GM. He just needs a plan to get us our new QB whether it be the draft, FA, trade, or starting Eason at some point.

[DougDew 4,363]

2 minutes ago, chad72 said:

 

WR position - I see other WRs drafted in the same draft as Campbell contributing better than him. Ballard continually chose quantity over quality, trading down several times, passing on Montez Sweat, A J Brown, and possibly more in his quest for more darts on the board. I can see his philosophy but at some point, quality prevails. 

 

Let us hope we produce at that critical WR position, might need some insurance in the form of a 1 or 2 year deal with a free agent, it seems like. Funchess was supposed to be that, flopped. That is why Grigson kept investing in Donnie Avery, Hakeem Nicks, DHB, Andre Johnson etc. and missed on Dorsett. We will see, I guess. I am not getting my hopes up. 

Yes, slightly OT here but the #2 WR position has been a problem for the Colts for years. 

 

Grigson tried to address it with Moncrief and Dorsett, and a series of FAs, none of which were very productive (at the time though, Avery was a slot and played with TY and Reggie, making a very good trio).

 

Ballard has tried to address it with Campbell and Pittman, but his quantity of other tries did not emerge or had setbacks like Funchess.

 

You could say that since Reggie got hurt, the most reliable and consistent second option behind TY was Ebron......for one year. 

 

That's pretty pathetic.

[danlhart87 5,251]

The WR position though greatly needed isnt very big for me.

 

I highly hope Ballard continues to build the trenches as he has done cause he has done wonderful doing that thus far.

[shasta519 2,979]

50 minutes ago, chad72 said:

Great GM for roster depth and complete team.

 

However, high value positions like WR and pass rusher, definitely lacking in top notch talent drafted or seeing results on the field, it is like we have been waiting for a while for the next WR behind TY to produce. He cannot continue to draft like he has Andrew Luck anymore, hoping the QB will elevate those positions, even if we sign vet QBs in their home stretch. The QB, WR and pass rusher positions cover up roster depth blemishes faster than most positions. No wonder Polian was successful for so long with the draft and inferior depth on D and special teams.

 

We are at a cross roads w.r.t the QB position. We either double down on free agent/vet QBs while drafting for the future simultaneously and continue to do that for the next 2 years while drafting for the high value positions OR pull a big trade for a QB we think can be a franchise QB for 6-7 years.

 

Agree. With or without Luck...the WR moves have been bad. Aiken, Grant, Funchess, Cain, Fountain, Campbell and Pittman. I am not going to write off Campbell and certainly not Pittman...but that is a very meh group...and in 4 offseasons...it is also a concerning trend. Whether it's a deprioritization or just bad talent evaluation (that has led to passing on very good WRs to draft lesser WRs/players)...objectively...it needs to get (much) better. 

 

The DE position has been similar...in regards to the draft. Fortunately, Ballard was shrewd in signing both Sheard and Houston. But 3 2nd round picks at DE...and the Colts have gotten little. How many teams can (potentially) whiff on 3 2nd round picks? If not for that great trade deal with the NYJ (and the first 3 picks of that 2018 draft)...I think the Ballard draft convo is a bit different.

 

But like you said...it's all about the QB if sustained success is the goal.

[danlhart87 5,251]

10 minutes ago, Jared Cisneros said:

Ballard is the best drafting GM in the league since 2018 IMO (the year he brought HIS scouts in). However, he's shown an inability to draft WRs and EDGE rushers so far, and we don't know if he is able to get us a franchise QB back post-Luck. I do think this team will be good for years to come with him as GM, but Ballard has to drop his mentality that the QB isn't the most important guy on the team. That's just not true, and it's extremely obvious with the Colts.

 

Otherwise, if he continues his drafts the way he currently does them, I want him as my GM. He just needs a plan to get us our new QB whether it be the draft, FA, trade, or starting Eason at some point.

Don't rule out bringing Rivers back in 21'

[Jared Cisneros 5,837]

1 minute ago, danlhart87 said:

Don't rule out bringing Rivers back in 21'

That's true too. I believe Rivers would play for us one more year. It's a question of if he has fallen off by 2021 and if we want to start Eason or a possible high draft pick by then. Won't rule it out, I know he likes it here.

[Barry Sears 1,479]

Given that he had to rebuild this roster that he inherited and then had the Luck departure to deal with, I believe he's done a very good job.  Our defense has improved and we have a top notch OL that required a lot of high draft picks to assemble.

 

He now will be faced with the decisions on upcoming expiring contracts with some of our top players, so we'll see how that goes.

 

You can't anticipate injuries, so it's hard to evaluate some of his picks, especially at WR.

 

You can't fix everything in the time Ballard has been here, but he's fixed a lot of things IMO.

[Nesjan3 1,140]

He has not been perfect, but he has been very good. I never used to see former Colts players on other teams even going back to Polian days, it just seemed like after the Colts they jus faded out of the league. Now you see ex Colts all over. 

 

The Vinny thing was a mistake for sure and the Rivers saga is still playing out with a bit of a rough start.

 

I see some people saying were SB contenders this year. I dont believe that to be true after seeing the real contenders vs our team play. If he continues with the GREAT drafts, and fee agent signings and manages to find a franchise qb for the next 10 years we could have a real shot at winning a few in the next decade.

[NorthernColt 148]

This is going to come off as homerish, but to have the things happen to him at the start, (luck and mcdaniels), and to have the team where we are now is nothing short of spectacular. 

 

Hes shown that he isnt married to a strategy and is flexible, which is a super rare trait. For example, multiple years of trading down, then outright taking a risk and trading your 1st all together for an all pro DT. 

 

The only knock you could make imo is his DE prospect evaluation. I haven't liked any of the edge rushers we've picked, and none of them have ever really made an impact. 

[Myles 4,423]

I think he has done great.  His first action was that he needed to fix the O-line and protect Luck.  He did that quickly.  Then Luck retired, surprisingly to all.  The QB position will definitely be a challenge, as it is for most teams.    

[Nickster 642]

54 minutes ago, LJpalmbeacher2 said:

They are this year, a serious super bowl contender and built practically overnight. 

In fact I'm picking them to beat Steelers in SB.

Yeah, but that is more of the pied piper effect.  Anyone who signed Brady was going to bring in a lot of aging vets looking to win.  That org may getterdone, but will probably pretty bare again for years to come after Brady leaves.  The Defense is terrible.

 

But I do agree on Ballard.  I think he gets a ton of Leeway with the unprecedented Luck retirement thing.  It's hard to see if he drafted good WR or not, he certainly hasn't gotten lucky on the health there.

 

Pittsburgh, KC, Baltimore, Seattle, Tampa-You cite all these teams and they all have elite QBs.  That is biggest and most obvious difference between the Colts and other squads IMO.  If you take any of those QBs and put them on the Colts and put Rivers on their squads, I think you'd basically just flip the script.  They would be like we are now and we would be like them.

 

I think Ballard is in a terrible position but I will say one thing for sure.

 

We should have looked at Bell and Brown if we are serious about winning.  

[Nickster 642]

1 hour ago, shasta519 said:

 

I will say...while Luck retiring was a raw deal...how many new GMs actually get to inherit a top tier franchise QB? Most teams make a change in the FO because they don't have that QB (and therefore the team is not good). So while having your QB retire abruptly is uncommon...it is not uncommon for a GM to have to solve the QB problem for a franchise...like Ballard will have to do.

 

I would also say that Ballard got a chance few GMs get. The 2017 team was a disaster...and it gave the Colts the #3 pick in a QB-heavy draft. Already having a QB on the roster (at the time)...Ballard was able to flip that pick into a huge amount of draft capital to accelerate the rebuild. In his first 3 drafts...he had SIX 2nd round picks to work with. And most people don't even begin to evaluate him until the 2018 season...which seems like a pretty good deal as well.

 

I agree that there is often a QB problem to solve, but I cannot think one other example of an elite QB in his prime years having his career ended.  There have been guys like Brady but he came back a year later and was expected too.  To have your prime years, elite QB just be gone suddenly one day forever has never happened in the NFL that I can recall.  

So what I am saying is that Ballard is in a worse position inheriting an Elite QB who quit rather than starting his tenure knowing that QB was going to be priority one. 

 

They built for 2 years around having Luck.  Now they give lip service about not building around elite QBing, but there are very few examples of championship football without elite QBing.

 

I do think that this has to be acknowledged to be fair to Ballard.  We are probably going to be around 500 club IMO and I don't see us being that big of a threat in the playoffs.  I think we have a limited rushing attack, limited weapons on the field right to throw to, and a good, but not great Defense. We will be fortunate to make the playoffs, but I don't see major success there even if we do.

[John Waylon 3,770]

He seems to have inherited Grigson’s struggles with the WR position...

[Superman 37,568]

1 hour ago, shasta519 said:

I will say...while Luck retiring was a raw deal...how many new GMs actually get to inherit a top tier franchise QB? Most teams make a change in the FO because they don't have that QB (and therefore the team is not good). So while having your QB retire abruptly is uncommon...it is not uncommon for a GM to have to solve the QB problem for a franchise...like Ballard will have to do.

 

This is true, but Ballard took the job expecting that the QB situation wasn't a factor -- just like everyone else. In fact, having Luck was considered the biggest selling point for the Colts GM job. Fast forward to September 2019, and the team that Ballard was building around Luck suddenly didn't have Luck anymore. 

 

Out of four offseasons, only this last one was undertaken with the understanding that we did not have a franchise QB. It's a major adjustment, and it came out of nowhere.

 

We'll see how this year winds up, but so far, Ballard has been thrown some serious curve balls. 

 

Talking about Ballard's scouting and team building is one thing. But focusing on record and team trajectory is another, and it's pointless to do so without acknowledging the turbulence over the last three seasons.

[chad72 13,517]

1 hour ago, Nesjan3 said:

 

The Vinny thing was a mistake for sure and the Rivers saga is still playing out with a bit of a rough start.

 

 

Our schedule last year, looking back, was much better with a win vs the Mariota led Titans and almost 2 wins vs the Texans with Hopkins. The rest of the schedule also lent itself for us to win several games and Vinny was a factor in at least 3 games. We could have won 9 or 10 games last year if not for Vinny and been in the playoffs, IMO.

 

While JB's limited ceiling was a factor as the season went on, we left too many points on the field with missed kicks and extra points contributing to losses.

[Zoltan 405]

2 hours ago, LJpalmbeacher2 said:

 

With Mack & Hooker injured and contracts expiring we may not have any draftees from his first draft on colts roster which was not that long ago. 

The QB position presently and going forward is not looking so rosey unless Eason, a 4th rd. Pick emerges , or a trade for a quality veteran happens.

Our receiving group is one of the weakest units in league and getting worse every year as TY ages.

And Ballard still has a overall losing record. Having said that our Defense is much improved,  it's  biggest weakness is the soft, big cushion philosophy they sometimes employ. 

After 4 years I dont think we're anywhere near the level of the elite teams like Pittsburgh, KC, Baltimore, Seattle, Tampa etc.... 

 

I'm not saying fire him or even he was a bad hire. I know he's not going anywhere and that's good 'caus I doubt we replace him with anyone who'll do better. He's  our man for the job.

But our team doesn't reflect what a lot of people here think/say of him..... not yet anyway. Lol

 

Disagree with the bolded, I would say the Eagles, Ravens, Jets, Patriots, 49ers, Dolphins, Giants easily are worse.

 

I do agree about the QB situation, but I think he did the best possible for the situation we were in last offseason. Yes their are rookie QBs doing good but none of them were sure things and I like the trade for Buckner, this offseason will be very interesting to see what they do at QB.

[Defjamz26 4,886]

I’m a big believer in Ballard. He fixed the OL and finally the Colts have a top ranked defense. However we’re at the point now where criticism is fair because he’s got 4 drafts under his belt.

 

The biggest knock on him I have is that he has completely dropped the ball on the edge rusher position. I know a lot of the good ones get drafted early so we haven’t had a bunch of shots there, but pass rushers can be found later. Danielle Hunter, TJ Watt (later in the 1

st)Ngaukue, etc... And I know Turray has his believers, but between him, Banogu, and Lewis, I don’t see a future starter at DE. The best rusher we’ve had in his time is Houston. 
 

I also think it’s been a mixed bag at WR. For starters, none of his projects have worked out because fan favorite Deon Cain hasn’t amounted to anything and neither has Fountain. Paris Campbell is injured again and its hard knowing we was drafted ahead of McLaurin and Metcalf. I have faith in Pittman though. 
 

I also need to see how he handles the QB position LONG TERM. Luck retiring wasn’t fair and is still an unprecedented move at the position. But it’s part of being an NFL GM. Unexpected things happen and you have to have a plan B. Jacoby was his immediate plan B and he decided that wasn’t the long term answer. Rivers was a great plan C but we all know that’s short term. If Eason isn’t the answer he is going to need to figure out something possibly as soon as next year.

 

Overall it’s been way more good then bad, but he’s got 3 marquee positions he needs to find answers for.

[Nickster 642]

2 hours ago, chad72 said:

 

WR position - I see other WRs drafted in the same draft as Campbell contributing better than him. Ballard continually chose quantity over quality, trading down several times, passing on Montez Sweat, A J Brown, and possibly more in his quest for more darts on the board. I can see his philosophy but at some point, quality prevails. 

 

Let us hope we produce at that critical WR position, might need some insurance in the form of a 1 or 2 year deal with a free agent, it seems like. Funchess was supposed to be that, flopped. That is why Grigson kept investing in Donnie Avery, Hakeem Nicks, DHB, Andre Johnson etc. and missed on Dorsett. We will see, I guess. I am not getting my hopes up. In the time it took us to search for a good #2, our #1 is fading into a #2 in TY.

 

 

Campbell hasn't played so anyone drafted just about anywhere would have more contribution.  If there had been an indicator of injury before then maybe you have a point,  but otherwise it's just kinda like saying that water is wet,  Well, duh.

 

A dead body has as much production as Campbell and Pittman the last month.

 

[chad72 13,517]

2 minutes ago, Nickster said:

 

 

Campbell hasn't played so anyone drafted just about anywhere would have more contribution.  If there had been an indicator of injury before then maybe you have a point,  but otherwise it's just kinda like saying that water is wet,  Well, duh.

 

 

But like others said, injuries are not good enough for me to give Ballard a pass on the WR position front. His RAS score projects in later rounds have not amounted to much either despite playing time. I frankly have a better feeling about Pittman more than Campbell, to be honest. We will see, I guess.

[EastStreet 7,681]

I like Ballard. He's improved the overall roster and depth. I don't worship him like some though. I think he's done enough at WR, and you can't blame him for the injury issues. I don't feel sorry for him due to Luck, it's his job to fix. The only area I really don't like is his DE drafting. Other areas like coaching hires, are still TBD.

 

We had a lot of bad talent when he got here, so it was easy to improve. It's not so easy going forward. 

 

 

 

 

[Nickster 642]

3 minutes ago, Nickster said:

 

 

Campbell hasn't played so anyone drafted just about anywhere would have more contribution.  If there had been an indicator of injury before then maybe you have a point,  but otherwise it's just kinda like saying that water is wet,  Well, duh.

 

 

3 minutes ago, chad72 said:

 

But like others said, injuries are not good enough for me to give Ballard a pass on the WR position front. His RAS score projects in later rounds have not amounted to much either despite playing time. I frankly have a better feeling about Pittman more than Campbell, to be honest. We will see, I guess.

Man that Jax game Campbell looked awesome.

 

I wasn't that thrilled with either pick by the way though.  I think injury has everything to do with Ballard's building of WR corps.

 

The other guys were late round flier projects that didn't work out. No big deal.

[Korey 65]

HUGE CB supporter 

 

He has cleaned up a mess that he didn't create. .

 

With that being said doesn't mean he hasn't made his fair share of mistakes.  For me the biggest position that he has failed to improve in his time is the WR. I know that group may not have been that good since Luck was the QB with some "lessor" WR.  To me having an elite WR is like having a great RB opens up the offense and makes the defender prepare for every play against them. 

 

Overall CB has made the best hand out a a decked that was stacked against him. 

[LJpalmbeacher2 1,932]

2 hours ago, danlhart87 said:

They would be the first team to play in their own stadium then.

Yes, besides the brady thing, first team to play SB in their own stadium would be another interesting story line.

[Nickster 642]

Ballard also picked up Pascal who has worked out well so he probably negates a project pick or 2.

 

Again I'm not sold on Pittman or Campbell but can't look at what CB has done as failure because neither player has been playing enough to evaluate.

 

It AJ Brown has career ender sunday that is not an indicator of a bad pick.  It's just unlucky.