Jump to content
Indianapolis Colts
Indianapolis Colts Fan Forum

Recommended Posts

4 hours ago, danlhart87 said:

Would you rule out Rodgers in your scenario 

If he is as good as he is now at the beginning of next year, and Eason isn't ready yet, no. If he's on Rivers level now next year, yes. The reason we may be able to get him at his current level next year is Jordan Love. If they are ready to move on. Big ifs though.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 272
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

I think if Andrew Luck was still on this team, this wouldn't even be a question and he would be viewed as the best GM in football.

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 lik

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

If you look at how the trend is heading nowadays it seems like GM has become a complementary role to the Head Coach.  Where they basically work hand in hand with the coach or maybe even for them in scouting the class and shaping their board.  But I think the old model, the classic GM at the top ensuring you have that year to year consistency (and maybe even setting the course on what type of team he wants) has its advantages.

 

Ballard's a good GM.  Having that in place is really important for your long term health of the franchise.  So I think from that perspective the franchise is immediately better off than half to two-thirds of the rest of the league.

 

I think what he's missing is the right coach.  He needs someone more current, more creative.  Not necessarily the trendy offensive mind but a head coach who is young and gives you a tactical advantage on one side of the ball and has a chance to grow into the total package.  There's some good options out there, lot of young coordinators filtering in to the league now, but Ballard can also look at college.

 

Bottom line is I think we're in good hands at the top.  The roster is strong.  Lot of positives just find the right guy to tie it all together.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, Jared Cisneros said:

:) I disagree we need a veteran QB for one simple reason. We have a QB coach, we have an older presence to teach these guys, as well as an O-Coordinator and HC. I don't want any old QBs on this team possibly starting if our young guys struggle. Next year needs to be a year to find our new franchise QB. Let them take all their bumps and don't waste a spot on the roster with a veteran QB that should never see playing time.

I'm curious, if the front office decided to go this route and we started 0-4, with Eason/Kelly/draftedQB, do you think you would be happy that they're taking their bumps or would your mental health suffer from it?

 

I guess just be careful what you ask for.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, CheezyColt said:

I'm curious, if the front office decided to go this route and we started 0-4, with Eason/Kelly/draftedQB, do you think you would be happy that they're taking their bumps or would your mental health suffer from it?

 

I guess just be careful what you ask for.

I would of thought they did the right thing and got the wrong result. That's different. As long as we used all 3 QBs throughout the year and learned everything we could from them, I would be fine from it, especially since we would be in position again to draft a top QB and dump Kelly and probably Eason at that point.

 

As a blackjack card counter and poker player, I have a saying. "It's not about what result you get, it's about continuously making the right play every time and things will work out over a long sample size." It's about creating positive EV (expected value). That's how you win. Ballard is doing that through other positions in the draft very well and we have a solid team mostly. Now he needs to do it through the QB position in every way possible and hope things sort themselves out.

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 10/29/2020 at 11:49 AM, Jared Cisneros said:

Not sure how old you are. I'm 33, I've become disinterested after losing Luck. I'm not a poor sport or bandwagoner or anything like that, I'm a Colts fan who had a top 5 QB in Andrew Luck as my QB and lost him, and now I have to try and pretend to act like we have a chance against a powerhouse AFC conference without him at QB. I don't care if we have Ballard or a better team, with our QB situation the way it is, our chances of winning a SB are poor at best. 

Maybe not a poor sport or a bandwagoner, but this is the definition of a fair weather fan. 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, BeanDiasucci said:

Maybe not a poor sport or a bandwagoner, but this is the definition of a fair weather fan. 

Maybe so, but losing a top 5 QB in Andrew Luck in his prime is a very unusual and uncommon situation for a football team and its fanbase. Hard to feign interest after getting that ripped from your team and trying to pretend it'll be ok and everything will work out. That's simply not true. I'm a realist.

  • Haha 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
On 10/29/2020 at 2:32 AM, NewColtsFan said:

 

All you're doing now Jared is projecting.    You're taking your views and putting them on Ballard and Irsay.    Ballard always keeps Irsay in the loop.   Nothing Ballard has done has caught Irsay off guard.   As long as Ballard is competitive and spending wisely,  Irsay will likely be fine with him.   Irsay knows Ballard inherited a mess.   Irsay knows Ballard was going to need time,  especially after he asked CB to keep Pagano and his staff around for another year.  Unless something shocking comes up unexpectedly,  Ballard should have Irsays complete faith and patience.   

 

As I layed out in my last post,  Ballard has all these options.   As a fan one would think you'd be excited.   You've shared that you like Ballard and think he drafts well.   He's not too bad at free agency either.   But instead of being excited over possibilities you see all the downside.   You see all the ways this could go south.   You worry and worry and worry some more.   I've run out of magic words to try and have you see the bright side....

 

Good luck....

 

This is year 4 under Ballard. Win or lose this is his team! No more exscuses and no more he inherited no talent and his franchise qb quit. They went after Rivers and both Ballard and Reich endorsed him. Honestly, I judge  Ballard more  on his building of this defence. They are all his players and the scheme he wanted to employ. That is on him and I dont like the results so far.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
On 10/29/2020 at 6:02 AM, lollygagger8 said:

I feel Ballard has done a great job building this team's trenches. Now it's time to spend more capital on skill positions. 

WR has been a sore spot on this team for way too long (since Reggie) but Ballard can't control all the injuries.

DE has also been pretty bad (outside of Houston). He needs to figure that out quick. 

 

Luck quitting out of nowhere really screwed this team, and even though I don't care for who he replaced that void with, Ballard put his head down and dealt with it. I also was not a fan of giving Brisket that much money, but hey I'm not the GM. 

 

Or when you hire a head coach and they also quit on you at the last minute, he handled that like a champ as well. 

 

 

 

Hmmmmm building the trenches?? Lets see. Their O line is first in pass protection and last in yards per carry. That makes them average.  The D line has not been able to generate any pass rush the last 2 weeks. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 10/29/2020 at 3:42 PM, csmopar said:

Given what he started with, and the level of QUALITY he's brought to every position BUT two, I'm giving him an A- and I think he's here for at least 3-4 more years. I like what he's done across the board. My concerns are the QB position, obviously, but I'm also concerned about the lack of ability when it comes to the WR position.  Yes, it can be said he's tried to address it, but after 3 tries now, 3 misses, i think its a glaring weakness in both Ballard and the scouting department.  Which isn't bad I supposed given he seems to be hitting on every other position. It may take us venturing into a trade or a big WR pick up to really bring that area up. 

Why does everyone focus on the qb posiiton?  Look at the defence. It is not good

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 10/29/2020 at 9:44 AM, Nickster said:

We need an elite QB.  They have one.  That is the difference in the two teams.  

 

Let me put it to you this way.  Switch Mahomes with Rivers.  Which team would be more likely to win a SB?  

Does Andy Reid come with Mahommes?

  • Haha 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Moosejawcolt said:

Why does everyone focus on the qb posiiton?  Look at the defence. It is not good

I think our defense is above average. I don’t think it’s stellar but it’s a lower level concern for me

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
On 10/29/2020 at 11:49 AM, Jared Cisneros said:

Not sure how old you are. I'm 33, I've become disinterested after losing Luck. I

Then why are you even still here? Why waste your time if you’re disinterested?

Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, csmopar said:

I think our defense is above average. I don’t think it’s stellar but it’s a lower level concern for me

U wait till we see the good offensive teams. Lets revisit this conversation in 5 weeks 

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
On 10/28/2020 at 10:36 AM, Superman said:

 

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.

I agree some what. Lets throw out the offensive side of the ball, because there have been setbacks that were not in within Ballard's control.  I speak of Luck's departure and injuries at the wr position. Have u been happy with the progress on the defensive side of the ball? He picked the scheme, the coordinator and they are all Ballard's players in terms of drafting and free agent pick ups. I am very concerned by the lack of growth and progress of this defence.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Moosejawcolt said:

I agree some what. Lets throw out the offensive side of the ball, because there have been setbacks that were not in within Ballard's control.  I speak of Luck's departure and injuries at the wr position. Have u been happy with the progress on the defensive side of the ball? He picked the scheme, the coordinator and they are all Ballard's players in terms of drafting and free agent pick ups. I am very concerned by the lack of growth and progress of this defence.

 

For the first time in a long time, the defense looks good. I don't think they're a top five defense, let's see what they look like after the next few games. 

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

Hmmmmm building the trenches?? Lets see. Their O line is first in pass protection and last in yards per carry. That makes them average.  The D line has not been able to generate any pass rush the last 2 weeks. 

I'm not questioning they are good in pass protection, but what is Rivers' release time compared to JB and even to Luck.  Snap to release.  It probably gotten faster as the season has progressed.

 

Its probably the quickest pace we've had here since Manning.

 

How does that (likely) reality impact those statistical rankings?

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

 

For the first time in a long time, the defense looks good. I don't think they're a top five defense, let's see what they look like after the next few games. 

They are slowly showing progress. I hope we eventually get another DE cause Houston won't be here too long.

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Jared Cisneros said:

Maybe so, but losing a top 5 QB in Andrew Luck in his prime is a very unusual and uncommon situation for a football team and its fanbase. Hard to feign interest after getting that ripped from your team and trying to pretend it'll be ok and everything will work out. That's simply not true. I'm a realist.

What you say is true and has a lot of merit.  I sure felt the same way when that happened.  But with change comes opportunity.  And with opportunity comes a chance at something special.  This team has a chance to do that, to find another special QB.  Maybe they already have in Eason?  Who knows?  But I'm not going to give up on'em.  I can't hold this regime to the fire for something they didn't have anything to do with.  Ballard is pretty good.  He will find the guy.  It just may take a little bit.

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

 

For the first time in a long time, the defense looks good. I don't think they're a top five defense, let's see what they look like after the next few games. 

That’s how I feel about the defense.  I think they are good just not the elite defense that some were calling them at the start of the season.  I would still take them over most defenses in the league though.

Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, GoColts8818 said:

That’s how I feel about the defense.  I think they are good just not the elite defense that some were calling them at the start of the season.  I would still take them over most defenses in the league though.

They are definitely top 15 which is a lot better than bottom of the barrel

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, danlhart87 said:

They are definitely top 15 which is a lot better than bottom of the barrel

Yeah I am not going to suggest they are bottom or the barrel.  I think they are good.  I just don’t think they are a top three defense which is what I would consider elite.  

Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, CheezyColt said:

I'm curious, if the front office decided to go this route and we started 0-4, with Eason/Kelly/draftedQB, do you think you would be happy that they're taking their bumps or would your mental health suffer from it?

 

I guess just be careful what you ask for.

 

I would be happy if we truly had our franxhise/elite QB in place regardless of the early results.

Do you think Bengal fans mind losing this season knowing they have a stud qb for the future? 

Or Dolphins go crazy if Tua loses next few games. Or chargers  fans knowing they have Herbert?

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, LJpalmbeacher2 said:

 

I would be happy if we truly had our franxhise/elite QB in place regardless of the early results.

Do you think Bengal fans mind losing this season knowing they have a stud qb for the future? 

Or Dolphins go crazy if Tua loses next few games. Or chargers  fans knowing they have Herbert?

 

I kinda hope Zach Wilson is that guy for us

Link to post
Share on other sites
23 hours ago, Jared Cisneros said:

If he is as good as he is now at the beginning of next year, and Eason isn't ready yet, no. If he's on Rivers level now next year, yes. The reason we may be able to get him at his current level next year is Jordan Love. If they are ready to move on. Big ifs though.

So in other words, “Yes. Absolutely.”

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
On 10/31/2020 at 10:41 AM, Jared Cisneros said:

Maybe so, but losing a top 5 QB in Andrew Luck in his prime is a very unusual and uncommon situation for a football team and its fanbase. Hard to feign interest after getting that ripped from your team and trying to pretend it'll be ok and everything will work out. That's simply not true. I'm a realist.

This is really sad, at least to me. People would miss out on many of life's greatest thrills, accomplishments and surprises if they started to give up, lose interest, or quit whenever significant setbacks arise. It's the ultimate sports cliche, but when the going gets tough, the tough get going rings true for me.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, BeanDiasucci said:

This is really sad, at least to me. People would miss out on many of life's greatest thrills, accomplishments and surprises if they started to give up, lose interest, or quit whenever significant setbacks arise. It's the ultimate sports cliche, but when the going gets tough, the tough get going rings true for me.

Here's the difference though. I'm not giving up on setbacks for myself. I'm disinterested because of a setback of my favorite sports team that I can't control. When I have a setback, I can gameplan and take the next step to decide what to do next to fix it. In the case of losing Andrew Luck, it's a major setback that is quite uncommon for this team and I have no control to do anything about it. It wouldn't be like Luck retiring in Madden and I can make a trade or scout the next QB class and FA for a replacement, it's real life. I know that a replacement for Luck probably isn't coming, and the next best thing will be a QB that is 50-75% as good from the draft that will have to grow into that role. 

 

Like I said, if something happened to me, I fwould fix it. In the case of a fan, what control do I have? I know how good Luck was, and I know how good the teams are in the AFC we are competing against. I also know how hard it is to replace Luck, and I know we aren't making a run at the SB unless we get very lucky. Like I said, I'm a realist, and I'm not going to pretend we are going to get lucky against superior teams. I will be happy if it happens, but my expectations are very tempered now.

 

We want to live through our team, but we also need to understand what is going on after things happen. If you think people shouldn't be negative after Luck left, then you are crazy. If you think we aren't a worse team after losing Luck, you are crazy. Losing Luck doesn't make this team "rise above everything" or whatever. It just makes us play worse without an elite QB, and the pain is all the worse because we had one and lost him in his prime.

 

This is not a fairytale where if you just believe in the team they will do well. There are 32 teams, and now we have to catch up again at the QB position to all of them. Once we lose Rivers and Brissett at the end of the season, we have Eason and that's it. Losing Luck set us back 5 years. That's how I look at it, and that's time I have to spend knowing we are retooling without a QB while probably having no chance to win a SB. It sucks.

  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, Jared Cisneros said:

Here's the difference though. I'm not giving up on setbacks for myself. I'm disinterested because of a setback of my favorite sports team that I can't control. When I have a setback, I can gameplan and take the next step to decide what to do next to fix it. In the case of losing Andrew Luck, it's a major setback that is quite uncommon for this team and I have no control to do anything about it. It wouldn't be like Luck retiring in Madden and I can make a trade or scout the next QB class and FA for a replacement, it's real life. I know that a replacement for Luck probably isn't coming, and the next best thing will be a QB that is 50-75% as good from the draft that will have to grow into that role. 

 

Like I said, if something happened to me, I fwould fix it. In the case of a fan, what control do I have? I know how good Luck was, and I know how good the teams are in the AFC we are competing against. I also know how hard it is to replace Luck, and I know we aren't making a run at the SB unless we get very lucky. Like I said, I'm a realist, and I'm not going to pretend we are going to get lucky against superior teams. I will be happy if it happens, but my expectations are very tempered now.

 

We want to live through our team, but we also need to understand what is going on after things happen. If you think people shouldn't be negative after Luck left, then you are crazy. If you think we aren't a worse team after losing Luck, you are crazy. Losing Luck doesn't make this team "rise above everything" or whatever. It just makes us play worse without an elite QB, and the pain is all the worse because we had one and lost him in his prime.

 

This is not a fairytale where if you just believe in the team they will do well. There are 32 teams, and now we have to catch up again at the QB position to all of them. Once we lose Rivers and Brissett at the end of the season, we have Eason and that's it. Losing Luck set us back 5 years. That's how I look at it, and that's time I have to spend knowing we are retooling without a QB while probably having no chance to win a SB. It sucks.

But in life, as in sports, there are many setbacks that are beyond your control to fix - a death, a chronic illness, a catastrophic business loss, maybe even the impact of a pandemic. And with a sports team, if it plays the best it can, overachieves and makes progress, given whatever setbacks it has faced, why don't you see satisfaction in that? And if they end up falling short despite their efforts to fix their problems, there may still be moments of joy and achievement along that journey. I would argue that will likely sometimes happen in our own lives, as well, as we try to overcome setbacks, but don't always succeed.

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, BeanDiasucci said:

But in life, as in sports, there are many setbacks that are beyond your control to fix - a death, a chronic illness, a catastrophic business loss, maybe even the impact of a pandemic. And with a sports team, if it plays the best it can, overachieves and makes progress, given whatever setbacks it has faced, why don't you see satisfaction in that? And if they end up falling short despite their efforts to fix their problems, there may still be moments of joy and achievement along that journey. I would argue that will likely sometimes happen in our own lives, as well, as we try to overcome setbacks, but don't always succeed.

true the muses GIF

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, BeanDiasucci said:

But in life, as in sports, there are many setbacks that are beyond your control to fix - a death, a chronic illness, a catastrophic business loss, maybe even the impact of a pandemic. And with a sports team, if it plays the best it can, overachieves and makes progress, given whatever setbacks it has faced, why don't you see satisfaction in that? And if they end up falling short despite their efforts to fix their problems, there may still be moments of joy and achievement along that journey. I would argue that will likely sometimes happen in our own lives, as well, as we try to overcome setbacks, but don't always succeed.

I guess I'm a bit bitter still over the lack of SBs won when we had Peyton Manning. I saw Manning and Brady as equals at best, with Manning probably being a superior QB, and I feel we got the short end of the stick. Enter Andrew Luck, the most hyped prospect since Elway, and it was like a 2nd chance to add another SB or two to correct what we couldn't accomplish with Manning. Of course, we have one of the worst GMs in history in Grigson, Luck gets hurt, and prematurely retires. 

 

So yes, I'm very disinterested and bitter now after only getting 1 SB between Manning and Luck on the Colts while Brady accomplished so much on the Pats. Yes, I got to enjoy Manning win another on the Broncos, but that's not the same thing. I'm sure a lot of people feel the same way I do. Remember, I started becoming a fan at 10 years old when Manning got drafted by the Colts. Him and Luck are all I know as an NFL fan.

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 10/31/2020 at 10:41 AM, Jared Cisneros said:

Maybe so, but losing a top 5 QB in Andrew Luck in his prime is a very unusual and uncommon situation for a football team and its fanbase. Hard to feign interest after getting that ripped from your team and trying to pretend it'll be ok and everything will work out. That's simply not true. I'm a realist.

 

I think most Fans of most teams are realist! 

Most teams fans know they have little or no chance at a Super Bowl.  Just to be a playoff or wild card contender is exciting season for them. There are only a few elite organizations and a handful more that may compete for a run in the postseason. 

Through the decades there are of course fan boys with optimism and rose colored glasses of even organizations like browns,bengals,lions etc.. 

 

As far as the colts, your feelings are of a realist. Not currently having a Elite or even a franchise QB and seemingly slim hopes of getting one anytime soon our future seems somewhat  mediocre or bleak.

But having personally gone through end of Bert Jones era to beginning of Manning's you'll survive. 

Hopefully it will take less than 2 Decades this time around to be regularly relevant. :D

 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
19 minutes ago, Jared Cisneros said:

Remember, I started becoming a fan at 10 years old when Manning got drafted by the Colts. Him and Luck are all I know as an NFL fan.

 

Yeah, it's very obvious you weren't a fan during the pre-Manning years.

 

Those of us that have been around since the "Lord help our Colts" days probably have more appreciation for what this organization has accomplished in the last 20 years, and will continue to be fans through a few rough years.

 

Good times are right around the corner, and they will be even sweeter when you've gone through the lows to get to the highs.  :thmup:

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 2 weeks later...

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...