Jump to content
Indianapolis Colts
Indianapolis Colts Fan Forum

Ballard's approach on building Colts


danlhart87

Recommended Posts

I have seen several complaints about Ballard's approach and the lack of success getting to the playoffs.

 

I am firm believer that Grigson set this team back several years with his inability to protect Andrew Luck by fixing the OL. Things got so rough that it costed Luck to retire.

 

The OL has struggled this year but even still Ballard came in and immediately took action helping to rebuild it.

 

Ballard's approach is building from the inside out starting with the trenches which he has helped with tremendously.

 

The idea beyond this is he doesn't want our next franchise QB to be forced into retirement.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 227
  • Created
  • Last Reply
21 minutes ago, danlhart87 said:

I have seen several complaints about Ballard's approach and the lack of success getting to the playoffs.

 

I am firm believer that Grigson set this team back several years with his inability to protect Andrew Luck by fixing the OL. Things got so rough that it costed Luck to retire.

 

The OL has struggled this year but even still Ballard came in and immediately took action helping to rebuild it.

 

Ballard's approach is building from the inside out starting with the trenches which he has helped with tremendously.

 

The idea beyond this is he doesn't want our next franchise QB to be forced into retirement.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Thing is, they’ve not struggled in pass pro, it’s been a struggle in the run game. Which is odd. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

29 minutes ago, danlhart87 said:

I have seen several complaints about Ballard's approach and the lack of success getting to the playoffs.

 

I am firm believer that Grigson set this team back several years with his inability to protect Andrew Luck by fixing the OL. Things got so rough that it costed Luck to retire.

 

The OL has struggled this year but even still Ballard came in and immediately took action helping to rebuild it.

 

Ballard's approach is building from the inside out starting with the trenches which he has helped with tremendously.

 

The idea beyond this is he doesn't want our next franchise QB to be forced into retirement.

 

 

 

 

 

 

I agree on the effect that Luck was taking a beating.  But it wasn't from a lack of trying.  He tried a lot.  Too bad that it wasn't successful.

2012

C Samson Satele

G Mike McGlynn

2013

G Hugh Thornton

C Khaled Holmes

G Joe Reitz

T Gosder Cherilus

2014

G Jack Mewhort

C Jonotthan Harrison

2015

T Denzelle Good

C A. Q. Shipley

2016

C Ryan Kelly

T LeRaven Clark

G Joe Haeg

C Austin Blythe

No matter what he tried, it just didn't work.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

56 minutes ago, danlhart87 said:

I have seen several complaints about Ballard's approach and the lack of success getting to the playoffs.

 

I am firm believer that Grigson set this team back several years with his inability to protect Andrew Luck by fixing the OL. Things got so rough that it costed Luck to retire.

 

well, that and his snow boarding accident where he had to be airlifted off the mountain.  But shhhhh... don't mention that! 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, danlhart87 said:

They could also bring Rivers back and draft QB with the idea of him starting 22

I wouldn't be a fan of that personally unless Rivers had a contract for $10 million or something for 2021 in that scenario. I just want a young, franchise, QB at this point that can take over and get us on the right track. Even if Rivers starts in 2021 and is still good, it'll just delay the growth of our other QBs and we'll be sticking a band-aid on the team for an extra year. There are 5-7 QBs in the 2021 draft that could go 1st round. Ballard needs to identify which one he likes and get him for our team. This is the draft, no excuses anymore and no more band-aids. I'm ready to get our new, franchise, QB for the Colts next year and have him start immediately.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

25 minutes ago, John Hammonds said:

I agree on the effect that Luck was taking a beating.  But it wasn't from a lack of trying.  He tried a lot.  Too bad that it wasn't successful.

2012

C Samson Satele

G Mike McGlynn

2013

G Hugh Thornton

C Khaled Holmes

G Joe Reitz

T Gosder Cherilus

2014

G Jack Mewhort

C Jonotthan Harrison

2015

T Denzelle Good

C A. Q. Shipley

2016

C Ryan Kelly

T LeRaven Clark

G Joe Haeg

C Austin Blythe

No matter what he tried, it just didn't work.

Yeah I think Grigson is treated very unfairly when it comes to trying to protect Luck. He missed on his free agent pick ups and draft choices, but he did try.  I blame Pagano and the offensive coaches more than Grigson

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Jared Cisneros said:

I wouldn't be a fan of that personally unless Rivers had a contract for $10 million or something for 2021 in that scenario. I just want a young, franchise, QB at this point that can take over and get us on the right track. Even if Rivers starts in 2021 and is still good, it'll just delay the growth of our other QBs and we'll be sticking a band-aid on the team for an extra year. There are 5-7 QBs in the 2021 draft that could go 1st round. Ballard needs to identify which one he likes and get him for our team. This is the draft, no excuses anymore and no more band-aids. I'm ready to get our new, franchise, QB for the Colts next year and have him start immediately.

Nothing wrong with a new starter sitting his first year

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, danlhart87 said:

Nothing wrong with a new starter sitting his first year

I'm of the opinion that you learn by experience and not sitting on the bench watching and taking notes. Not all QBs are ready right away, but if we draft a 1st-round QB, then he should be starting year 1. I want to move on with a young QB at this point, and we will soon have to start re-signing the 2017 and 2018 classes to new contracts, so we can't afford Rivers to another one-year deal. A rookie contract will help keep our core and Ballard can continue to supplement the team with more draft classes to make our team better. However, we need to start a new QB to get him acclimated to the NFL and actually become a real threat to win the SB for years to come. If we start Rivers in 21 and he retires afterwards, it wastes a year of our rookie QBs contract and sets him back a year and this organization back a year. Start the rookie immediately.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Jared Cisneros said:

I'm of the opinion that you learn by experience and not sitting on the bench watching and taking notes. Not all QBs are ready right away, but if we draft a 1st-round QB, then he should be starting year 1. I want to move on with a young QB at this point, and we will soon have to start re-signing the 2017 and 2018 classes to new contracts, so we can't afford Rivers to another one-year deal. A rookie contract will help keep our core and Ballard can continue to supplement the team with more draft classes to make our team better. However, we need to start a new QB to get him acclimated to the NFL and actually become a real threat to win the SB for years to come. If we start Rivers in 21 and he retires afterwards, it wastes a year of our rookie QBs contract and sets him back a year and this organization back a year. Start the rookie immediately.

If Rivers does well and is resigned it is not a waste of time. 

As far as the money you cant say we cant afford a starting QBs contract. 

Example: If Ballard made a trade for a good QB he would have to be paid wouldn't he? 

Drafting a QB in the 1st round in this next draft would depend on Ballard moving up in the draft IMO. 

If that happens the starter would have to compete for the starting position, not automatically be the starter. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, crazycolt1 said:

If Rivers does well and is resigned it is not a waste of time. 

As far as the money you cant say we cant afford a starting QBs contract. 

Example: If Ballard made a trade for a good QB he would have to be paid wouldn't he? 

Drafting a QB in the 1st round in this next draft would depend on Ballard moving up in the draft IMO. 

If that happens the starter would have to compete for the starting position, not automatically be the starter. 

Technically, if Rivers is re-signed and we don't win the SB, then it's a waste of time because we set back our QB search or starting a young QB for the chance of winning a SB slightly quicker.

 

With signing the 2017 and 2018 classes soon, we aren't getting a veteran QB of any value that's worth it unless we trade for Darnold or something and use a draft pick that way. 

 

We wouldn't necessarily have to move up to take a QB in the draft. There will be 5-7 of them going in the first round this year. We will have our pick either by them falling to us or trading up besides the big 3 (Lawrence/Fields/Lance).

 

A 1st round pick shouldn't have to compete for the starting job. If he gets drafted by us in the 1st round and Ballard and Reich are questioning whether to start him, then that was poor judgment drafting him in the 1st place.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 minutes ago, Moosejawcolt said:

Yeah I think Grigson is treated very unfairly when it comes to trying to protect Luck. He missed on his free agent pick ups and draft choices, but he did try.  I blame Pagano and the offensive coaches more than Grigson

So you want to blame Pagano for Grigson's lack of bringing talented players in to coach?

Grigson'e inability to get along with the coaches AND the players was a huge negative check mark. 

So you think Grigson is being treated unfairly because he cant hold a job in the NFL? He has had three jobs since he was fired here. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, crazycolt1 said:

So you want to blame Pagano for Grigson's lack of bringing talented players in to coach?

Grigson'e inability to get along with the coaches AND the players was a huge negative check mark. 

So you think Grigson is being treated unfairly because he cant hold a job in the NFL? He has had three jobs since he was fired here. 

Yeah, not only was Grigson bad at his job, he was just a piece of garbage human being also. Couldn't stand him, and I hope he never gets a job in the NFL again.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Jared Cisneros said:

Technically, if Rivers is re-signed and we don't win the SB, then it's a waste of time because we set back our QB search or starting a young QB for the chance of winning a SB slightly quicker.

 

With signing the 2017 and 2018 classes soon, we aren't getting a veteran QB of any value that's worth it unless we trade for Darnold or something and use a draft pick that way. 

 

We wouldn't necessarily have to move up to take a QB in the draft. There will be 5-7 of them going in the first round this year. We will have our pick either by them falling to us or trading up besides the big 3 (Lawrence/Fields/Lance).

 

A 1st round pick shouldn't have to compete for the starting job. If he gets drafted by us in the 1st round and Ballard and Reich are questioning whether to start him, then that was poor judgment drafting him in the 1st place.

To assume any QB taken in Rd 1 is an automatic starter is wrong. 

Even Mahomes wasn't a starter in his first year. 

Any player on the field has to earn a starter position and the QB is no exception. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 minutes ago, Jared Cisneros said:

I'm of the opinion that you learn by experience and not sitting on the bench watching and taking notes. Not all QBs are ready right away, but if we draft a 1st-round QB, then he should be starting year 1. I want to move on with a young QB at this point, and we will soon have to start re-signing the 2017 and 2018 classes to new contracts, so we can't afford Rivers to another one-year deal. A rookie contract will help keep our core and Ballard can continue to supplement the team with more draft classes to make our team better. However, we need to start a new QB to get him acclimated to the NFL and actually become a real threat to win the SB for years to come. If we start Rivers in 21 and he retires afterwards, it wastes a year of our rookie QBs contract and sets him back a year and this organization back a year. Start the rookie immediately.

Not that long ago,   first round qbs didn't always start.    Most freshman don't start in college

2 minutes ago, Jared Cisneros said:

Yeah, not only was Grigson bad at his job, he was just a piece of garbage human being also. Couldn't stand him, and I hope he never gets a job in the NFL again.

A bit extreme for a person you've never met.   

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, danlhart87 said:

Love is another example of QB drafted high that didn't start his rookie year

Love may never start. Rodgers is still in his prime right now. Plus Love was a huge project and GB drafted him knowing that. That's an exception of a player drafted based on potential that was probably overdrafted.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Nature Boy FTW

FB_IMG_1605570037621.jpg

Just now, Jared Cisneros said:

Love may never start. Rodgers is still in his prime right now. Plus Love was a huge project and GB drafted him knowing that. That's an exception of a player drafted based on potential that was probably overdrafted.

Rodgers will play 1 to 2 years tops with GB before they move on

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, crazycolt1 said:

To assume any QB taken in Rd 1 is an automatic starter is wrong. 

Even Mahomes wasn't a starter in his first year. 

Any player on the field has to earn a starter position and the QB is no exception. 

Mahomes is probably an exception, but not the rule. People can't use him for everything. Burrow and Herbert started right away and have done fine. Josh Allen, Deshaun Watson, and Kyler Murray started right away and are now really good. Russell Wilson is another one. There are exceptions like Lamar Jackson, but he was a runner more than anything coming out of college. Most QBs drafted in the 1st round should start, especially in our situation.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Jared Cisneros said:

Love may never start. Rodgers is still in his prime right now. Plus Love was a huge project and GB drafted him knowing that. That's an exception of a player drafted based on potential that was probably overdrafted.

Love was drafted because the Packers were not sure if Rogers wanted to play for the Packers. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, crazycolt1 said:

So you want to blame Pagano for Grigson's lack of bringing talented players in to coach?

Grigson'e inability to get along with the coaches AND the players was a huge negative check mark. 

So you think Grigson is being treated unfairly because he cant hold a job in the NFL? He has had three jobs since he was fired here. 

The schemes they employed

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Jared Cisneros said:

Mahomes is probably an exception, but not the rule. People can't use him for everything. Burrow and Herbert started right away and have done fine. Josh Allen, Deshaun Watson, and Kyler Murray started right away and are now really good. Russell Wilson is another one. There are exceptions like Lamar Jackson, but he was a runner more than anything coming out of college. Most QBs drafted in the 1st round should start, especially in our situation.

Hypothetically speaking 

 

Let's say Rivers retires and Colts draft QB and AC retires what's the plan of action then 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Jared Cisneros said:

Mahomes is probably an exception, but not the rule. People can't use him for everything. Burrow and Herbert started right away and have done fine. Josh Allen, Deshaun Watson, and Kyler Murray started right away and are now really good. Russell Wilson is another one. There are exceptions like Lamar Jackson, but he was a runner more than anything coming out of college. Most QBs drafted in the 1st round should start, especially in our situation.

You want to hand pick those you want to use a an example but over look the list of 1st round QB bust. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, danlhart87 said:

Hypothetically speaking 

 

Let's say Rivers retires and Colts draft QB and AC retires what's the plan of action then 

Well, hopefully AC doesn't pull an AL on us and does it right before the season starts. If he retires, draft a OT in the second round or sign a top one in FA for a year or two. That's all I got. Would be the correct course of action IMO.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, crazycolt1 said:

You want to hand pick those you want to use a an example but over look the list of 1st round QB bust. 

The issue with the 1st round busts that started right away is that you or I can't prove that any of them would of been hits if they sat for a year or two, so it's all pretty irrelevent, isn't it? At least the ones I hand pick are based off of evidence. You're basing the busts off of speculation that they may of hit if they sat a year or two, which isn't possible to prove.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Jared Cisneros said:

The issue with the 1st round busts that started right away is that you or I can't prove that any of them would of been hits if they sat for a year or two, so it's all pretty irrelevent, isn't it? At least the ones I hand pick are based off of evidence. You're basing the busts off of speculation that they may of hit if they sat a year or two, which isn't possible to prove.

The point is rookies arent guarantees so even drafting a QB high doesn't guarantee anything 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Jared Cisneros said:

The issue with the 1st round busts that started right away is that you or I can't prove that any of them would of been hits if they sat for a year or two, so it's all pretty irrelevent, isn't it? At least the ones I hand pick are based off of evidence. You're basing the busts off of speculation that they may of hit if they sat a year or two, which isn't possible to prove.

What? :scratch:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, danlhart87 said:

The point is rookies arent guarantees so even drafting a QB high doesn't guarantee anything 

No, but drafting a QB in the 1st round gives you the best chance to hit on one. That's based on any legitamite facts and data out there. You have to take that leap of faith sometime, as you said. :thmup:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Jared Cisneros said:

No, but drafting a QB in the 1st round gives you the best chance to hit on one. That's based on any legitamite facts and data out there. You have to take that leap of faith sometime, as you said. :thmup:

If it comes down to taking chance on rookie or choosing savy vet like Rodgers or even Darnold who has shown flashes im choosing the ladder.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 minutes ago, danlhart87 said:

If it comes down to taking chance on rookie or choosing savy vet like Rodgers or even Darnold who has shown flashes im choosing the ladder.

Well, you'll have a sample size, but you'll also overpay as well. A lot of time, in the case of Rivers (and possibly Rodgers), you'll get the final years of them as well and be back to square one very quickly. It's like a constant band-aid that you pay a big contract to every year.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Jared Cisneros said:

Well, you'll have a sample size, but you'll also overpay as well. A lot of time, in the case of Rivers (and possibly Rodgers), you'll get the final years of them as well and be back to square one very quickly. It's like a constant band-aid that you pay a big contract to every year.

If it means winning a SB im fine with the band aid temporal fix especially if its Rodgers. 

 

Aaron would destroy teams behind our line.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...