Jump to content
Indianapolis Colts
Indianapolis Colts Fan Forum

Chris Ballard goes into Wentz trade and more (MERGE)


Recommended Posts

  • Replies 88
  • Created
  • Last Reply

I think everyone should listen to this podcast episode before next years free agency, just for the part when Ballard says He doesn't like the first couple days of free agency because he won't pay B players A+ money.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

25 minutes ago, Zoltan said:

Also thought it was interesting that Carson’s college coach was the guy that recruited Ballard back in the day

Getting  Wentz was fate. I mean we got the QB our head coach wanted in Phili and scouted. Ballard says in this interview he loves Wentz too and it all isn’t Reich.  We got so dang lucky eagles went off the rails.

 

Kevin Bowen says he believes if we hadn’t got Wentz Fields would be our QB now. They would of done everything to get him. They have made it no secret to media they love the kid.

 

Everyone who says Ballard doesn’t pay enough. He said in this interview that if they love a player you have to do everything yo try and get them.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Not surprising.. but a pretty good read:  https://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2021/07/06/chris-ballard-colts-would-rather-build-roster-patiently-than-pay-b-players-a-money/

 

Just basically Ballard reiterating that he thinks he and his staff have done a good job with the FAs they have brought in and keeping the guys they draft without overspending for guys early in free agency.  He likens it to not giving someone an A+ salary when they are worth B money.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

31 minutes ago, CurBeatElite said:

Not surprising.. but a pretty good read:  https://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2021/07/06/chris-ballard-colts-would-rather-build-roster-patiently-than-pay-b-players-a-money/

 

Just basically Ballard reiterating that he thinks he and his staff have done a good job with the FAs they have brought in and keeping the guys they draft without overspending for guys early in free agency.  He likens it to not giving someone an A+ salary when they are worth B money.  

I just don't see how we are going to beat the top teams in the AFC like the Chiefs, Bills, and Browns with this approach unless Wentz is elite honestly. We are about to pay Leonard, Braden, and Nelson next year, so we won't have the financial flexibility we used to have. We don't have a QB on a rookie contract, and we don't have a 1st round pick next year most likely. I feel unless we see some major growth from our players or some hits on our draft picks this year, this may be our peak and we will be taking shots as the 4th best team in the AFC while attempting to stay ahead of the Titans. 

 

Unfortunately, the difference between Luck and Wentz is probably decently large, and it's the difference from being in the Chiefs and Bills tier to being in the tier below them with Wentz. Ballard has been way too conservative in FA in my opinion. FA had EDGE rushers and he chose to get them in the draft instead of taking Darrisaw and taking Fisher in FA. I think we are a playoff contender with Wentz at QB, but the lack of aggressiveness in FA may make us one of those teams like the Giants with Eli or the Eagles where we are the underdogs in the playoffs most years to get to the SB every year.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Florio is just bleh. Can't talk PFT without mentioning his brand of awfulness. Give me the rodeo clown commentators any day over his smugness.

 

Anyway. Ballard is doing things right on paper (we think, lot's of picks are still in the "can they?" folder). That's fine, but he's going to contend with the reality that FA can matter and reset the whole NFL. Tampa won the SB specifically because they did FA correct and didn't get cold feet, going and getting AB, Gronk, Fornette etc to make sure the talent base was high. It might not always be possible or prudent for the Colts to do that, but when people get cranky at FA being slow around here, that's what people are pinning their hopes against. I'm just curious if Ballard is going to ever get to that place where he thinks it's time or not to go all in. And if he doesn't and the team continues to be merely pretty good- AT SOME POINT- his job status will have to be looked at. Because tbh- from what I'm seeing, this thing he's building is capping out at "merely pretty good" and doing things *correctly* is cool, but Jared see's what I'm seeing. A list of other teams are better and not insignificantly so. So what's the goal here?

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, The Fish said:

Florio is just bleh. Can't talk PFT without mentioning his brand of awfulness. Give me the rodeo clown commentators any day over his smugness.

 

Anyway. Ballard is doing things right on paper (we think, lot's of picks are still in the "can they?" folder). That's fine, but he's going to contend with the reality that FA can matter and reset the whole NFL. Tampa won the SB specifically because they did FA correct and didn't get cold feet, going and getting AB, Gronk, Fornette etc to make sure the talent base was high. It might not always be possible or prudent for the Colts to do that, but when people get cranky at FA being slow around here, that's what people are pinning their hopes against. I'm just curious if Ballard is going to ever get to that place where he thinks it's time or not to go all in. And if he doesn't and the team continues to be merely pretty good- AT SOME POINT- his job status will have to be looked at. Because tbh- from what I'm seeing, this thing he's building is capping out at "merely pretty good" and doing things *correctly* is cool, but Jared see's what I'm seeing. A list of other teams are better and not insignificantly so. So what's the goal here?

 

First off I agree on Florio. Not a huge fan myself. 
 

On the FA point. You mentioned Tampa who aside from one the greatest QB’s to ever play the game there FA moves were small. Gronk and AB accounted for next to nothing. Fournette was cut from the Jags and wanted to play for TB for pennies so that helps financially. They drafted very well over the last few years so to me that’s a bad example. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 minutes ago, Jared Cisneros said:

I just don't see how we are going to beat the top teams in the AFC like the Chiefs, Bills, and Browns with this approach unless Wentz is elite honestly. We are about to pay Leonard, Braden, and Nelson next year, so we won't have the financial flexibility we used to have. We don't have a QB on a rookie contract, and we don't have a 1st round pick next year most likely. I feel unless we see some major growth from our players or some hits on our draft picks this year, this may be our peak and we will be taking shots as the 4th best team in the AFC while attempting to stay ahead of the Titans. 

 

Unfortunately, the difference between Luck and Wentz is probably decently large, and it's the difference from being in the Chiefs and Bills tier to being in the tier below them with Wentz. Ballard has been way too conservative in FA in my opinion. FA had EDGE rushers and he chose to get them in the draft instead of taking Darrisaw and taking Fisher in FA. I think we are a playoff contender with Wentz at QB, but the lack of aggressiveness in FA may make us one of those teams like the Giants with Eli or the Eagles where we are the underdogs in the playoffs most years to get to the SB every year.

The Chiefs only spend big when they need something crucial like this year. They rebuilt their o line though. They typically aren’t huge spenders outside of one or two key additions each year. Now outside of literally one player (Mahomes) none of that matters. Have him retire in his prime like Lick did and watch the constant struggles they have as well. Browns are a very bad example. Spend a lot each year to barely scrape by. No thanks to that. 
 

Now is there a difference between Luck and Wentz…. Yea. No one doubts that. And having young edge guys with potential is also great. You are going to see yet again many of those “top” edge guys you wanted to throw the bank at will be released in a few years or just will not live up to the hype. Happens every year. I’ll take Ballards approach anytime. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The thing Im worried about is that if Ballard starts using the Pacers approach to FA/drafts! Just good and satisfied enough to make the playoffs but not to be SB contenders! Pacers are the definition of mediocrity and will never get out of that until the Simons sell the team to someone that is willing to take chances! I know its 2 totally different sports and $$$ wise, etc. But, Ballard should take a chance or 2 a year to overpay a FA if it can help the team! Irsay has the $$$ to do so!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, DaColts85 said:

The Chiefs only spend big when they need something crucial like this year. They rebuilt their o line though. They typically aren’t huge spenders outside of one or two key additions each year. Now outside of literally one player (Mahomes) none of that matters. Have him retire in his prime like Lick did and watch the constant struggles they have as well. Browns are a very bad example. Spend a lot each year to barely scrape by. No thanks to that. 
 

Now is there a difference between Luck and Wentz…. Yea. No one doubts that. And having young edge guys with potential is also great. You are going to see yet again many of those “top” edge guys you wanted to throw the bank at will be released in a few years or just will not live up to the hype. Happens every year. I’ll take Ballards approach anytime. 

Well, I can tell you with my hindsight (but not Ballard's hindsight) Ballard's line of thinking heading into FA and the draft. He wanted two EDGE rushers (evident by our 1st two picks in the draft) and a LT (evident by the Eric Fisher signing). Ballard IMO didn't take what FA offered to him. We could obviously afford a FA EDGE (my hindsight based on the rest of FA but Ballard already knew this), but instead of signing the EDGE that fit us best that was around 25 years old and go into the draft needing one EDGE and a LT, we just punted and mostly re-signed our own.

 

This meant we still needed two EDGE rushers (after Autry and Houston left), and a LT. So instead of drafting Darrisaw and Dayo and having our future LT with a young FA EDGE and still getting Dayo, we ended up with Paye, Dayo and Fisher and now two of them have torn achilles instead of one, and one of them is 30 years old and may need to get replaced next year. You can say it's hindsight that Darrisaw was there and it was, but with Ballard's mindset, you are going into the draft with needs at EDGE and LT, so if Darrisaw got taken, you do what Ballard did for real, and if Darrisaw is there like he was for real, you go Darrisaw and Dayo and you have whatever 25 year-old EDGE you signed in FA.

 

That's the blunder I think will set us back a bit, as it was obvious from Ballard's mindset to do that and he took a really weird route and made things worse. We are worse at LT in the long term now, and we have two players with a torn achilles in that group. Without a 1st round pick, I worry about that position. I also don't believe it's just that easy to re-sign Fisher either. He has to heal well, and he has to play well. Then you have to pay him what he wants. I don't understand avoiding EDGE in FA to this day.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Shive changed the title to Chris Ballard goes into Wentz trade and more (MERGE)
1 hour ago, Jared Cisneros said:

Well, I can tell you with my hindsight (but not Ballard's hindsight) Ballard's line of thinking heading into FA and the draft. He wanted two EDGE rushers (evident by our 1st two picks in the draft) and a LT (evident by the Eric Fisher signing). Ballard IMO didn't take what FA offered to him. We could obviously afford a FA EDGE (my hindsight based on the rest of FA but Ballard already knew this), but instead of signing the EDGE that fit us best that was around 25 years old and go into the draft needing one EDGE and a LT, we just punted and mostly re-signed our own.

 

This meant we still needed two EDGE rushers (after Autry and Houston left), and a LT. So instead of drafting Darrisaw and Dayo and having our future LT with a young FA EDGE and still getting Dayo, we ended up with Paye, Dayo and Fisher and now two of them have torn achilles instead of one, and one of them is 30 years old and may need to get replaced next year. You can say it's hindsight that Darrisaw was there and it was, but with Ballard's mindset, you are going into the draft with needs at EDGE and LT, so if Darrisaw got taken, you do what Ballard did for real, and if Darrisaw is there like he was for real, you go Darrisaw and Dayo and you have whatever 25 year-old EDGE you signed in FA.

 

That's the blunder I think will set us back a bit, as it was obvious from Ballard's mindset to do that and he took a really weird route and made things worse. We are worse at LT in the long term now, and we have two players with a torn achilles in that group. Without a 1st round pick, I worry about that position. I also don't believe it's just that easy to re-sign Fisher either. He has to heal well, and he has to play well. Then you have to pay him what he wants. I don't understand avoiding EDGE in FA to this day.

Now let me start by saying I am not a fan of the Fisher signing. As you said he is injured plus you are talking about still needing to resign him as well for it to be a truly beneficial move. 1 year does nothing to help us so I agree with you there. Now I think Ballard has shown he is very good with scouting and has been pretty good especially with o line moves. So he believes he has a solid foundation and I will go with that. Also, feeding off that same thing he is on record saying he did not believe there were true LT’s (Darrisaw included) at our pick and saw far more potential with Paye. If that works out you have a rookie contract that helps and a guy younger than the 25 year old over priced guy you refer too. This is clearly just my opinion but I error in the way of Ballard on this with the first round. Honestly I dislike the second round the most. You had some good options on the board but went for a Achilles injury that could become a bust due to that. I hope not obviously but I would have went other ways here. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, DaColts85 said:

First off I agree on Florio. Not a huge fan myself. 
 

On the FA point. You mentioned Tampa who aside from one the greatest QB’s to ever play the game there FA moves were small. Gronk and AB accounted for next to nothing. Fournette was cut from the Jags and wanted to play for TB for pennies so that helps financially. They drafted very well over the last few years so to me that’s a bad example. 

I don't think it's a bad example, it's the example! In a few years prior they brought in guys like JPP and Suh too. A good chunk of the top end talent was brought in, not drafted. But yeah, they have had a run of a few good drafts and they did pick some WR's that'll be on par with the other big names.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, The Fish said:

I don't think it's a bad example, it's the example! In a few years prior they brought in guys like JPP and Suh too. A good chunk of the top end talent was brought in, not drafted. But yeah, they have had a run of a few good drafts and they did pick some WR's that'll be on par with the other big names.

Key D players and o players were drafted or is  just Brady. Suh and JPP are basically the only other ones. Vita Vea was the better DT and was drafted. Shaq Barrett drafted. You replace Suh and JPP no problem plus those were what 2 or 3 years ago. They aren’t making multiple big moves instead they sign there own guys. Literally exactly what Ballard is trying to do. So again I would say it’s a bad example. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 minutes ago, DaColts85 said:

Key D players and o players were drafted or is  just Brady. Suh and JPP are basically the only other ones. Vita Vea was the better DT and was drafted. Shaq Barrett drafted. You replace Suh and JPP no problem plus those were what 2 or 3 years ago. They aren’t making multiple big moves instead they sign there own guys. Literally exactly what Ballard is trying to do. So again I would say it’s a bad example. 

Dude, we're at 6 guys acquired in FA, they won the SB. Feel free to look at it differently, but the math here is straight forward.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

38 minutes ago, DaColts85 said:

Now let me start by saying I am not a fan of the Fisher signing. As you said he is injured plus you are talking about still needing to resign him as well for it to be a truly beneficial move. 1 year does nothing to help us so I agree with you there. Now I think Ballard has shown he is very good with scouting and has been pretty good especially with o line moves. So he believes he has a solid foundation and I will go with that. Also, feeding off that same thing he is on record saying he did not believe there were true LT’s (Darrisaw included) at our pick and saw far more potential with Paye. If that works out you have a rookie contract that helps and a guy younger than the 25 year old over priced guy you refer too. This is clearly just my opinion but I error in the way of Ballard on this with the first round. Honestly I dislike the second round the most. You had some good options on the board but went for a Achilles injury that could become a bust due to that. I hope not obviously but I would have went other ways here. 

I think the colts signed fisher because they are looking at it more as a 2 to 3 year acquisition. So they are perfectly fine if he misses some games. 
 

Dayo is basically the first round pick we won’t have next season.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, The Fish said:

Dude, we're at 6 guys acquired in FA, they won the SB. Feel free to look at it differently, but the math here is straight forward.

What? Give us Brady and not Rivers. Maybe that is a factor as well but whatever your math says. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Jared Cisneros said:

I just don't see how we are going to beat the top teams in the AFC like the Chiefs, Bills, and Browns with this approach unless Wentz is elite honestly. We are about to pay Leonard, Braden, and Nelson next year, so we won't have the financial flexibility we used to have. We don't have a QB on a rookie contract, and we don't have a 1st round pick next year most likely. I feel unless we see some major growth from our players or some hits on our draft picks this year, this may be our peak and we will be taking shots as the 4th best team in the AFC while attempting to stay ahead of the Titans. 

 

Unfortunately, the difference between Luck and Wentz is probably decently large, and it's the difference from being in the Chiefs and Bills tier to being in the tier below them with Wentz. Ballard has been way too conservative in FA in my opinion. FA had EDGE rushers and he chose to get them in the draft instead of taking Darrisaw and taking Fisher in FA. I think we are a playoff contender with Wentz at QB, but the lack of aggressiveness in FA may make us one of those teams like the Giants with Eli or the Eagles where we are the underdogs in the playoffs most years to get to the SB every year.

So what would you do? Pay three top free agents big contracts to fill current positions of need or extend Leonard, Smith and Nelson? If you sign three top free agents you don't have the flexibility to re-sign your own homegrown superstars??? You can't have it both ways.

 

Why are we not in the Bills tier? Their QB was from Wyoming, not much different than Wentz and they have similar professional stats. Not only that, we beat ourselves with a missed kick and a poor coaching decision otherwise we beat the Bills last year in the playoffs. His lack of results in FA does not equate a lack of aggression. Teams choose to overpay for FA's so they price themselves out of our market. Homegrown rosters with a few FA's sprinkled in tend to win more than teams who buy their roster. Has been proven since the inception of the league.

 

Who care is we are underdogs, be happy you have a competitive team that will be there versus watching from home.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Scott Pennock said:

So what would you do? Pay three top free agents big contracts to fill current positions of need or extend Leonard, Smith and Nelson? If you sign three top free agents you don't have the flexibility to re-sign your own homegrown superstars??? You can't have it both ways.

 

Why are we not in the Bills tier? Their QB was from Wyoming, not much different than Wentz and they have similar professional stats. Not only that, we beat ourselves with a missed kick and a poor coaching decision otherwise we beat the Bills last year in the playoffs. His lack of results in FA does not equate a lack of aggression. Teams choose to overpay for FA's so they price themselves out of our market. Homegrown rosters with a few FA's sprinkled in tend to win more than teams who buy their roster. Has been proven since the inception of the league.

 

Who care is we are underdogs, be happy you have a competitive team that will be there versus watching from home.

I would definitely pay Leonard, Smith, and Nelson. You pay your own. What Ballard didn't do is sign solid FAs when we had the chance the last few years when our payroll was lower. Now we don't have that opportunity with Wentz, and soon to be Leonard, Smith, and Nelson after this year. I could of had it both ways from 2018-2020 with that 2018 draft and we didn't take advantage of it. Now we don't have a 1st round pick next year, and our money is mostly tied up in the 2018 draft class. We have pretty much peaked. Any improvement is based on how much Wentz is better than Rivers and how much better our own get. Is that enough to win a SB? I think we'll be underdogs as I said.

 

Also, Josh Allen is the 2nd best QB in the NFL behind Mahomes. Wentz is arguably a project right now. There's no comparing them until Reich "fixes" Wentz. I mostly just wanted a FA EDGE as that's what the theme of FA was, and to draft Darrisaw instead of Fisher and Paye. Instead of getting two under 25 year old starters, we get one under 25 year old starter, and a 30 year old with a torn achilles on a one year deal. That's not even counting Dayo either who has a torn achilles himself. 

 

I never said 3 top FAs.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well, each of us has a choice as to how they perceive the Colt organization and their either lack of aggressiveness, or their exuberant aggressiveness. 

 

Personally, I have never in my 5 decades of NFL fandom.....witnessed my team being built the way I truly hoped it would.

 

It is now, Hallefreakingluja. 

 

#handwringingisawasteofjoy

Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 minutes ago, Four2itus said:

Well, each of us has a choice as to how they perceive the Colt organization and their either lack of aggressiveness, or their exuberant aggressiveness. 

 

Personally, I have never in my 5 decades of NFL fandom.....witnessed my team being built the way I truly hoped it would.

 

It is now, Hallefreakingluja. 

 

#handwringingisawasteofjoy

In my nearly 50 years as a fan, I completely agree!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 7/3/2021 at 12:51 PM, Wentzszn said:

Getting  Wentz was fate. I mean we got the QB our head coach wanted in Phili and scouted. Ballard says in this interview he loves Wentz too and it all isn’t Reich.  We got so dang lucky eagles went off the rails.

 

Kevin Bowen says he believes if we hadn’t got Wentz Fields would be our QB now. They would of done everything to get him. They have made it no secret to media they love the kid.

 

Everyone who says Ballard doesn’t pay enough. He said in this interview that if they love a player you have to do everything yo try and get them.

If they loved Fields so much why trade for Wentz then? I think it was a bit of smokescreen in regards to the love affair with Fields before they ultimately traded for Wentz. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 minutes ago, BProland85 said:

If they loved Fields so much why trade for Wentz then? I think it was a bit of smokescreen in regards to the love affair with Fields before they ultimately traded for Wentz. 

Because you can’t guarantee Fields would of been there. Nobody knew where he was going to drop too. Also who says we would of been able to beat out the bears. You lose out then you have nothing. Getting Wentz was the right move.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, Jared Cisneros said:

I just don't see how we are going to beat the top teams in the AFC like the Chiefs, Bills, and Browns with this approach unless Wentz is elite honestly. We are about to pay Leonard, Braden, and Nelson next year, so we won't have the financial flexibility we used to have. We don't have a QB on a rookie contract, and we don't have a 1st round pick next year most likely. I feel unless we see some major growth from our players or some hits on our draft picks this year, this may be our peak and we will be taking shots as the 4th best team in the AFC while attempting to stay ahead of the Titans. 

 

Unfortunately, the difference between Luck and Wentz is probably decently large, and it's the difference from being in the Chiefs and Bills tier to being in the tier below them with Wentz. Ballard has been way too conservative in FA in my opinion. FA had EDGE rushers and he chose to get them in the draft instead of taking Darrisaw and taking Fisher in FA. I think we are a playoff contender with Wentz at QB, but the lack of aggressiveness in FA may make us one of those teams like the Giants with Eli or the Eagles where we are the underdogs in the playoffs most years to get to the SB every year.

 

Luckily for us we have one of the youngest rosters in the league, so we are primed to see growth across our roster. Also I don't get your argument it seems you don't account for the Cap because you can't pay for big name Free Agents which always get overpaid and be able to afford contract extensions for our big name players. 

 

7 hours ago, The Fish said:

I don't think it's a bad example, it's the example! In a few years prior they brought in guys like JPP and Suh too. A good chunk of the top end talent was brought in, not drafted. But yeah, they have had a run of a few good drafts and they did pick some WR's that'll be on par with the other big names.

 

It is actually a bad example, I broke the Bucs down in a different thread on Free agent signing that became starters per year in the past 5 years and they added two starters from free agency a year which may sound like alot but it's less than us. Frankly we use free agents and have more starters from free agency than the Bucs and it's the fact they have drafted ridiculously well with multiple starters that are on rookie deals with the edition of the goat that got them the Super Bowl.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Zoltan said:

 

Luckily for us we have one of the youngest rosters in the league, so we are primed to see growth across our roster. Also I don't get your argument it seems you don't account for the Cap because you can't pay for big name Free Agents which always get overpaid and be able to afford contract extensions for our big name players. 

 

 

It is actually a bad example, I broke the Bucs down in a different thread on Free agent signing that became starters per year in the past 5 years and they added two starters from free agency a year which may sound like alot but it's less than us. Frankly we use free agents and have more starters from free agency than the Bucs and it's the fact they have drafted ridiculously well with multiple starters that are on rookie deals with the edition of the goat that got them the Super Bowl.

 

They won the Super Bowl, they did it because of free agents. Again, straight line. I'm not saying it's a sure fire way to do anything other than spend money, but if done wisely, at the right time in roster construction, it can put a team over the edge. It's the example, not bad anything.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, DaColts85 said:

Key D players and o players were drafted or is  just Brady. Suh and JPP are basically the only other ones. Vita Vea was the better DT and was drafted. Shaq Barrett drafted. You replace Suh and JPP no problem plus those were what 2 or 3 years ago. They aren’t making multiple big moves instead they sign there own guys. Literally exactly what Ballard is trying to do. So again I would say it’s a bad example. 


Barrett was a FA signing.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, The Fish said:

They won the Super Bowl, they did it because of free agents. Again, straight line. I'm not saying it's a sure fire way to do anything other than spend money, but if done wisely, at the right time in roster construction, it can put a team over the edge. It's the example, not bad anything.

your logic doesn't make sense and you are ignoring all of the information that doesn't agree with your view.

 

By your train of thought every team that has won a super bowl is because of free agency just with the fact that they had free agents on their roster.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

32 minutes ago, The Fish said:

They won the Super Bowl, they did it because of free agents. Again, straight line. I'm not saying it's a sure fire way to do anything other than spend money, but if done wisely, at the right time in roster construction, it can put a team over the edge. It's the example, not bad anything.

 

The Bucs were listless for six years, then they signed Tom Brady. Saying they added free agents "wisely" is being a little generous, IMO. What happened is they added free agents that happened to work out well for them in 2020. I agree about doing it at the right time, but the Bucs have been adding free agents every year, with little/no success. The major factor is they added a good QB.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

29 minutes ago, Zoltan said:

your logic doesn't make sense and you are ignoring all of the information that doesn't agree with your view.

 

By your train of thought every team that has won a super bowl is because of free agency just with the fact that they had free agents on their roster.

Except look at the quality of the FA's they signed. Tom Brady (greatest QB of all time) who is still on a high level, Gronkowski (who does great with Brady and is probably the 2nd best TE of all time), Antonio Brown (released because of character issues but still plays at a high level), and Shaq Barrett (elite EDGE for them). Fournette also had a decent role as well. They drafted well, but they filled it in with FA's. Also, before you say they got them for cheap because they wanted to sign with TB and Brady, they would of done the same for us if we signed Brady instead of Rivers. We just chose the wrong QB.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

51 minutes ago, Wentzszn said:

If Wentz plays really good this year and Ballard feels like he has the guy for the next five years you may find him going out and signing that key FA if he feels he will get us over the hump. 

Hopefully we have the cash at that point. Aside from extending Nelson, Smith, Leonard, etc. this year, we'll also have starters and key 2 deep guys like  Fisher (LT), Glow (RG), Hilton (WR1), Pascal (WR4), Rhodes (CB1), Carrie (CB4), Cox (TE1 or 2), Hines (APB), Turay (Edge), Lewis (Edge/DE), AQM (DE), Wilkins and Mack (RB2 and RB3), and key STs like Franklin, Adams, Odum, and Dulin... who are all FAs. 

 

In short, lot of stuff in play after this season. That's roughly a third of our starters in addition to Smith, Nelson, and Leonard. 

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.

  • Thread of the Week

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • No.   You weren’t.   If you were the least bit sincere, we’d be having these conversations in private.  But you’ve repeatedly ignored my efforts to do that.  Your call.      Then you avoid me until I’m in an uncomfortable conversation with another poster.   You use that awkward moment as an excuse for you to come in with some sincere friendly advice.   The problem is, you’re neither sincere, nor friendly.  And you’ve been doing this for months now.  This is not new.   The pattern is clear and obvious.     And the shame of it all is that even with our different views on Ballard we have enough in common that we should be friendly.  Maybe not friends, but friendly.  You wouldn’t need to address me as “Sir.”    “Good deed going unpunished”.  You flatter yourself.     But your actions speak much louder than your words.   There’s no reason for me to trust you.  And here we are.  A real shame.      
    • In a year when the Colts were in serious need of a QB and in position to draft one, Ballard came up in front of the media 3 days before the draft and straight up said something to the effect of "That guy everybody in media is talking about(Levis), we are not taking him". I don't know why you think the Colts are trying to throw us off the scent this year specifically. They are not trying to give us away the pick(thus the vagueness), but I also don't really think they are trying to mislead anybody. This usually becomes specifically apparent in retrospect after the draft when you look back at a lot of those quotes in the videos they release pre-draft... and they were talking precisely about players we ended up drafting, which they reveal in the post-draft video by extending some of those quotes(they did that with AR last year for example).    And about why people are doing it(guessing who they are talking about) - because it is fun. Nobody has the illusion that we will be right in our guesses 100% of the time... or anywhere close really... but it's still fun. And it's part of why the Colts release those videos with those quotes - to create engagement with the fanbase... part of which, and the entirety of which that 70 pages thread and whole board is about in the offseason. is to guess who the Colts might take and how they might feel about specific prospects.
    • Sir, I was just trying to help you out. No good deed goes unpunished! 
    • Not the least bit surprised to hear from you at this moment.   You see me in an uncomfortable conversation (with a moderator no less) and you seize the moment to take a shot at me.  And you try to act like you’re giving me a sincere explanation of what you’re doing.   Like you have an ounce of credibility with me.      This is not the first time you’ve done this.  While I may not be surprised, I’m certainly disappointed.   
    • Things have now gone from bad to worse.     After I explained myself, I was kind of hoping you’d simply come back with “I’m sorry, I misunderstood you,  may bad.”  And we’d be done with this.  It would be over.      But instead, you double down on the roommate issue and follow up by questioning everything I said by breaking down some of my comments and what you think I really meant by them.     In other words, you’re telling me my motive, my meaning, as if you know my meaning better than I do.    It’s interesting to me…. I was recently told there’s an unofficial moderator policy:  don’t attack the poster, attack the argument.    Well, I don’t see that here.  You attacked me personally the first time and instead of a simple apology, you’ve double downed on a bad hand by attacking me personally AGAIN.      Why you’re comfortable telling me you know my meaning , my intention, better than I do is mystifying to me.  And frankly, I think you’re comfortable doing this because one of us is a moderator, and it certainly is NOT me.     I’ll say it again: you misunderstood my meaning, and intention,  the first time, and you’ve misunderstood me even worse the second time.   As I said before, I’m happy to withdraw and apologize for “go figure”, but the negative inference was not my intention.  Poorly phrased, I give you (in two posts now).   I don’t know what else to say…. I’m hoping this brings this very unfortunate exchange to an end.       
  • Members

×
×
  • Create New...