Jump to content
Indianapolis Colts
Indianapolis Colts Fan Forum

Chris Ballard and Frank Reich given extensions through 2026


Mel Kiper's Hair

Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, IrsaysArmy said:

Also, about Ballard not getting a QB yet. Even though odds are we do finally have our guy on the roster now. 

 

In years prior though, who has he supposed to have gone get? They have to be better players than who they have. Luck in 18 was the guy. Brissett is 19 made a ton of sense. And Phillip rivers last year was the move to make. And please don’t respond with Tom Brady. It just was not going to happen. 
 

If Justin Fields ends up being a star it will sting a bit but again, hindsight. 

Justin Fields is one, but another is Justin Herbert. The Colts could of traded up from 13 to 5 in order to get him in 2020. It would of cost us Buckner, Pittman, and Paye probably, but we would also have Herbert, a 3rd from the 2021 draft, and all of our picks next year (either the 1st or 2nd we lose). 

 

I was against Herbert and thought he'd be a bust, but that's just my opinion that was wrong. It's Ballard's opinion that matters, and he didn't take Herbert (which is wrong in hindsight, but Ballard is making the decision) or Fields (who is impressing thus far). 

 

So if Wentz fails, or Herbert or Fields become a top 5 elite QB, then we can look back and say Ballard made a mistake, and again, it's Ballard's decision, so hindsight is pointless from our view, Ballard is the GM. You can't say you put the trust in the GM and absolve him of blame and call it hindsight when he's wrong.

 

Praise Ballard for being right, and blame him for his mistakes. Be fair both ways.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 181
  • Created
  • Last Reply
1 hour ago, jvan1973 said:

3 years to find a franchise qb?    Ask Bears fans,   ask Bills fans,   Jags fans,  WFT fans etc.      3 years isn't very long.   If Carson turns out to be the guy,   Ballard and Reich did an amazing job

 

Especially considering the fact that they didn't think they even needed a new QB until two years ago. They patched up with JB, then tried Rivers in a tough year, and now their big-but-measured move is for Wentz, which somehow people are complaining about before he's even hit the field.

 

Weird, but not unexpected. 

 

I have no problem with these extensions. Ballard and Reich have done a very good job to this point, and now have to live up to their new deals. If they don't, Irsay will replace them, just like he did last time. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

50 minutes ago, Wentzszn said:

That isn’t what I meant. I just meant we are 3 years out so the excuses are gone of Luck can’t be used anymore. I think Wentz will work if as long as there is no bad injury and bad luck.


I appreciate you have me on ignore.   But you have now used the word “anymore” 3 or 4 times.    It was used wrongly the first time and it looks even worse each time you continue to use it.  Because it’s been explained clearly why.   And yet, it continues.   A problem of your own making. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, jvan1973 said:

Who should they have taken?


Trade up for Herbert?

 

Draft Love and develop him under Rivers for a year?
 

Trade up for Fields? 
 

I don’t see the situation being much more nebulous with those guys. And it’s definitely not like Ballard’s hand was forced to trade for Wentz. That’s all I am saying. But if Wentz is the guy, they got it right. I just lean more heavily on the draft and develop side, which is the backbone of this team as well.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, Jared Cisneros said:

Justin Fields is one, but another is Justin Herbert. The Colts could of traded up from 13 to 5 in order to get him in 2020. It would of cost us Buckner, Pittman, and Paye probably, but we would also have Herbert, a 3rd from the 2021 draft, and all of our picks next year (either the 1st or 2nd we lose). 

 

I was against Herbert and thought he'd be a bust, but that's just my opinion that was wrong. It's Ballard's opinion that matters, and he didn't take Herbert (which is wrong in hindsight, but Ballard is making the decision) or Fields (who is impressing thus far). 

 

So if Wentz fails, or Herbert or Fields become a top 5 elite QB, then we can look back and say Ballard made a mistake, and again, it's Ballard's decision, so hindsight is pointless from our view, Ballard is the GM. You can't say you put the trust in the GM and absolve him of blame and call it hindsight when he's wrong.

 

Praise Ballard for being right, and blame him for his mistakes. Be fair both ways.

Herbert is another one for sure.  I’m with you on everything you say. I don’t just blindly love all of Ballards moves. However he’s been pretty darn good.

 

I’ll be honest with you. If I had the option of either having Buckner, Pittman and Paye or just Herbert. I’m not sure what I would take, that’s tough. I think Pittman is going to be a star. I don’t really know about Paye. I’m sure he will be good too. And of course Buckner if Buckner. Herbert might be special though.

 

I would actually love to hear some people’s opinions on this. 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 minutes ago, Superman said:

 

Especially considering the fact that they didn't think they even needed a new QB until two years ago. They patched up with JB, then tried Rivers in a tough year, and now they're big-but-measured move is for Wentz, which somehow people are complaining about before he's even hit the field.

 

Weird, but not unexpected. 

 

I have no problem with these extensions. Ballard and Reich have done a very good job to this point, and now have to live up to their new deals. If they don't, Irsay will replace them, just like he did last time. 

Yes….   Irsay will replace them should they fail to deliver enough.   But I feel compelled to add this….  Irsay has given them an incredibly long leash.   They’re both now signed thru 2026,  that’s six more years.  That’s a very, very long extension by NFL standards.

 

Theres a small but persistent segment of our community here…. The ones who talk about the seats that Ballard and Reich sit on getting hotter and hotter if they don’t deliver soon. Well, I’d respectfully say that Jim Irsay has just rebuffed that idea big time.  The seats those two sit on Isn't hot at all.  That’s a HUGE vote of confidence for both men.  Irsay believes in both, and I’d say any doubters might want to reconsider…

 

Just saying…. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

37 minutes ago, Jared Cisneros said:

Justin Fields is one, but another is Justin Herbert. The Colts could of traded up from 13 to 5 in order to get him in 2020. It would of cost us Buckner, Pittman, and Paye probably, but we would also have Herbert, a 3rd from the 2021 draft, and all of our picks next year (either the 1st or 2nd we lose). 

 

I was against Herbert and thought he'd be a bust, but that's just my opinion that was wrong. It's Ballard's opinion that matters, and he didn't take Herbert (which is wrong in hindsight, but Ballard is making the decision) or Fields (who is impressing thus far). 

 

So if Wentz fails, or Herbert or Fields become a top 5 elite QB, then we can look back and say Ballard made a mistake, and again, it's Ballard's decision, so hindsight is pointless from our view, Ballard is the GM. You can't say you put the trust in the GM and absolve him of blame and call it hindsight when he's wrong.

 

Praise Ballard for being right, and blame him for his mistakes. Be fair both ways.

Of course your post assumes Ballard could have convinced San Diego to trade down with us.   We might’ve not done the Buckner trade, not signed Rivers, and made a huge offer to trade up and the Chargers might’ve still said no.   That’s a lot of moving parts to gamble on.  And if that trade want done, we’d have no Buckner and maybe no Rivers as well.  2020 might’ve looked very, very different.   As well as 21 and 22. 
 

By the way….  Same goes for the possible Fields trade.   Everything is obvious in hindsight.  GM’s don’t get that luxury.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Wentzszn said:

The Dolphins took TUA at five.  Also we don’t know maybe ballard tried to trade up above them but had no takers.

Generally, if this were true, something would of been leaked at some point. I remember Ballard saying he loved Buckner, and it was an easy trade. Trust me Chloester, Ballard had no interest in Herbert. Fields I don't know his interest in, but he traded for Wentz before the draft, so we can safely assume he either liked Wentz more or thought it'd be too expensive to trade for him.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, NewColtsFan said:

Of course your post assumes Ballard could have convinced San Diego to trade down with us.   We might’ve not done the Buckner trade, not signed Rivers, and made a huge offer to trade up and the Chargers might’ve still said no.   That’s a lot of moving parts to gamble on.  And if that trade want done, we’d have no Buckner and maybe no Rivers as well.  2020 might’ve looked very, very different.   As well as 21 and 22. 
 

By the way….  Same goes for the possible Fields trade.   Everything is obvious in hindsight.  GM’s don’t get that luxury.  

You are right, everything is obvious in hindsight. However, Ballard has much more information than any of us do. He has a full team of scouts and coaches helping him. So we put our faith in him. So when he's wrong, he should be blamed because he's the professional. Hindsight for any of us is irrelevant.

 

I'll say what I said earlier in this thread. Praise Ballard when he's right, blame him when he's wrong. Take the good with the bad as the GM and the praise with the blame. Works both ways.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 minutes ago, NewColtsFan said:

Yes….   Irsay will replace them should they fail to deliver enough.   But I feel compelled to add this….  Irsay has given them an incredibly long leash.   They’re both now signed thru 2026,  that’s six more years.  That’s a very, very long extension by NFL standards.

 

Theres a small but persistent segment of our community here…. The ones who talk about the seats that Ballard and Reich sit on getting hotter and hotter if they don’t deliver soon. Well, I’d respectfully say that Jim Irsay has just rebuffed that idea big time.  The seats those two sit on Isn't hot at all.  That’s a HUGE vote of confidence for both men.  Irsay believes in both, and I’d say any doubters might want to reconsider…

 

Just saying…. 

 

Huge vote of confidence, sure. And Irsay has said plenty of times that he values continuity, so unless things start falling apart in one way or another, it's not likely that either guy is going anywhere any time soon. But Irsay has also said that he wants multiple championships, and he continues to reinforce that standard. 

 

So just because they're signed through 2026 doesn't mean they have carte blanche. The length of the extension doesn't really matter. Irsay extended Grigson, then fired him a year later, with three years remaining. He extended Pagano, and allowed Ballard to fire him with two years remaining. If they aren't doing their jobs, their contracts aren't going to keep them from being terminated.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Wentzszn said:

My hope is this organization ends up like the Steelers. Having both GM and coach in place for a long time just gives teams such continuity.

Yep, Steelers. Ravens, Patriots, Saints are all great examples too. Continuity is a must
 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

59 minutes ago, shasta519 said:


Trade up for Herbert?

 

Draft Love and develop him under Rivers for a year?
 

Trade up for Fields? 
 

I don’t see the situation being much more nebulous with those guys. And it’s definitely not like Ballard’s hand was forced to trade for Wentz. That’s all I am saying. But if Wentz is the guy, they got it right. I just lean more heavily on the draft and develop side, which is the backbone of this team as well.

The draft capital to move up and get any of those guys would have been so much more than what we gave up to get Wentz. If Frank has confidence in Wentz, I do as well

Link to comment
Share on other sites

31 minutes ago, Superman said:

 

Huge vote of confidence, sure. And Irsay has said plenty of times that he values continuity, so unless things start falling apart in one way or another, it's not likely that either guy is going anywhere any time soon. But Irsay has also said that he wants multiple championships, and he continues to reinforce that standard. 

 

So just because they're signed through 2026 doesn't mean they have carte blanche. The length of the extension doesn't really matter. Irsay extended Grigson, then fired him a year later, with three years remaining. He extended Pagano, and allowed Ballard to fire him with two years remaining. If they aren't doing their jobs, their contracts aren't going to keep them from being terminated.

Huh?   The length of the extension doesn’t matter?    Huh?

 

I think the proof of that being false is how Pagano was handled.   We kept him on and made him a lame duck and ate an entire season so Irsay wouldn’t have to eat so much contract.   Three years?   Too much.  Two years, that was acceptable.  
 

How often do you see a team bring in a new GM and he doesn’t fire the HC right away?   They wait a year.   I know it’s happened before,  but is rare.  
 

If the length of extensions didn’t matter, then many contract negotiations wouldn’t get hung up on that issue.    A rare disagreement for you and me. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, NewColtsFan said:

Huh?   The length of the extension doesn’t matter?    Huh?

 

I think the proof of that being false is how Pagano was handled.   He kept him on and made him a lame duck and ate an entire season so Irsay wouldn’t have to eat so much contract.   Three years?   Too much.  Two years, that was acceptable.  
 

Hiw often do you see a team bring in a new GM and he doesn’t fire the HC right away?   They wait a year.   I know it’s happened before,  but is rare.  
 

If the length of extensions didn’t matter, then many contract negotiations wouldn’t get hung up on that issue.    A rare disagreement for you and me. 

If I may,   I think Sup is saying as of right now he is confident.    But GMs and coaches get fired all the time.    I don't see that happening with this duo unless things completely unravel 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, IrsaysArmy said:

If Carson Wentz turns out to be our guy you might as well start making his Canton bust lol. 
 

Joking aside, it would be one of the most impressive moves I’ve seen in a while. I mean there’s rankings right now with Carson like 30-32. Imagine if he plays at a top 8-10 level for us. 

I believe in Frank.    He will get him right.   Plus the oline and JT.   Carson is in the perfect situation 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, jvan1973 said:

I believe in Frank.    He will get him right.   Plus the oline and JT.   Carson is in the perfect situation 

Exactly. This take is not emotion based, not juicy, nor is it complicated. Not every aspect of one's favorite team needs to be dissected ad nauseum. I would add a pretty darned supportive defense. 

 

Thanks. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

35 minutes ago, IrsaysArmy said:

Yep, Steelers. Ravens, Patriots, Saints are all great examples too. Continuity is a must
 

There were also the Bengals, Titans and Eagles who had long running coaches and GMs and some see as a disappointment. I’m a fan of the extensions but just wanted to point out stability and mediocrity are closer than people realize. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Jared Cisneros said:

Justin Fields is one, but another is Justin Herbert. The Colts could of traded up from 13 to 5 in order to get him in 2020. It would of cost us Buckner, Pittman, and Paye probably, but we would also have Herbert, a 3rd from the 2021 draft, and all of our picks next year (either the 1st or 2nd we lose). 

 

I was against Herbert and thought he'd be a bust, but that's just my opinion that was wrong. It's Ballard's opinion that matters, and he didn't take Herbert (which is wrong in hindsight, but Ballard is making the decision) or Fields (who is impressing thus far). 

 

So if Wentz fails, or Herbert or Fields become a top 5 elite QB, then we can look back and say Ballard made a mistake, and again, it's Ballard's decision, so hindsight is pointless from our view, Ballard is the GM. You can't say you put the trust in the GM and absolve him of blame and call it hindsight when he's wrong.

 

Praise Ballard for being right, and blame him for his mistakes. Be fair both ways.

Could have.  Could of.... That's not what could've is derived from, nor would've.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Jared Cisneros said:

Justin Fields is one, but another is Justin Herbert. The Colts could of traded up from 13 to 5 in order to get him in 2020. It would of cost us Buckner, Pittman, and Paye probably, but we would also have Herbert, a 3rd from the 2021 draft, and all of our picks next year (either the 1st or 2nd we lose). 

 

I was against Herbert and thought he'd be a bust, but that's just my opinion that was wrong. It's Ballard's opinion that matters, and he didn't take Herbert (which is wrong in hindsight, but Ballard is making the decision) or Fields (who is impressing thus far). 

 

So if Wentz fails, or Herbert or Fields become a top 5 elite QB, then we can look back and say Ballard made a mistake, and again, it's Ballard's decision, so hindsight is pointless from our view, Ballard is the GM. You can't say you put the trust in the GM and absolve him of blame and call it hindsight when he's wrong.

 

Praise Ballard for being right, and blame him for his mistakes. Be fair both ways.

It's just not that cut and dry.  You say the Team would have made a mistake.  It's more reasonable to say they may have missed an opportunity.  It's not a mistake in their eyes if the compensation to take one of those players was deemed to be too high by them, or if they did t believe they fit as well as another option ... Hindsight is 20/20 and it's even easier for a fan with no knowledge of any internal dynamics or anything really, apart from game footage and box scores, to sit on judgement....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, NewColtsFan said:

Huh?   The length of the extension doesn’t matter?    Huh?

 

I think the proof of that being false is how Pagano was handled.   We kept him on and made him a lame duck and ate an entire season so Irsay wouldn’t have to eat so much contract.   Three years?   Too much.  Two years, that was acceptable.  
 

How often do you see a team bring in a new GM and he doesn’t fire the HC right away?   They wait a year.   I know it’s happened before,  but is rare.  
 

If the length of extensions didn’t matter, then many contract negotiations wouldn’t get hung up on that issue.    A rare disagreement for you and me. 

I think your theory that Pagano was kept an extra year so Irsay didn’t have to eat the contract is false.  It’s no secret that Pagano and Grigson didn’t get along with it being reported that Pagano felt Grigson was overriding decisions Pagano wanted in regards to personal.  I think Pagano was given an extra year to see if he could be successful without Grigson and see if Grigson was the problem.  
 

As for your point about a coach being retained after a GM was fired it almost happened here with Caldwell.  Irsay fired the Polians and hired Grigson long before Caldwell was ultimately let go and was reportedly close to keeping his job.  Irsay runs his ship differently than other owners.  Always has always will.  He values continuity and has proven to be patient, at times probably too patient (Pagano and Grigson are prime examples), but he marches to the beat of his own drum.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

27 minutes ago, GoColts8818 said:

I think your theory that Pagano was kept an extra year so Irsay didn’t have to eat the contract is false.  It’s no secret that Pagano and Grigson didn’t get along with it being reported that Pagano felt Grigson was overriding decisions Pagano wanted in regards to personal.  I think Pagano was given an extra year to see if he could be successful without Grigson and see if Grigson was the problem.  
 

As for your point about a coach being retained after a GM was fired it almost happened here with Caldwell.  Irsay fired the Polians and hired Grigson long before Caldwell was ultimately let go and was reportedly close to keeping his job.  Irsay runs his ship differently than other owners.  Always has always will.  He values continuity and has proven to be patient, at times probably too patient (Pagano and Grigson are prime examples), but he marches to the beat of his own drum.

I normally understand your posts very clearly. I don’t with this one.   And to be clear, I think you’re one of the smartest posters here, so I'm very confused with this. 
 

I’ll take the second issue first.  I literally wrote that I know it’s happened before, but that it doesn’t happen often.   So I addressed it.  Giving an example of it happening doesn’t move the needle.  I already acknowledged it. 
 

Now the first issue.   Are you seriously suggesting that Pagano had any chance of saving his job?  That’s my read of your comment.   I’m sorry, but I believe that to be false.   Irsay isn’t going to publicly say he’s keeping Pagano around to pay him for another year so he doesn’t have to eat an extra year of his contract.   That would be a PR nightmare on a National scale.   And he was never going to force Ballard to keep a head coach that wasn’t his pick like that.  Few GMs would do that.   
 

I submit,  it was a show.  Everyone publicly says all the right things and everyone saves face.  Pagano, the loyal head coach who was popular for a variety of reasons including his health scare.   Ballard, the new GM gets a free year of no pressure as Pagano tries his best while Ballard builds a team that had completely different systems on offense AND defense.   Ballard’s preferences were the exact opposite on both sides of the ball.  And Irsay looks like a good and fair guy after dumping the un-likable Grigson and giving Pagano a fair last shot.   Everyone winks and nods.  Everyone says the right things.   Everyone saves face.  Everyone wins. 
 

I try to read Indy media.  I don’t recall ever reading local or National media that suggested otherwise.  I suppose it’s possible, but I don’t think it’s likely.  
 

Im sorry we disagree on this.  I don’t like disagreeing with people I have such high respect for, but that’s the case here.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

To add on to the Herbert/Fields convo, that is completely hindsight.  I can’t remember anyone on this board at that time saying QB was so of a desperate need that we needed to trade up.  Majority of us were saying that we needed a DT/NT.  So many people were hurt we got Buckner instead of staying put and drafting Kinlaw.

 

I can’t imagine the blowback if we would’ve got Herbert or Fields and have yet to find our stud in the middle.  It’s not fair to Ballard.  Buckner has been as advertised and Grover is another good find by Ballard.  We can’t hit on every pick and signing.  If we would’ve traded up to get fields or Herbert, chances are we don’t have Buckner OR Kinlaw.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

37 minutes ago, NewColtsFan said:

I normally understand your posts very clearly. I don’t with this one.   And to be clear, I think you’re one of the smartest posters here, so I'm very confused with this. 
 

I’ll take the second issue first.  I literally wrote that I know it’s happened before, but that it doesn’t happen often.   So I addressed it.  Giving an example of it happening doesn’t move the needle.  I already acknowledged it. 
 

Now the first issue.   Are you seriously suggesting that Pagano had any chance of saving his job?  That’s my read of your comment.   I’m sorry, but I believe that to be false.   Irsay isn’t going to publicly say he’s keeping Pagano around to pay him for another year so he doesn’t have to eat an extra year of his contract.   That would be a PR nightmare on a National scale.   And he was never going to force Ballard to keep a head coach that wasn’t his pick like that.  Few GMs would do that.   
 

I submit,  it was a show.  Everyone publicly says all the right things and everyone saves face.  Pagano, the loyal head coach who was popular for a variety of reasons including his health scare.   Ballard, the new GM gets a free year of no pressure as Pagano tries his best while Ballard builds a team that had completely different systems on offense AND defense.   Ballard’s preferences were the exact opposite on both sides of the ball.  And Irsay looks like a good and fair guy after dumping the un-likable Grigson and giving Pagano a fair last shot.   Everyone winks and nods.  Everyone says the right things.   Everyone saves face.  Everyone wins. 
 

I try to read Indy media.  I don’t recall ever reading local or National media that suggested otherwise.  I suppose it’s possible, but I don’t think it’s likely.  
 

Im sorry we disagree on this.  I don’t like disagreeing with people I have such high respect for, but that’s the case here.  

His first year here Ballard drafted guys for Pagano’s defense.  Guys like Wilson who never fit in the Colts 4-3 cover-2 defense under Reich.  Had Pagano won that year he would have saved his job.  
 

The reason I brought up Caldwell was to show you that Jim Irsay the owner has a history of hiring GMs while keeping the head coach.  While it’s out of the norm for most of the NFL it’s not out of the norm for Jim Irsay.  He did it again with Pagano and gave him a chance to show he could win without Grigson undermining his personal decisions which was one of Pagano’s big grips about Grigson.  If you recall at the time there was a debate about if the Colts had a talent or coaching problem.  While it turned out to be both Irsay gave Pagano a legit chance to show it was a talent problem and the coaching was good.  It didn’t work out.

 

Irsay didn’t just keep Pagano around to avoid paying him a contract when he wasn’t employed.  If that were the case he wouldn’t have fired Mora, the Polians, Caldwell, or even Grigson for the same reason or fired several coaches including both coordinators under Pagano.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

 

7 hours ago, Jared Cisneros said:

Justin Fields is one, but another is Justin Herbert. The Colts could of traded up from 13 to 5 in order to get him in 2020. It would of cost us Buckner, Pittman, and Paye probably, but we would also have Herbert, a 3rd from the 2021 draft, and all of our picks next year (either the 1st or 2nd we lose). 

You would also have an additional 20M per year in capspace to spend on free agents. Hell you might even have gotten Buckner himself as a free agent, just a year later since the 49ers traded him precisely because they couldn't afford to pay him long-term. Oh... and you would be paying Herbert about 6.5M a year, which is about 18-19M less than Wentz. Add that to what you can spend on other FAs... 

 

 

Quote

I was against Herbert and thought he'd be a bust, but that's just my opinion that was wrong. It's Ballard's opinion that matters, and he didn't take Herbert (which is wrong in hindsight, but Ballard is making the decision) or Fields (who is impressing thus far). 

Yep, the particulars of what our personal evaluations were don't matter that much(for example, I was high on Jordan Love(and possibly wrongly so), along with Herbert and Fields(possibly rightly so), but ultimately it matters what Ballard thought of them. 

Quote

So if Wentz fails, or Herbert or Fields become a top 5 elite QB, then we can look back and say Ballard made a mistake, and again, it's Ballard's decision, so hindsight is pointless from our view, Ballard is the GM. You can't say you put the trust in the GM and absolve him of blame and call it hindsight when he's wrong.

 

Praise Ballard for being right, and blame him for his mistakes. Be fair both ways.

Yeah... to me it's a bit weird to evaluate possible specific moves we could have made because we don't really know what was available - for example, maybe noone in the top 5 was willing to trade out and drop to 13 for us to go get Herbert. But in the long run I think how you maneuver the draft and your ability to get in position to draft a player you love should be part of the evaluation of a GM. 

 

7 hours ago, IrsaysArmy said:

Herbert is another one for sure.  I’m with you on everything you say. I don’t just blindly love all of Ballards moves. However he’s been pretty darn good.

 

I’ll be honest with you. If I had the option of either having Buckner, Pittman and Paye or just Herbert. I’m not sure what I would take, that’s tough. I think Pittman is going to be a star. I don’t really know about Paye. I’m sure he will be good too. And of course Buckner if Buckner. Herbert might be special though.

 

I would actually love to hear some people’s opinions on this. 
 

To me the biggest point of contention is whether you could actually have gotten Herbert for #13+ Pittman(2nd) + Paye(1st). If you could IMO it's no brainer. In essence here's the choice IF that type of deal was available:

 

Herbert, 3d this year, 1st/2nd next year, 40M of capspace PER YEAR(21M capspace from Buckner + 19M capspace from difference between Wentz and Herbert)

 

or

 

Wentz, Buckner, Paye, Pittman

 

To me it's not particularly close. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, GoColts8818 said:

His first year here Ballard drafted guys for Pagano’s defense.  Guys like Wilson who never fit in the Colts 4-3 cover-2 defense under Reich.  Had Pagano won that year he would have saved his job.  
 

The reason I brought up Caldwell was to show you that Jim Irsay the owner has a history of hiring GMs while keeping the head coach.  While it’s out of the norm for most of the NFL it’s not out of the norm for Jim Irsay.  He did it again with Pagano and gave him a chance to show he could win without Grigson undermining his personal decisions which was one of Pagano’s big grips about Grigson.  If you recall at the time there was a debate about if the Colts had a talent or coaching problem.  While it turned out to be both Irsay gave Pagano a legit chance to show it was a talent problem and the coaching was good.  It didn’t work out.

 

Irsay didn’t just keep Pagano around to avoid paying him a contract when he wasn’t employed.  If that were the case he wouldn’t have fired Mora, the Polians, Caldwell, or even Grigson for the same reason or fired several coaches including both coordinators under Pagano.  

I think Pagano would’ve had to win a minimum of 10 games, and they had to know at some point that Luck was not going to play that year.  Once that happened, that eliminated any chance Pagano had of winning enough to save his job.   
 

With the other Colts coaches you list, there wasn’t an issue with a new GM wanting to hire his own guy.   I don’t even understand debating this?   Even a successful season by Pagano wasn’t going to save him.   He ran a big play, chunk offense,  Ballard prefers a more ball control,  high efficiency offense.  Pagano employs a 3-4 defense,  Ballard prefers a unique 4-3.    I don’t see how a 10-win season would get Ballard to keep a coach he wouldn’t want any part of?   Not his guy.  We tried to help Pagano win to give him a chance to rehabilitate his career elsewhere.  But that’s the key — elsewhere.   I don’t see this as a sincere chance to stay. 
 

I’m sorry we don’t have any common ground on this.   That rarely happens for me with your posts.   But that’s where we are. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, Superman said:

 

Huge vote of confidence, sure. And Irsay has said plenty of times that he values continuity, so unless things start falling apart in one way or another, it's not likely that either guy is going anywhere any time soon. But Irsay has also said that he wants multiple championships, and he continues to reinforce that standard. 

 

So just because they're signed through 2026 doesn't mean they have carte blanche. The length of the extension doesn't really matter. Irsay extended Grigson, then fired him a year later, with three years remaining. He extended Pagano, and allowed Ballard to fire him with two years remaining. If they aren't doing their jobs, their contracts aren't going to keep them from being terminated.

I think the length of the contracts kind of matters. It's not everything but it matters. There is a difference between having to cut ties with 2 years left or with 4 years left on a contract. And more importantly ... IMO it shows that Irsay's not worried even a bit about the possibility that he might have to cut ties any time soon. Here's a thought exercise... 

 

Lets say Wentz completely flops this year. Lets say he's similar to what he was last year and the Colts are out of the playoffs(but still lose the 1st). What do you think happens next? For Wentz? For Ballard? For Reich? IMO the most likely scenario is - Ballard and Reich are safe and they convince themselves and Irsay that it was all due to Wentz' injury and roll with him for one more year. I just cannot see them being fired for at least next 2 years pretty much no matter what happens. The earliest I can see it happening is off season of 2023 if everything goes wrong. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, smittywerb said:

To add on to the Herbert/Fields convo, that is completely hindsight.  I can’t remember anyone on this board at that time saying QB was so of a desperate need that we needed to trade up.  Majority of us were saying that we needed a DT/NT.  So many people were hurt we got Buckner instead of staying put and drafting Kinlaw.

 

I can’t imagine the blowback if we would’ve got Herbert or Fields and have yet to find our stud in the middle.  It’s not fair to Ballard.  Buckner has been as advertised and Grover is another good find by Ballard.  We can’t hit on every pick and signing.  If we would’ve traded up to get fields or Herbert, chances are we don’t have Buckner OR Kinlaw.

Oh, there definitely were plenty of people who wanted us to trade up for a QB. I was one of them. Both this year and last year. I outlined the options above in another post. IMO going up for Herbert would have been the best option by some significant margin.

 

Now the hindsight element of importance here is - what if we went with Tua or Love rather than Herbert? I guess both still might pan out, but they are not as sure of a thing as Herbert seems right now. 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, Wentzszn said:

My hope is this organization ends up like the Steelers. Having both GM and coach in place for a long time just gives teams such continuity.

 

7 hours ago, IrsaysArmy said:

Yep, Steelers. Ravens, Patriots, Saints are all great examples too. Continuity is a must
 

Continuity is overrated. It depends on what you are continuing with. The Bengals had continuity for almost 2 decades under Marvin Lewis with complete and utter mediocrity, never winning a single playoff game. 

 

But in general, teams don't stay with mediocrity for too long so huge majority of the examples of continuity(those you listed) are actually examples of prolonged success, rather than continuity for continuity sake. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

1 hour ago, stitches said:

You would also have an additional 20M per year in capspace to spend on free agents. Hell you might even have gotten Buckner himself as a free agent, just a year later since the 49ers traded him precisely because they couldn't afford to pay him long-term. Oh... and you would be paying Herbert about 6.5M a year, which is about 18-19M less than Wentz. Add that to what you can spend on other FAs... 

 

 

Yep, the particulars of what our personal evaluations were don't matter that much(for example, I was high on Jordan Love(and possibly wrongly so), along with Herbert and Fields(possibly rightly so), but ultimately it matters what Ballard thought of them. 

Yeah... to me it's a bit weird to evaluate possible specific moves we could have made because we don't really know what was available - for example, maybe noone in the top 5 was willing to trade out and drop to 13 for us to go get Herbert. But in the long run I think how you maneuver the draft and your ability to get in position to draft a player you love should be part of the evaluation of a GM. 

 

To me the biggest point of contention is whether you could actually have gotten Herbert for #13+ Pittman(2nd) + Paye(1st). If you could IMO it's no brainer. In essence here's the choice IF that type of deal was available:

 

Herbert, 3d this year, 1st/2nd next year, 40M of capspace PER YEAR(21M capspace from Buckner + 19M capspace from difference between Wentz and Herbert)

 

or

 

Wentz, Buckner, Paye, Pittman

 

To me it's not particularly close. 

 

These are some dramatic hypotheticals. 

 

First, the 49ers were shopping Buckner, he was going to get traded to someone. The Colts made sure it was them. He wasn't going to be available in FA.

 

Second, I'm all about Herbert, was before the 2020 draft, and I think he's shown how talented he is. Still, he produced in an unsustainable way last season, and he has to get better to continue to produce at a consistent level. Herbert still isn't there yet, and some of this talk about him is premature. I'd like to have him, but time will tell whether he's worth the haul it would have taken to go up for him. There were no draft day trades before #14. It stands to reason we're talking about three firsts to enter the conversation, and you probably need to get to #4 to move ahead of Miami and the Chargers. We need to at least see Year 2 of Herbert before it's clear that he's worth that kind of capital. And yes, I'd have been a supporter of that move, but it's obvious the Colts weren't ready to take that kind of swing yet.

 

Similar conversation with Love, who was obviously more of a project than we realized at the time. Talented, don't know if he's able to do anything as an NFL QB though.

 

They might have been ready to make a big move up in 2021, and Fields is a really nice prospect. 

 

As it stands, we got Wentz at half the cost in draft picks (plus other players; kind of non-chalantly tossing Buckner to the side in these scenarios, just an All Pro caliber 3T that you basically don't get outside of the top ten of the draft), and we haven't seen him play yet.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

38 minutes ago, stitches said:

I think the length of the contracts kind of matters. It's not everything but it matters. There is a difference between having to cut ties with 2 years left or with 4 years left on a contract. And more importantly ... IMO it shows that Irsay's not worried even a bit about the possibility that he might have to cut ties any time soon. Here's a thought exercise... 

 

Lets say Wentz completely flops this year. Lets say he's similar to what he was last year and the Colts are out of the playoffs(but still lose the 1st). What do you think happens next? For Wentz? For Ballard? For Reich? IMO the most likely scenario is - Ballard and Reich are safe and they convince themselves and Irsay that it was all due to Wentz' injury and roll with him for one more year. I just cannot see them being fired for at least next 2 years pretty much no matter what happens. The earliest I can see it happening is off season of 2023 if everything goes wrong. 

 

Why should Irsay be worried about having to move on from Ballard and Reich any time soon? They've done a good job, they appear to be the right kind of guys, they evidently have a great working relationship. Why would he be thinking that there's a need to find a different GM or coach any time soon?

 

Even if Wentz busts, that in itself isn't reason enough to get rid of either guy. 

 

It seems like some people are expecting Ballard and/or Reich to fail, and soon. Like you're just waiting for them to go bad. That's weird to me. Neither guy is perfect, but they've had a rough series of events to start their run together, and still have gotten pretty good results through three years. 

 

If this starts falling apart, Irsay has shown he's willing to move on. Doesn't matter how many years are left on their contracts. And it has no salary cap implications, so even if Irsay is eating guaranteed money to guys that don't work for him anymore, I don't really care. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Superman said:

 

 

These are some dramatic hypotheticals. 

 

First, the 49ers were shopping Buckner, he was going to get traded to someone. The Colts made sure it was them. He wasn't going to be available in FA.

That's fair. You still would have the 21M of capspace though. You could use that on pretty much anyone you choose in FA. Along with the 19M difference between Wentz and rookie contract. 40M of capspace is no joke. This is not for 1 year. This is for the duration of Buckner's and Wentz' contracts. You can get/keep a ton of talent with that. 

 

5 minutes ago, Superman said:

Second, I'm all about Herbert, was before the 2020 draft, and I think he's shown how talented he is. Still, he produced in an unsustainable way last season, and he has to get better to continue to produce at a consistent level. Herbert still isn't there yet, and some of this talk about him is premature. I'd like to have him, but time will tell whether he's worth the haul it would have taken to go up for him. There were no draft day trades before #14. It stands to reason we're talking about three firsts to enter the conversation, and you probably need to get to #4 to move ahead of Miami and the Chargers. We need to at least see Year 2 of Herbert before it's clear that he's worth that kind of capital. And yes, I'd have been a supporter of that move, but it's obvious the Colts weren't ready to take that kind of swing yet.

Still... with all the uncertainty in Herbert going forward - if you could have Herbert or Wentz right now on their respective deals. Who are you choosing? 

 

Also, yeah... I'm not sure such a move was available and if available I'm not sure it would be at that price. To me this was the biggest point of contention. 

 

5 minutes ago, Superman said:

Similar conversation with Love, who was obviously more of a project than we realized at the time. Talented, don't know if he's able to do anything as an NFL QB though.

 

They might have been ready to make a big move up in 2021, and Fields is a really nice prospect. 

 

As it stands, we got Wentz at half the cost in draft picks (plus other players; kind of non-chalantly tossing Buckner to the side in these scenarios, just an All Pro caliber 3T that you basically don't get outside of the top ten of the draft), and we haven't seen him play yet.

 

I'm not non-chalantly tossing Buckner in and out of those scenarios. He's the main piece of them. But he is in those scenarios along with the other pieces we would have lost/gained. I'm not seeing a lot of talk about the 40M of capspace difference in those scenarios though. 40M for 4 years! This is %ton of money you can use in tons of ways to make your team better. This is in addition to having a young franchise QB. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

47 minutes ago, Superman said:

 

Why should Irsay be worried about having to move on from Ballard and Reich any time soon? They've done a good job, they appear to be the right kind of guys, they evidently have a great working relationship. Why would he be thinking that there's a need to find a different GM or coach any time soon?

 

Even if Wentz busts, that in itself isn't reason enough to get rid of either guy. 

That in itself is not a reason to get rid off either guy. But it sure as hell would have to give you pause about extending them for 5 years into the future. IMO how the Wentz thing goes is incredibly important for this team and for both Ballard and Reich. Irsay pretty much treated it as if it was a success already. This is the type of extension you give to your decision makers after your team has hit on a QB and is set for success for the next decade... or at the very least for the duration of that extension. And maybe we are... who knows. Or maybe we are not. That's the point. We have no surefire long-term solution at the most important positions in football... QB, LT, DE, WR, CB. Irsay treated them like we have a lot of those solutions locked in. 

 

Quote

It seems like some people are expecting Ballard and/or Reich to fail, and soon. Like you're just waiting for them to go bad. That's weird to me. Neither guy is perfect, but they've had a rough series of events to start their run together, and still have gotten pretty good results through three years. 

I'm not expecting them to fail. I think they've done relatively good job, too... BUT with Wentz failure is not some distant unlikely possibility. We will know relatively soon whether Wentz is a hit or a miss, IMO. He's not a rookie. He's a 28 year old QB with 5 years experience in the league... a player we paid a 1st and 3d and 25M contract a year for the next 4 years. He needs to produce. NOW! And maybe he will... but what happens if he doesn't? How many GMs get the chance to take a second shot at a franchise QB after the 1st one flames out? 

 

Quote

If this starts falling apart, Irsay has shown he's willing to move on. Doesn't matter how many years are left on their contracts. And it has no salary cap implications, so even if Irsay is eating guaranteed money to guys that don't work for him anymore, I don't really care. 

Same. I don't care about Irsay's money. But I care about what the way he's spending his money means for the team. IMO it means both Ballard and Reich probably survive Wentz flaming out. There seems to be a very VERY long leash on both of them. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Stitches, you make some good points. 65 million extra without Buckner and Wentz. It all comes down to how good Herbert will be. He is getting hyped up right now. Who knows what will happen with him.

 

Somebody said before how GMS don’t have the luxury of hindsight. It’s so true. Sometimes you have to hedge your bets. Ballard in my opinion does that well. 

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

    • Right. But we also are expected to draft a corner, So the fact that DeJean can play either position, makes me think Ballard could have his eye on him.
    • As a Ballard type player, he seems to fit the bill.  Big 10. Excels at zone coverage. Elite athlete. Special Teams standout, Good tackler. etc. Colts may be able to trade back, and still land DeJean   Considered one of the Safest picks. Seven 2024 NFL Draft Prospects Who Are Safest Bets to Succeed at Next Level https://bleacherreport.com/articles/10113875-7-2024-nfl-draft-prospects-who-are-safest-bets-to-succeed-at-next-level   DB Cooper DeJean, Iowa   A fractured fibula during a November practice tempered any excitement regarding Cooper DeJean's draft status. So he's not been in the same conversations as the class' top defensive backs, specifically Toledo's Quinyon Mitchell and Alabama's Terrion Arnold. DeJean's profile projects just as well or better than the aforementioned cornerbacks.   Three specific attributes set DeJean's floor higher than anyone else among the back end.   First, the reigning Big Ten Defensive Back of the Year presents the positional flexibility and traits to start at cornerback or safety at the professional level, with B/R's Cory Giddings highlighting his coverage skills:   "DeJean excels in zone coverage, but he's versatile enough to play man as well. He shows a smooth backpedal and the ability to keep his leverage and quick footwork with few wasted steps. Although he transitions well, there are times where DeJean hops into his breaks; allowing a step of separation.   "When in zone, DeJean does a great job of reading and reacting to the quarterback's eyes. Pairing that skill set with his route recognition, he often puts himself in good position with leverage and positioning.   "While working downfield, DeJean has the strength necessary to hand-fight with tight ends and bigger receivers, as well as the speed necessary to carry twitchier receivers downfield. He also does a very good job of locating the ball and playing through the catch point."   Second, the high school track standout is an elite athlete who captured Iowa state titles in the long jump and 100-meter dash. Many expected him to blow the doors off Lucas Oil Stadium. Unfortunately, he wasn't ready to test in Indianapolis after being cleared a few weeks earlier.   "His acceleration is incredibly fluid and super powerful," NFL combine trainer Jordan Luallen told The Athletic's Bruce Feldman last summer. "He's the best athlete I've seen in person, pound for pound."   Finally, DeJean adds significant value as an elite collegiate returner. Big Ten coaches also awarded him Return Specialist of the Year this past season. DeJean averaged 13.1 yards per punt return over the last two seasons. A top-notch contributor anywhere along the defensive backfield and on special teams will provide excellent value in the NFL.   Potential Landing Spots: Indianapolis Colts, Philadelphia Eagles    
    • He could, but I think he's way more athletic than people give him credit for and projects way better as CB. Definitely could be a good safety, but I think if we drafted him, he fits well as a boundary corner for us.
    • I think we need to sign a vet, but Jackson isn't it. Age and his dirty playstyle are non-starters for me.   JuJu definitely flashed pretty well in the limited games we saw him in. If he's healthy, I think he'll be a solid CB for us.   He dominated every WR at the Senior Bowl, specifically in drills that heavily skew towards WRs, often using techniques he was just really learning in the pro-bowl practices (mainly press man techniques). He dominated in the MAC and dominated at Senior Bowl practices, and with his athletic traits, he projects very well to the NFL. I see him being a dominant CB in the near future. I don't necessarily want to take a CB at 15, but I wouldn't be mad if we took Mitchell.
    • There are quite a few articles on the internet that say he may transition to safety in the NFL. Interesting reads
  • Members

×
×
  • Create New...