Jump to content
Indianapolis Colts
Indianapolis Colts Fan Forum

Grigson vs Ballard


MPStack
 Share

Recommended Posts

Just now, James said:

 


I mean Ballard is far from the perfect GM, but wouldn’t use record without context like he does.

Luck is a huge factor. Huge. The biggest. Luck with the higher amount of pro bowlers / All Pros Ballard has drafted likely would have done better than what the Grigson era though. Unfortunately we won’t know.

 


After 5 years who was more successful? 
 

Grigs or Ballard? 
 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, MPStack said:


After 5 years who was more successful? 
 

Grigs or Ballard? 
 

 


I just alluded to the fact that Grigson was more successful record wise because he had Luck. Having trouble reading? 
I specifically mentioned context while you try to spin it by ignoring context.

I’m simply saying Ballard has flaws, but wish we could have his 5 years with Luck on his Colts teams that I find better player for player than Grigson’s. More Pro Bowlers and All Pros. But again, Grigs had Luck. 

 

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, IndySouthsider said:

Successful in single handily killing Andrew’s career? 

Exactly there is a difference between being successful and being apart of a successful organization.  I mean by that logic Trent Richardson was more successful than Jonathan Taylor because Trent was on teams who went further in the playoffs.

  • Like 4
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 minutes ago, IndySouthsider said:

Successful in single handily killing Andrew’s career? 

Do you think Grigs wanted, ignored and neglected this on purpose? Did Grigs not attempt, but failed to fix the O-Line?

 

Remember, he inherited AC, and later drafted Kelly. We get the FAs duds. But seriously? 

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, MPStack said:

Do you think Grigs wanted, ignored and neglected this on purpose? Did Grigs not attempt, but failed to fix the O-Line?

 

Remember, he inherited AC, and later drafted Kelly. We get the FAs duds. But seriously? 

Yea seriously.  Wonder why be can't get a GM interview? There are so many openings. I would not have fires Caldwell. His first act was a huge mistake.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, IndySouthsider said:

Yea seriously.  Wonder why be can't get a GM interview? There are so many openings. I would not have fires Caldwell. His first act was a huge mistake.


GMs don’t typically get a 2nd stint as GM. It’s one and done. I think the last was the former Giants GM and Polian. That’s about it. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, MPStack said:

Do you think Grigs wanted, ignored and neglected this on purpose? Did Grigs not attempt, but failed to fix the O-Line?

 

Remember, he inherited AC, and later drafted Kelly. We get the FAs duds. But seriously? 

Totally ignored the OL problem that led to Lucks demise. Ballard inherited his problem and 1 year later had to take a team that had one of the best QBs in the league in his prime to starting from scratch with the QB situation.

MP, I respect you as a poster and am surprised at your take on this. Grigson was terrible and has not even had a smell of another GM job since he was fired. Ballard is one of the better respected GMs in the league.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, MPStack said:

Do you think Grigs wanted, ignored and neglected this on purpose? Did Grigs not attempt, but failed to fix the O-Line?

 

Remember, he inherited AC, and later drafted Kelly. We get the FAs duds. But seriously? 

He also got us #1 RB in Trent Richardson I wonder where is that guy? Also that German #1 rounder DE what was his name? Sorry can't recall oh yeah Werner.

 

I know we can say the same about Ballard and Campbell where we pass on AJ Brown and DK Metcalf and got Benagou. 

 

However I still think the most important position QB unfortunately each off season there is not really good replacements.

 

The year he had decent QB like Luck and Rivers they made to playoffs he had 2 QB retired on him. 

 

Last year after Rivers what really options we had I mean colts tried for Stafford but that was too much, then it was only Wentz or Darnold or Cam Newton or keep Jacoby so I think he went to best solution with the input of Reich. 

 

Going forward next year also it does not look good for Ballard to fill up QB position I mean with who? 

 

You have to admit that aside from QB position this team does have better pieces then Grigson team unless you are really a grigson fan haha

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

25 minutes ago, hoosierhawk said:

MP, I respect you as a poster and am surprised at your take on this. Grigson was terrible and has not even had a smell of another GM job since he was fired. Ballard is one of the better respected GMs in the league.


I like to clarify a few things. Never have I said, that Grigson was a great GM. And I think I clearly stated that almost no GMs get a 2nd shot at being one. E. Accorsi and Polian, I’m almost positive are the only ones.

 

In regards to Ballard, never said he’s a bad GM, just not God like or top 10. I support him, but am critical at the same time.

 

Anyone, who’s thinks Grigson didn’t try to protect Luck and or just didn’t care about the O-Line are most likely posters who reply with short one word sentences. 


As far as Grigson and Ballard, their philosophy, approach into building a team was and is different. Both have done good and bad things. 
 

After 5 years, all I’m saying is Grigson was more successful. It doesn’t mean I think Grigson was a good GM. 
 

Ballard, gets cut slack, because of the QB revolving door, and somewhere down the line, that has to be laid to rest. 
 

 

  • Like 3
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, IndySouthsider said:

Successful in single handily killing Andrew’s career? 

 

Lol, that narrative is getting old, laughable, and most of all WRONG.

 

Maybe holding on to the ball too long and taking on safeties and linebackers head on and not learning to slide were reasons for getting injured.

 

Remember that Highlight of him throwing a pick at Stanford and then leveling the cornerback that intercepted his pass? That's the way he played, fearless. Everyone said he played with a linebackers mentality. Problem was his size wasn't no longer a advantage in NFL as it was in highschool & college. NFL linebackers are big too, and strong and tough..and tougher than high schoolers & college players and repeated encounters with them get you hurt. 

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, MPStack said:

Do you think Grigs wanted, ignored and neglected this on purpose? Did Grigs not attempt, but failed to fix the O-Line?

 

Remember, he inherited AC, and later drafted Kelly. We get the FAs duds. But seriously? 


Prob wasting your time. People just want to hate the guy. He clearly made attempts to fix the OL, but he didn’t get it right…in part because talent evaluation wasn’t that good and really bad luck with OL injuries. He also never had a chance to draft a Q level player, so I won’t hold that against him.

 

However, he did draft Kelly. And he, like Ballard, inherited AC. But look at what happened at LT the first year Ballard didn’t have AC. Also, the supposed elite OL surrendered 6 sacks in a win or go home game against the team picking #1 overall. 

 

I doubt many people think Grigson was a good, let alone great GM (except maybe Dakich who knows), but he had more success at this point in their tenures.

 

And yes he had Luck, but I ask what has Ballard accomplished without Luck? One playoff berth in 3 seasons and a WC loss. A 27-22 record is solid, but it’s not great.
 

And it’s not like Luck didn’t require using a #1 overall pick…the single most valuable asset a GM could ever have. I always mention this, but what if Ballard doesn’t inherit Luck. What happens in that 2018 draft if Ballard has to address QB?

 

You don’t have to like the guy, but Grigson was nowhere near the disaster he is made out to be. That’s an emotional mindset and not a logical one. Those 2013-14 teams beat great teams…and did so as a team. They also won playoff games with their defense. 

  • Like 3
  • Thanks 1
  • Confused 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

38 minutes ago, LJpalmbeacher2 said:

 

Lol, that narrative is getting old, laughable, and most of all WRONG.

 

Maybe holding on to the ball too long and taking on safeties and linebackers head on and not learning to slide were reasons for getting injured.

 

Remember that Highlight of him throwing a pick at Stanford and then leveling the cornerback that intercepted his pass? That's the way he played, fearless. Everyone said he played with a linebackers mentality. Problem was his size wasn't no longer a advantage in NFL as it was in highschool & college. NFL linebackers are big too, and strong and tough..and tougher than high schoolers & college players and repeated encounters with them get you hurt. 

 

Maybe get sliding lessons instead of snow board lessons?

 

2 hours ago, MPStack said:


I like to clarify a few things. Never have I said, that Grigson was a great GM. And I think I clearly stated that almost no GMs get a 2nd shot at being one. E. Accorsi and Polian, I’m almost positive are the only ones.

 

In regards to Ballard, never said he’s a bad GM, just not God like or top 10. I support him, but am critical at the same time.

 

Anyone, who’s thinks Grigson didn’t try to protect Luck and or just didn’t care about the O-Line are most likely posters who reply with short one word sentences. 


As far as Grigson and Ballard, their philosophy, approach into building a team was and is different. Both have done good and bad things. 
 

After 5 years, all I’m saying is Grigson was more successful. It doesn’t mean I think Grigson was a good GM. 
 

Ballard, gets cut slack, because of the QB revolving door, and somewhere down the line, that has to be laid to rest. 
 

 

Ballard
41-40 50.6%

 

Grigson
49-31 61.3%

 

the truth is more often than not, somewhere in between.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

51 minutes ago, shasta519 said:


Prob wasting your time. People just want to hate the guy. He clearly made attempts to fix the OL, but he didn’t get it right…in part because talent evaluation wasn’t that good and really bad luck with OL injuries. He also never had a chance to draft a Q level player, so I won’t hold that against him.

 

However, he did draft Kelly. And he, like Ballard, inherited AC. But look at what happened at LT the first year Ballard didn’t have AC. Also, the supposed elite OL surrendered 6 sacks in a win or go home game against the team picking #1 overall. 

 

I doubt many people think Grigson was a good, let alone great GM (except maybe Dakich who knows), but he had more success at this point in their tenures.

 

And yes he had Luck, but I ask what has Ballard accomplished without Luck? One playoff berth in 3 seasons and a WC loss. A 27-22 record is solid, but it’s not great.
 

And it’s not like Luck didn’t require using a #1 overall pick…the single most valuable asset a GM could ever have. I always mention this, but what if Ballard doesn’t inherit Luck. What happens in that 2018 draft if Ballard has to address QB?

 

You don’t have to like the guy, but Grigson was nowhere near the disaster he is made out to be. That’s an emotional mindset and not a logical one. Those 2013-14 teams beat great teams…and did so as a team. They also won playoff games with their defense. 

The 2013 Colts won a playoff game 45-44 and lost 43-22.  Tell me more about how they won with their defense that year in the playoffs?  They gave up 87 points in two games.

 

2014 you have an argument for but they still gave up 45 points in the AFCCG and caught a major break with an injured Manning that was entering the end of his career.  Still they do hold him to 13 points and the Bengals to 10 the week before.

 

When I look back at Grigson’s career he had a pretty good first draft class and won with Luck and Polian’s holdovers like Wayne, Mathis, Freeney, AC, AV, McAfee, and Bethea.  He also has a good signing in Redding and a good trade for Davis but as those players aged and it came time to replace them he couldn’t.  Outside of his first draft class, which again I concede was good, the rest were a disaster until he got Kelly but even that class besides Kelly was not good.  His free agents and trades were not great, a first for Trent Richardson, trading Jerry Hughes for Kelvin Sheppard.  Signing Landry, Jones, Knicks, DHB, Francois, Andre Johnson, Satelle.  None of that was good.  
 

He just wasn’t good.  He had a true franchise QB who covered up A LOT of holes with hall of farmers in AV, Mathis, and Wayne, none of which he brought in.  He also had a really good WR in Hilton which might have been his best find in his time here.  That’s why they won.

 

Yet he failed to protect his most important peace and got him so beat up he ultimately retired very young.  Yes he tried to address the line but again he was awful at it until he got to Kelly which was too late.  In the NFL you don’t get credit for trying to address a problem if it fails.  Just like Ballard won’t get credit for trying to address the QB spot if he doesn’t get it right.  
 

Yeah his team might have won more games than Ballard’s have right now but like I said one having Andrew Luck the whole time and the other having to play patch work at QB because Luck retired matters and can’t just be discarded when you talk about that.

 

Honestly ask your self would Ballard’s teams have won more games had he had a healthy Andrew Luck the whole time he was GM?  Then ask yourself would Grigson’s teams have won as much if they had Tolizen, Jacoby, Hoyer, an end of his career Rivers, and Wentz starting for them?

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think the argument proves just how vital an Elite QB in this league is to winning.

 

Everyone with a brain knows Grigson was terrible.  Andrew Luck put the team on his back like hercules and carried them including Grigs to a better winning % than Ballard as well as multiple playoff births, playoff wins and a trip to the AFCG.

 

Ballard has easily built the all around better roster, but has failed to find the long term solid answer at the most critical position on the team., and before anyone says oh Grigs drafted Luck..please he fell right in his lap.

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, Nesjan3 said:

I think the argument proves just how vital an Elite QB in this league is to winning.

 

Everyone with a brain knows Grigson was terrible.  Andrew Luck put the team on his back like hercules and carried them including Grigs to a better winning % than Ballard as well as multiple playoff births, playoff wins and a trip to the AFCG.

 

Ballard has easily built the all around better roster, but has failed to find the long term solid answer at the most critical position on the team., and before anyone says oh Grigs drafted Luck..please he fell right in his lap.

He did but If I recall Irsay made it clear he was making that decision along with what to do with Manning not the new GM.  Grigson best picks were Hilton and Kelly.  After that it’s probably Mewhort, who wasn’t a bad player, but if he’s your third best draft pick over five years that’s not good.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, LJpalmbeacher2 said:

 

Lol, that narrative is getting old, laughable, and most of all WRONG.

 

Maybe holding on to the ball too long and taking on safeties and linebackers head on and not learning to slide were reasons for getting injured.

 

Remember that Highlight of him throwing a pick at Stanford and then leveling the cornerback that intercepted his pass? That's the way he played, fearless. Everyone said he played with a linebackers mentality. Problem was his size wasn't no longer a advantage in NFL as it was in highschool & college. NFL linebackers are big too, and strong and tough..and tougher than high schoolers & college players and repeated encounters with them get you hurt. 

I think it was his second year against Cincy, Luck scrambled out of the pocket and Vontez Burfict was coming up to make the tackle...and Luck put the helmet down to pick up the extra yard. Surprisingly Luck knocked Burfict out of the game, but Burfict was a player known for laying people out(legally or not). 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 hours ago, MPStack said:


After 5 years who was more successful? 
 

Grigs or Ballard? 
 

 

Ballard: in terms of talent and depth at every position EXCEPT QB. Ballard easily takes the cake.

 

Grigson: Had Luck. This fact can’t be understated. However, Grigson had a better record W/L wise. Mostly due to the success of Luck under center. Grigson had more draft busts than any other GM during that time frame too. He also screwed the cap up with greatly overpaying beyond their Prime FAs. 
 

If Luck would have just stayed once more year, or even 2, no doubt with the talent and depth and coaching of this era, we at least make a Super Bowl run. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Its been a long time since I've thought about RG, but here's what stands out. 

 

RG:  Inherited a franchise QB with the first pick in the draft, and inherited terrible salary cap problems.  Immediately built a winning team by signing mid level free agents and hiring a very good offensive coordinator.  Couldn't sustain it due to the inability to find a successor OC and because of wasting drat picks, notably low first round draft capital....Post Pick 23 on TRich, Werner, and Dorsett.  His mid level free agent signings were generally productive, with some misses like AJohnson and Trent Cole at the end, but also did not create dead salary cap.    When the franchise QB was struggling with injuries, RG signed a backup QB in Matt Hasselbeck who could win a few games.  The Colts never had a record worse than 500.  Personality, he generally wore a tie and spoke reservedly like an executive typically would.

 

CB: Inherited a franchise QB and lots of salary cap room.  Signed mid level free agents like John Simon, Jabaal Sheard, and Margus Hunt with productive results.  Crapped the bed with the Johnathan Hankins signing and the Devin Funchess signings.  Traded a 1st round pick for Carson Wentz.  Traded down from 26 in 2019, passing on EDGE Montez Sweat to take RYS.  in 2019, CB passed on Sweat, Deebo, DK, and McLauren to take RYS, Parris, and Benogu.  Has yet to figure out the QB position and has never found a good backup QB.  Do the Wentz trades and 2019 bad decisions equal Grigson's low first round whiffs?  Yet to be seen.  Will CB be able to replace the departures of his mid level free agent signings like Sheard, Autry, and Houston with drafted players.  Yet to be seen.  Does the one year signing Eric Fisher and TY Hilton put CB on the same level as the one year RG signings of AJohnson and Trent Cole?  Does paying JB $25 million over two years equate to ALL of the bad signings RG did?  Personality, Never wears a tie.  Comes off not as an Executive, but as one of the boys you might want to have a beer with.... a Real Working Class Hero. 

   

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 hours ago, MPStack said:


After 5 years who was more successful? 
 

Grigs or Ballard? 
 

 

Definitely Ballard.  Wins and losses aside, Ballard's roster is healthier and better balanced than anything Grigson put together.  The issue for Ballard is that his rebuilding plan counted on having Luck.  Our results every year since are the result of not havinng the elite QB we were counting on.

 

Grigson had a perfect situation fall into his lap and managed to  screw it up.  Ballard took over a franchise on the point of disaster and managed to restore the roster to a healthier state, but the biggest damage Grigson did in wasting Luck has proven intractable, which is quite frankly understandable given how rare the asset is that Grigson wasted.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Griggles had a superstar QB. Ballard doesn't. 

 

So is an elite QB w/ an average team around him more important than a well rounded roster with an average QB? 

 

Bengals went from zero to heroes once Burrow got rolling. 

Then again, the Bears also went to a SB 

 

unbalance-weighing-options.gif

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

A few things Grigson inherited did help him.

 

First Andrew Luck. Second, Adam Vinatieri, Reggie Wayne and Robert Mathis at least till 2014. Pat McAfee as well for the most part along with Anthony Castanzo. All of these other than Luck were Polian picks. Luck was an obvious pick, from an Irsay and Grigson point of view. Luck sold out to beat the Broncos in 2015, taking hit after hit that lacerated his kidneys, but stood in there and took a beating.

 

Grigson's best pick was what Bruce Arians clamored for, the move up to get T.Y. Hilton. His next best draft pick was while he was on his way out, Ryan Kelly. No other draft pick is on this team, right, other than Hilton and Kelly? It is not like Grigson drafted pass rushers any better than Ballard or secondary better than Ballard. We got Vontae Davis in a trade, our best CB then. 

 

Let us talk positions (including draft picks and free agency as much as I can remember)

1. QB for Grigson and Ballard - Grigson had Luck

2. Skill positions picked/acquired by Grigson and Ballard (let us stick with first 4 rounds for quality):

   T.Y.Hilton, Fleener, Dwayne Allen, Moncrief, Dorsett, DHB, Nicks, Donnie Avery, Andre Johnson, Frank Gore, TRich

   vs Marlon Mack, Michael Pittman, JT, Hines, Campbell I would lean towards Ballard for the return on investment though TY in his prime might have been better than Pittman as a playmaker, just guessing here

3. OL - Ryan Kelly, Joe Haeg, Mewhort, that Thomas guy from Patriots, 

vs Nelson, Braden Smith, Glowinski, Pryor, Reed - hands down Ballard

4. DL - Cory Redding, Werner, Henry Anderson, Hassan Ridgeway, Montori Hughes, Terrell Basham, Lawrence Guy

vs Lewis, Turay, Banogu, Buckner, Autry, Houston, Daye, Payo - this is actually a push for me because Grigson made decent acquistions and some like Ridgeway, Basham, Guy are still in the league if I am not mistaken

5. Secondary - Vontae Davis, John Boyett, D'Joun Smith, T.J.Green, Darius Butler

vs Malik Hooker, Quincy Wilson, Rock Ya Sin, Julian Blackmon, Kenny Moore - This is also a push for me given how Hooker and Wilson busted and how well Davis and Butler turned out for us

6. LBs - We never had anyone like Darius Leonard, we might get Anthony Walker back, I am thinking, Okereke is coming along well and it is harder to compare because we play 4-2-5 and Pagano played a 3-4, thus comparing quality to quantity but I would lean Ballard here too.

7. Special teams - Overall, based on rankings of Colts across years, we have been a Top 12 unit under Ballard, better than Grigson - leaning Ballard here

 

However, the AFC South is also much better since 2017, another thing to consider as well. Overall, I would say 60-40 FOR BALLARD docking Ballard mainly because of his misses on the pass rush front with early picks and positives on Grigson's side for playing FA/trades a little more even though he swung and missed on guys like Harold Landry, Andrew Thomas, TRich etc. while landing a few hits.

 

 

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, shakedownstreet said:

 

CAGEMATCH! Tonight at 8 on FOX

I’ll take Ballard

28 minutes ago, lollygagger8 said:

Griggles had a superstar QB. Ballard doesn't. 

 

So is an elite QB w/ an average team around him more important than a well rounded roster with an average QB? 

 

Bengals went from zero to heroes once Burrow got rolling. 

Then again, the Bears also went to a SB 

 

unbalance-weighing-options.gif

 

I think we’re gonna be like the chiefs leading up to Mahomes . solidly built, just need a QB worth a damn and then be nearly unbeatable.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Easily Ballard over Grigson but it’s fair to say Ballard hasn’t impressed much either. Yeah the roster is in better shape but we haven’t done anything worth writing home about with Ballard.  Just kinda average. 
 

Before people start quoting me to say Luck retired, Yup he sure did. It’s Ballard’s job to replace him tho.  Every leader faces their own set of bad circumstances they must work through. Ballard said it’s not about one player(Luck), well here we are with a decent starting QB(Wentz isn’t terrible but he obviously isn’t great) and not winning anything.
 

Let’s not forget the McDaniels fiasco that was 100% Ballard’s baby.  Both the head coach and QB quit on Ballards watch, there has to be some sort of accountability with that.  Neither are technically his fault but like every good leader should know, it’s definitely his responsibility. Also the insane amount of draft capital used on a pedestrian defensive line.  Maybe it does turn into something or maybe it just flashes good play like it has for the last 5yrs. Both fair assumptions. All I know is 2 first, 4 seconds, a third and fourth should net way better results than waiting for year 6 or 7 to POSSIBLY get delayed gratification.  
 

Ballard isn’t anywhere close to a bad GM but let’s be real, he isn’t a great one either. Could be worse but it should be better. He fits perfectly with the identity of this team which is slightly above average but needs everything to go right to have success.  Probably will win more than we lose except in January. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ryan might have better record but even his own players were pleased he was fired. I wonder how many players actually hate Ballard he does not seem like a guy who would be hated. I remember when there was an article that earlier this year he waived a kicker in preseason so he can get the job somewhere else.

 

https://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2017/01/21/pat-mcafee-celebrates-the-firing-of-ryan-grigson-apparently/

 

https://www.stampedeblue.com/2017/1/21/14348300/reggie-wayne-opens-up-on-ryan-grigson-says-it-was-about-time-grigson-was-fired-colts

 

Maybe we might such topic after CB is fired

Link to comment
Share on other sites

26 minutes ago, chad72 said:

A few things Grigson inherited did help him.

 

First Andrew Luck. Second, Adam Vinatieri, Reggie Wayne and Robert Mathis at least till 2014. Pat McAfee as well for the most part along with Anthony Castanzo. All of these other than Luck were Polian picks. Luck was an obvious pick, from an Irsay and Grigson point of view. Luck sold out to beat the Broncos in 2015, taking hit after hit that lacerated his kidneys, but stood in there and took a beating.

 

Grigson's best pick was what Bruce Arians clamored for, the move up to get T.Y. Hilton. His next best draft pick was while he was on his way out, Ryan Kelly. No other draft pick is on this team, right, other than Hilton and Kelly? It is not like Grigson drafted pass rushers any better than Ballard or secondary better than Ballard. We got Vontae Davis in a trade, our best CB then. 

 

Let us talk positions (including draft picks and free agency as much as I can remember)

1. QB for Grigson and Ballard - Grigson had Luck

2. Skill positions picked/acquired by Grigson and Ballard (let us stick with first 4 rounds for quality):

   T.Y.Hilton, Fleener, Dwayne Allen, Moncrief, Dorsett, DHB, Nicks, Donnie Avery, Andre Johnson, Frank Gore, TRich

   vs Marlon Mack, Michael Pittman, JT, Hines, Campbell I would lean towards Ballard for the return on investment though TY in his prime might have been better than Pittman as a playmaker, just guessing here

3. OL - Ryan Kelly, Joe Haeg, Mewhort, that Thomas guy from Patriots, 

vs Nelson, Braden Smith, Glowinski, Pryor, Reed - hands down Ballard

4. DL - Cory Redding, Werner, Henry Anderson, Hassan Ridgeway, Montori Hughes, Terrell Basham, Lawrence Guy

vs Lewis, Turay, Banogu, Buckner, Autry, Houston, Daye, Payo - this is actually a push for me because Grigson made decent acquistions and some like Ridgeway, Basham, Guy are still in the league if I am not mistaken

5. Secondary - Vontae Davis, John Boyett, D'Joun Smith, T.J.Green, Darius Butler

vs Malik Hooker, Quincy Wilson, Rock Ya Sin, Julian Blackmon, Kenny Moore - This is also a push for me given how Hooker and Wilson busted and how well Davis and Butler turned out for us

6. LBs - We never had anyone like Darius Leonard, we might get Anthony Walker back, I am thinking, Okereke is coming along well and it is harder to compare because we play 4-2-5 and Pagano played a 3-4, thus comparing quality to quantity but I would lean Ballard here too.

7. Special teams - Overall, based on rankings of Colts across years, we have been a Top 12 unit under Ballard, better than Grigson - leaning Ballard here

 

However, the AFC South is also much better since 2017, another thing to consider as well. Overall, I would say 60-40 FOR BALLARD docking Ballard mainly because of his misses on the pass rush front with early picks and positives on Grigson's side for playing FA/trades a little more even though he swung and missed on guys like Harold Landry, Andrew Thomas, TRich etc. while landing a few hits.

 

 

Its ancient history, but Grigs added Ahmad Bradshaw and Vic Ballard at the skill positions.  Very good players cut short by injury.  Added Gosder Cherilous at RT, was was very good until injury.  Added S  Laron Landry and Corner Greg Toler who were very good compliments to Vontae and Antoine Bethea.  When healthy and motivated , VD, Toler, Bethea, and Landry was a very good secondary.  RG also signed Mike Adams for a year after Bethea was cut.  

 

Matt Hasselbeck > JB.

 

I would say that Grigs was hands down better at finding veteran FAs but poor at finding the young draft picks to replace them.  CB has done well with vet FA, with just as many misses as Grigs, but CB doesn't rely on them as much and relies more on draft picks so his overall body of work with FA is not as good.   Both are equally as good with managing the salary cap.  I can't think of any contracts that RG gave out that were similar to Leonard and Nelson (pending), but RG did not have the quality of player to hand out that kind of money.  Maybe AC, Mathis, and Reggie but those were not his picks.  TY was the one player deserving of that kind of contract.  One player for RG, two players (so far) for CB.  But, TY was a playmaking WR and the others lesser positions and easier positions to find.

 

When it comes to having successfully drafted the harder positions to find, RG and CB are about even.  Even finding a good RB and an X are easier positions than the LT and stud WR he might need to find.  

 

I'd say that with Luck being injured and a Pagano who was a poor in game HC, the fact that the team never went below 8-8 speaks pretty well for the overall roster RG had built.  Ballard's record has sort of reflected his QB talent.  Good with a healthy Luck and Rivers, bad with JB, and kinda meh with Wentz.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ryan Grigson was the worse, in so many ways. His 2012 draft is overrated as well. He inherited a WR1 and an elite Pass rusher and a star QB. He did make a nice trade for Vontae but then made one of the worse trades in history with T. Rich. 
 

I respect and appreciate all your guys opinions (honestly), it’s what makes this forum cool…but I can’t believe there are Colts fans who actually prefer Grigson to Ballard. 

11 minutes ago, DougDew said:

Its ancient history, but Grigs added Ahmad Bradshaw and Vic Ballard at the skill positions.  Very good players cut short by injury.  Added Gosder Cherilous at RT, was was very good until injury.  Added S  Laron Landry and Corner Greg Toler who were very good compliments to Vontae and Antoine Bethea.  When healthy and motivated , VD, Toler, Bethea, and Landry was a very good secondary.  RG also signed Mike Adams for a year after Bethea was cut.  

 

Matt Hasselbeck > JB.

 

I would say that Grigs was hands down better at finding veteran FAs but poor at finding the young draft picks to replace them.  CB has done well with vet FA, with just as many misses as Grigs, but CB doesn't rely on them as much and relies more on draft picks so his overall body of work with FA is not as good.   Both are equally as good with managing the salary cap.  I can't think of any contracts that RG gave out that were similar to Leonard and Nelson (pending), but RG did not have the quality of player to hand out that kind of money.  Maybe AC, Mathis, and Reggie but those were not his picks.  TY was the one player deserving of that kind of contract.  One player for RG, two players (so far) for CB.  But, TY was a playmaking WR and the others lesser positions and easier positions to find.

 

When it comes to having successfully drafted the harder positions to find, RG and CB are about even.  Even finding a good RB and an X are easier positions than the LT and stud WR he might need to find.  

 

I'd say that with Luck being injured and a Pagano who was a poor in game HC, the fact that the team never went below 8-8 speaks pretty well for the overall roster RG had built.  Ballard's record has sort of reflected his QB talent.  Good with a healthy Luck and Rivers, bad with JB, and kinda meh with Wentz.

Lol I stopped reading at Laron Landry. I had to 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

33 minutes ago, DougDew said:

Its ancient history, but Grigs added Ahmad Bradshaw and Vic Ballard at the skill positions.  Very good players cut short by injury.  Added Gosder Cherilous at RT, was was very good until injury.  Added S  Laron Landry and Corner Greg Toler who were very good compliments to Vontae and Antoine Bethea.  When healthy and motivated , VD, Toler, Bethea, and Landry was a very good secondary.  RG also signed Mike Adams for a year after Bethea was cut.  

 

Matt Hasselbeck > JB.

 

I would say that Grigs was hands down better at finding veteran FAs but poor at finding the young draft picks to replace them.  CB has done well with vet FA, with just as many misses as Grigs, but CB doesn't rely on them as much and relies more on draft picks so his overall body of work with FA is not as good.   Both are equally as good with managing the salary cap.  I can't think of any contracts that RG gave out that were similar to Leonard and Nelson (pending), but RG did not have the quality of player to hand out that kind of money.  Maybe AC, Mathis, and Reggie but those were not his picks.  TY was the one player deserving of that kind of contract.  One player for RG, two players (so far) for CB.  But, TY was a playmaking WR and the others lesser positions and easier positions to find.

 

When it comes to having successfully drafted the harder positions to find, RG and CB are about even.  Even finding a good RB and an X are easier positions than the LT and stud WR he might need to find.  

 

I'd say that with Luck being injured and a Pagano who was a poor in game HC, the fact that the team never went below 8-8 speaks pretty well for the overall roster RG had built.  Ballard's record has sort of reflected his QB talent.  Good with a healthy Luck and Rivers, bad with JB, and kinda meh with Wentz.

 

Landry was terrible. Bethea was not cut, he was not re-signed and Landry was supposed to be his replacement. Bethea did much better with the 49ers. That was one of the bad moves Grigson made with letting go of Bethea and signing Landry.

 

The rest - Toler, Adams, yes, they were good acquisitions. I agree.  Yes, that is why I favored Grigson on the FA/trades aspect because objectively looking at it, rather swing and miss than not swing at all. Ballard has been swinging though - getting Kenny Moore, Xavier Rhodes, Buckner etc. but like all teams, not just the Colts, the record sways with the play of the QB.

 

Without Luck for half a 2015 season, after he went down vs the Broncos with the record at 4-5 (we were 4-5 WITH LUCK), Grigson's roster finished 8-8 in 2015. His roster eroded once the former stalwarts like Reggie Wayne, Robert Mathis, Pat McAfee started wearing down and even with Luck for most of the games, the roster finished at .500 at 8-8 in 2016, that tells you that when we started relying more on Grigson's picks and acquistions as the years went on, the roster was not good enough. Other than beating the Broncos, the Colts roster under Grigson/Pagano did not have significant wins. When matched up against playoff teams, we came up short and a lot of times were blown out, unlike this current Colts who actually beat the Bills and Cardinals on the road and the Patriots at home. That also tells me we have a roster that can compete well if the QB doesn't go off the tracks.

 

The weird part is this year when we were 9-6 and expecting us to continue that level of play, we were looking at a seed as high as No.5 in the AFC, which would have still been possible if we had won just 1 game. Now, we have the Wentz debacle, and all these questions. We saw the highs of what the team could do with above average QB play, unfortunately the lows came at the worst moment, suggesting that the talent was always there to make the playoffs. TIMING IS EVERYTHING. 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Thread of the Week

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • I feel your frustrations bud. I want a young franchise QB I'm willing to give up a limb or family member. Haha Just kidding not the family member but the limb definitely. Well I will think about the family member. Haha I just don't see a franchise QB this draft. It looks worse than last seasons. If we were going to get one it should've been last year going after Big Mac Jones.  
    • Well in my NFL video games I use to make sure I had Eddie George and I would like the Colts to just shake a leg and see what Saints want for Michael Thomas. Haha
    • We already  know there are not going to be QB cut who are worth cutting Wentz and starting that will raise the ceiling of this team. My point is with this QB class flying under the radar it actually may be a good time to take one they like without giving up future picks. I wouldn’t take one that we aren’t sure about bur if they liked one enough might be worth it. In this scenerio Wentz would still be the starter. I am perfectly fine giving him another year.
    • Right. Omg do people forget how bad Peyton was his first year?  He strived and demanded better for himself and team.
    • May risk it?   May?    MAY?!?       He’s completed one year.   It wasn’t that bad. They’re not giving up on a HUGE investment after one year.   I think they traded two 1’s, a 4 and a 5.   Maybe more?   No team gives up all that to trade up for a quarterback and then gives up in one year.   It just wasn’t that bad.   Other rookies have been much worse.  And they hit more than one year.    Sorry, yours is a fans viewpoint, not one used by NFL types. 
  • Members

    • LJpalmbeacher2

      LJpalmbeacher2 3,071

      Senior Member
      Joined:
      Last active:
    • #12.

      #12. 1,610

      Senior Member
      Joined:
      Last active:
    • runthepost

      runthepost 1,183

      Senior Member
      Joined:
      Last active:
    • Colts.sb41

      Colts.sb41 65

      New Member
      Joined:
      Last active:
    • jchandler7

      jchandler7 232

      Member
      Joined:
      Last active:
    • IndySouthsider

      IndySouthsider 808

      Senior Member
      Joined:
      Last active:
    • Trace Pyott

      Trace Pyott 231

      Member
      Joined:
      Last active:
    • Maniac53

      Maniac53 9

      New Member
      Joined:
      Last active:
    • husker61

      husker61 35

      Senior Member
      Joined:
      Last active:
    • ar7

      ar7 468

      Member
      Joined:
      Last active:
×
×
  • Create New...