Jump to content
Indianapolis Colts
Indianapolis Colts Fan Forum

Ballard FA Grievances Thread (Merge)


Bert Johns
 Share

Recommended Posts

2 hours ago, ChuggaBeer said:

Or the FO doesn't value certain players the way fans do.   I am not positive but I think LT is already on the team.  Honey Badgers best position is what Kenny Moore plays and was graded lower than Kenny so he would have to play another position, which he is not as good at.  So how much of an upgrade will he really be?   Ballard has offers out for HB but probably not for the price he thinks he deserves at the slot CB  Probably a safety at a lower rate Because again he is good but not as good there. 

 

Landry wants #1 receiver money and is not a #1 receiver.  He wouldn't even be the #1 receiver on the Colts.   So do you pay a #2 receiver WR1 money?  I wouldn't.  He's not that good And a reason he's still available and just fired his agent. LOL 

 

Vet WR.   Does everyone want one because of leadership?  If so sign TY. and don't forget we now have Reggie who will fill a big part of the leadership and mentor roles.

 

The few million you talk about is fine IF you are getting a lot more out of a player than what you already have.  If not. It's wasting money.

 

I think we have WR's already on this team that will elevate   Plus I think they will add in the draft.  Matt Ryan alone will make the receivers better 

 

Who else?     

 

Price vs value.   Same as shopping for anything. 

 

 

 

Your scnarios are for only for RIGHT NOW, I think most on here complaining/questioning Ballard's reluctance to spend are referring to his record of being thrifty for 6 seasons. 

 

Whether someone calls it being smart with your money or being cheap the reality is the same....and that's that this team is lacking in playmakers and has needs in the premium positions and the .500 record and zero division titles/ disappointing playoff appearances show it.

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

29 minutes ago, LJpalmbeacher2 said:

 

Your scnarios are for only for RIGHT NOW, I think most on here complaining/questioning Ballard's reluctance to spend are referring to his record of being thrifty for 6 seasons. 

 

Whether someone calls it being smart with your money or being cheap the reality is the same....and that's that this team is lacking in playmakers and has needs in the premium positions and the .500 record and zero division titles/ disappointing playoff appearances show it.


It’s Andrew’s fault 

  • Haha 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, cdgacoltsfan said:

CB is a fantastic GM!!! He's been at the helm only 5 + years and the Colts have already amassed 0 divisional titles!! (Although be it we are in the tough AFC South)


We’re lucky to have him. Patience! 

  • Haha 2
  • Sad 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, ChuggaBeer said:

Or the FO doesn't value certain players the way fans do.   I am not positive but I think LT is already on the team.  Honey Badgers best position is what Kenny Moore plays and was graded lower than Kenny so he would have to play another position, which he is not as good at.  So how much of an upgrade will he really be?   Ballard has offers out for HB but probably not for the price he thinks he deserves at the slot CB  Probably a safety at a lower rate Because again he is good but not as good there. 

 

Landry wants #1 receiver money and is not a #1 receiver.  He wouldn't even be the #1 receiver on the Colts.   So do you pay a #2 receiver WR1 money?  I wouldn't.  He's not that good And a reason he's still available and just fired his agent. LOL 

 

Vet WR.   Does everyone want one because of leadership?  If so sign TY. and don't forget we now have Reggie who will fill a big part of the leadership and mentor roles.

 

The few million you talk about is fine IF you are getting a lot more out of a player than what you already have.  If not. It's wasting money.

 

I think we have WR's already on this team that will elevate   Plus I think they will add in the draft.  Matt Ryan alone will make the receivers better 

 

Who else?     

 

Price vs value.   Same as shopping for anything. 

 

Judy Garland Dorothy GIF

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Apr 8, 2022, 11:51 AM ET

MATT RYANQB, INDIANAPOLIS COLTS

The Athletic's Mike Sando reports an NFL executive said "age has caught up" with Matt Ryan. 

“I had him with a big decline last year," the league exec said. "Matt has had a phenomenal career, a great quarterback, but it wasn’t like he was super big athletic or had a super strong arm. I see the skills declining a little bit quicker for him as a result. I think they could be looking at another quarterback in a year, and if they don’t win, look out for Irsay.” The Colts in March acquired Ryan for the low price of a third-round draft pick after Carson Wentz's 2021 late-season meltdown that left the team out of the postseason. In a terrible Atlanta offense last season, Ryan posted the third lowest adjusted yards per attempt (6.8) of his career along with his second-worst touchdown rate (3.6 percent). Ryan finished the year 23rd in adjusted expected points added per drop back, behind Wentz. In Indianapolis, Ryan will be charged with taking care of the football and operating an offense centered around Jonathan Taylor and the run game. Any decline he's experienced might not matter if Ryan, 36, isn't asked to do a whole lot in 2022. 

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 4/8/2022 at 3:57 PM, throwing BBZ said:

 

  PFF, for what it's worth graded Mathieu 67
 Stephon Gilmore 77
  So if Ballard decides to offer one a deal... say $12M
   which one would you folks want?
   TM does have a history of always being available.

    Gilmore less so.
     I would go for Gilmore.

I’m probably the minority here but I say neither unless it’s below market value.  Both are declining and I believe Gilmore has become injury prone. Honey Badger at 6m a year and other incentives for 3yrs with an out after each season would be ok. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

you guys need to stop bashing ballard, his cheap delayed gratification method will get the colts the number one pick in the draft in a year or two, he is going all in for a number one pick. remember how he loves draft picks.

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 4/8/2022 at 7:04 PM, cdgacoltsfan said:

CB is a fantastic GM!!! He's been at the helm only 5 + years and the Colts have already amassed 0 divisional titles!! (Although be it we are in the tough AFC South)

Hey Grigson,   you traded for Trent Richardson 

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 4/8/2022 at 9:31 PM, Indeee said:

Apr 8, 2022, 11:51 AM ET

MATT RYANQB, INDIANAPOLIS COLTS

The Athletic's Mike Sando reports an NFL executive said "age has caught up" with Matt Ryan. 

“I had him with a big decline last year," the league exec said. "Matt has had a phenomenal career, a great quarterback, but it wasn’t like he was super big athletic or had a super strong arm. I see the skills declining a little bit quicker for him as a result. I think they could be looking at another quarterback in a year, and if they don’t win, look out for Irsay.” The Colts in March acquired Ryan for the low price of a third-round draft pick after Carson Wentz's 2021 late-season meltdown that left the team out of the postseason. In a terrible Atlanta offense last season, Ryan posted the third lowest adjusted yards per attempt (6.8) of his career along with his second-worst touchdown rate (3.6 percent). Ryan finished the year 23rd in adjusted expected points added per drop back, behind Wentz. In Indianapolis, Ryan will be charged with taking care of the football and operating an offense centered around Jonathan Taylor and the run game. Any decline he's experienced might not matter if Ryan, 36, isn't asked to do a whole lot in 2022. 

I hope Ryan is great in Indy, but I do not agree with the people who think it's a slam dunk that he's successful here, especially with new, unproven offensive line starters and a lack of depth on the line.  

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, cdgacoltsfan said:

..or trade for Tolzein ...or Brissett and have them as your starting QBs....ha

Grigson traded for Tolzien, nice try. Tolzien came in, in 2016. Ballard had nothing to do with acquiring Tolzien. He only kept him in 2017 because Luck was injured.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

28 minutes ago, 2006Coltsbestever said:

Grigson traded for Tolzien, nice try. Tolzien came in, in 2016. Ballard had nothing to do with acquiring Tolzien. He only kept him in 2017 because Luck was injured.

Grigson...2 division titles ..3 playoff wins.

Ballard.....hmmm...0 division titles...oops..1 playoff win ..5 years

 

 

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, cdgacoltsfan said:

Grigson...2 division titles ..3 playoff wins.

Ballard.....hmmm...0 division titles...oops..1 playoff win ..5 years

 

 

 

Grigson had Luck for 5 years healthy, Ballard had Luck 1 year and when we had Luck we went 10-6 and beat the Division Champion Texans easily on their home turf in 2018. Hell If I had Andrew Luck for 5 years I could win 50 games The Simpsons GIF by KiwiGo (KGO)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Let’s get one thing straight. He might not have been a good GM, Grigson did NOT ruin Luck’s career. His contribution was no larger than anybody else. 
 

And blaming it on Grigson is just irrational. 

 

Luck suffered three main injuries during his time:
 

1. Torn labrum on a sack against TEN in early 2015. (OL’s fault)

 

2. Lacerated kidney and pulled abdomen muscles. Happened during a scramble against DEN where Luck had a clean pocket but took off running (like he often did). (Not OL’s fault)

 

3. Sprained AC joint from a snowboarding accident after the 2015 season, when he was already hurt. (Not OL’s fault)
 

So ONE injury occurred due to poor OL play.
 

Everybody knows that football is physical and violent (and that Luck had a very physical play style too). Players can (and do) get hurt on any play…QBs can get hurt on ANY sack or hit, regardless of the OL.

 

Luck’s shoulder injury happened early in only his 4th season. There are QBs who have played for far longer and absorbed many more hits and sacks over their careers, but never suffered an injury like that. 

 

Luck might have led a list of players with QB hits from  2012-2015. But the other three players were Russell Wilson, Matt Ryan and Ryan Tannehill. All still playing. Luck would be too…if he had chosen to. 

 

Hell, Ryan, at age 36, was sacked 40x

and knocked-down more than any QB last season. This was his 4th-straight 40+ sack season. And we are talking about him playing until he is possibly 40.

 

Wentz was second in QB knock-downs last year with this OL. Never got hurt,

except for when he scrambled. 

 

The best example is probably JB. In 2017, he led the league in sacks and

was hit a ton. Missed no games.

 

But then in 2019, when he is playing behind an elite OL, JB gets hurt because of an OL player. The irony. 

 

So % happens. And nobody was blaming a poor OL (and Ballard by proxy) for that JB injury. If that knee injury somehow led to JB retiring, people would just call it bad luck. 
 

And that’s all it was for Luck…just bad luck. Beyond silly to blame the GM for a QB getting hurt one time and even worse to blame him for that QB retiring on his own decision. 

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

LOL. Luck should have been more receptive to Grigson's counseling about protecting himself better.  Andrew might still be playing football if he listened to Grigson's superior wisdom.  But we don't want to think of it that way.

 

Luck was always thought to have a "unique" personality for a football player.  Even in the predraft analysis there were mentions of how he was slightly different than your normal player.  The comments weren't critical, just observant. That personality had more to do with retirement than any recurring injury recovery process that he stated was the reason, IMO. 

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

26 minutes ago, shasta519 said:

Let’s get one thing straight. He might not have been a good GM, Grigson did NOT ruin Luck’s career. His contribution was no larger than anybody else. 
 

And blaming it on Grigson is just irrational. 

 

Luck suffered three main injuries during his time:
 

1. Torn labrum on a sack against TEN in early 2015. (OL’s fault)

 

2. Lacerated kidney and pulled abdomen muscles. Happened during a scramble against DEN where Luck had a clean pocket but took off running (like he often did). (Not OL’s fault)

 

3. Sprained AC joint from a snowboarding accident after the 2015 season, when he was already hurt. (Not OL’s fault)
 

So ONE injury occurred due to poor OL play.
 

Everybody knows that football is physical and violent (and that Luck had a very physical play style too). Players can (and do) get hurt on any play…QBs can get hurt on ANY sack or hit, regardless of the OL.

 

Luck’s shoulder injury happened early in only his 4th season. There are QBs who have played for far longer and absorbed many more hits and sacks over their careers, but never suffered an injury like that. 

 

Luck might have led a list of players with QB hits from  2012-2015. But the other three players were Russell Wilson, Matt Ryan and Ryan Tannehill. All still playing. Luck would be too…if he had chosen to. 

 

Hell, Ryan, at age 36, was sacked 40x

and knocked-down more than any QB last season. This was his 4th-straight 40+ sack season. And we are talking about him playing until he is possibly 40.

 

Wentz was second in QB knock-downs last year with this OL. Never got hurt,

except for when he scrambled. 

 

The best example is probably JB. In 2017, he led the league in sacks and

was hit a ton. Missed no games.

 

But then in 2019, when he is playing behind an elite OL, JB gets hurt because of an OL player. The irony. 

 

So % happens. And nobody was blaming a poor OL (and Ballard by proxy) for that JB injury. If that knee injury somehow led to JB retiring, people would just call it bad luck. 
 

And that’s all it was for Luck…just bad luck. Beyond silly to blame the GM for a QB getting hurt one time and even worse to blame him for that QB retiring on his own decision. 

 

  Luck took way to many hits because he favored throwing the ball down the field (AFTER) his receivers had made their break. A flaw in his game.
  Grigson was being Mentored by Irsay who was in a bad way at the time.

  AND, we were in the Howard Mudd system of drafting lineman in the later rounds and developing them.
 Irsay made Gosder the highest paid RT and that was not a nice win. As i recall, None of the other late round picks turned into solid starters, including the respected Haeg. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, cdgacoltsfan said:

Grigson...2 division titles ..3 playoff wins.

Ballard.....hmmm...0 division titles...oops..1 playoff win ..5 years

 

 

 


Like I said yesterday….    Anyone with this view has an agenda.   They’re selling something.    Appreciate you making my point for me like that.    :thmup:

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, 2006Coltsbestever said:

Grigson had Luck for 5 years healthy, Ballard had Luck 1 year and when we had Luck we went 10-6 and beat the Division Champion Texans easily on their home turf in 2018. Hell If I had Andrew Luck for 5 years I could win 50 games The Simpsons GIF by KiwiGo (KGO)

 

Grigson had Luck healthy for 4 years...2012-14, 2016. 

 

Luck missed 9 games in 2015. In the 7 games he played, he was mostly really bad, with an overall 74.9 passer rating, a 55% completion % and 15 TD/12 INT. It was a lost season, as far as Luck is concerned.

 

But the 2015 Colts actually went 8-8 and played meaningful football in late December. They actually had a winning record with an old Matt Hasselback at QB (5-3). 

 

The only season that Grigson didn't win 11 games (with a healthy Luck) was 2016, in his 5th and final year.

 

An objective way to look at the comp:

 

In his second year as GM, with a healthy Luck at QB, Grigson went 11-5 and won a WC game against a flawed KC team. Got spanked in the Divisional round.

 

In his second year as GM, with a healthy Luck at QB, Ballard went 10-6 and won a WC game against a flawed HOU team. Got spanked in the Divisional round.

 

Those are very similar feats. And that was with Ballard having a lot more draft capital to rebuild the roster when he took over.

 

If Luck had played in 2019, and Ballard had gone to the AFCCG in his 3rd season as GM (like Grigson did), that would have been a very similar feat as well. But Ballard likely would have gotten so much more hype and credit.

 

I also don't get how Luck supposedly carried the Grigson-era teams, but not the 2018 team (which is Ballard's only playoff win to date). Ballard got the best version of Luck we have seen that season...and won 10 games. They were 1-5 until Luck started playing at an AP level.

 

Just seems like a double standard, as does the comparison of team success with Luck. I think Ballard is the better GM, but the fanbase has become irrational about Grigson for some reason.

  • Sad 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, shasta519 said:

 

Grigson had Luck healthy for 4 years...2012-14, 2016. 

 

Luck missed 9 games in 2015. In the 7 games he played, he was mostly really bad, with an overall 74.9 passer rating, a 55% completion % and 15 TD/12 INT. It was a lost season, as far as Luck is concerned.

 

But the 2015 Colts actually went 8-8 and played meaningful football in late December. They actually had a winning record with an old Matt Hasselback at QB (5-3). 

 

The only season that Grigson didn't win 11 games (with a healthy Luck) was 2016, in his 5th and final year.

 

An objective way to look at the comp:

 

In his second year as GM, with a healthy Luck at QB, Grigson went 11-5 and won a WC game against a flawed KC team. Got spanked in the Divisional round.

 

In his second year as GM, with a healthy Luck at QB, Ballard went 10-6 and won a WC game against a flawed HOU team. Got spanked in the Divisional round.

 

Those are very similar feats. And that was with Ballard having a lot more draft capital to rebuild the roster when he took over.

 

If Luck had played in 2019, and Ballard had gone to the AFCCG in his 3rd season as GM (like Grigson did), that would have been a very similar feat as well. But Ballard likely would have gotten so much more hype and credit.

 

I also don't get how Luck supposedly carried the Grigson-era teams, but not the 2018 team (which is Ballard's only playoff win to date). Ballard got the best version of Luck we have seen that season...and won 10 games. They were 1-5 until Luck started playing at an AP level.

 

Just seems like a double standard, as does the comparison of team success with Luck. I think Ballard is the better GM, but the fanbase has become irrational about Grigson for some reason.


For some reason…..    :facepalm:
 

Dear God….       Did you just try to wipe the Grigson slate clean, or what?    
 

For some reason….      Wowza. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, throwing BBZ said:

Irsay made Gosder the highest paid RT and that was not a nice win.

Gosder had an injury history that presented a risk and made his price questionable.  That risk came to fruition.  But when he played, he was a very good RT.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 minutes ago, shasta519 said:

Luck missed 9 games in 2015. In the 7 games he played, he was mostly really bad, with an overall 74.9 passer rating, a 55% completion % and 15 TD/12 INT. It was a lost season, as far as Luck is concerned.

 

But the 2015 Colts actually went 8-8 and played meaningful football in late December. They actually had a winning record with an old Matt Hasselback at QB (5-3). 

 

The only season that Grigson didn't win 11 games (with a healthy Luck) was 2016, in his 5th and final year.

This is factually correct.

 

MH's lack of down the field throwing came back to haunt during the end of the season, where DBs would be sitting on the short routes and the DL attacking the pocket.

 

But those first few games MH started, the offense was notably more efficient with MH running it than AL.  And if you timed the snap to release, MHs was much much faster than ALs...when running the SAME offense.  Holding the ball too long was NOT a function of Chud's offense more than it was a function of the QB that was running it. 

 

But, in the end, the lack of down the field ability was evident and the defenses adjusted to MH as the season progressed.  If only MH had a stronger arm to occasionally push the ball down field than he did by then, he would have run the offense better than AL in many ways, IMO.  And the OL would have looked better.

 

I thought the main shoulder surgery kept AL out of the 2017 year, so he would not have been totally healthy in 2016?  Playing on a shoulder that needed anti-snowboarding surgery, LOL.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 minutes ago, shasta519 said:

 

Grigson had Luck healthy for 4 years...2012-14, 2016. 

 

Luck missed 9 games in 2015. In the 7 games he played, he was mostly really bad, with an overall 74.9 passer rating, a 55% completion % and 15 TD/12 INT. It was a lost season, as far as Luck is concerned.

 

But the 2015 Colts actually went 8-8 and played meaningful football in late December. They actually had a winning record with an old Matt Hasselback at QB (5-3). 

 

The only season that Grigson didn't win 11 games (with a healthy Luck) was 2016, in his 5th and final year.

 

An objective way to look at the comp:

 

In his second year as GM, with a healthy Luck at QB, Grigson went 11-5 and won a WC game against a flawed KC team. Got spanked in the Divisional round.

 

In his second year as GM, with a healthy Luck at QB, Ballard went 10-6 and won a WC game against a flawed HOU team. Got spanked in the Divisional round.

 

Those are very similar feats. And that was with Ballard having a lot more draft capital to rebuild the roster when he took over.

 

If Luck had played in 2019, and Ballard had gone to the AFCCG in his 3rd season as GM (like Grigson did), that would have been a very similar feat as well. But Ballard likely would have gotten so much more hype and credit.

 

I also don't get how Luck supposedly carried the Grigson-era teams, but not the 2018 team (which is Ballard's only playoff win to date). Ballard got the best version of Luck we have seen that season...and won 10 games. They were 1-5 until Luck started playing at an AP level.

 

Just seems like a double standard, as does the comparison of team success with Luck. I think Ballard is the better GM, but the fanbase has become irrational about Grigson for some reason.

After 2018 we were on our way to being an elite team with Luck at QB, most people can see that. It is unfortunate we never got to see it. When Luck retired it threw a wrench on the way Ballard wanted to build. I just hate when people say 'Grigson had a better record then Ballard has now', I mean oh really lmao . He should've with Luck at his best from 2012-2014 and building a 33-15 record. My problem with Grigson was he never gave Luck an O.Line or a running game to help him. Luck carried those teams from 2012-2014 whether some want to admit or not. We had 1 game where a RB went over 100 Yards from 2012-2014 and we still won 11 games in those seasons. Then some will say, lets give Grigson credit, he drafted Luck, that is so laughable because an 8 yr old with any sense would've took Luck #1 that season. One thing I will give Grigson credit on is he went out and got Hasselbeck so yes we were able to go .500 that season in 2015.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, 2006Coltsbestever said:

After 2018 we were on our way to being an elite team with Luck at QB, most people can see that. It is unfortunate we never got to see it. When Luck retired it threw a wrench on the way Ballard wanted to build. I just hate when people say 'Grigson had a better record then Ballard has now', I mean oh really lmao . He should've with Luck at his best from 2012-2014 and building a 33-15 record. My problem with Grigson was he never gave Luck an O.Line or a running game to help him. Luck carried those teams from 2012-2014 whether some want to admit or not. We had 1 game where a RB went over 100 Yards from 2012-2014 and we still won 11 games in those seasons. Then some will say, lets give Grigson credit, he drafted Luck, that is so laughable because an 8 yr old with any sense would've took Luck #1 that season. One thing I will give Grigson credit on is he went out and got Hasselbeck so yes we were able to go .500 that season in 2015.

But your comment ignores that Grigson had an elite team with a healthy AL for three years, which is an accurate statement if you also say that we were on our way to an elite team under Ballard, because of the 10-6 record. 

 

Both GMs had an elite team when they had an elite QB.  And they didn't.......when they didn't.   There is no other way to see it.

 

There are too many comments that say that Ballard has an elite roster, but doesn't achieve because of no elite QB.   Whereas Grigson had a poor roster, but had elite achievement because of the elite QB. 

 

Huge double standard, IMO.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, DougDew said:

But your comment ignores that Grigson had an elite team with a healthy AL for three years, which is an accurate statement if you also say that we were on our way to an elite team under Ballard, because of the 10-6 record. 

 

Both GMs had an elite team when they had an elite QB.  And they didn't.......when they didn't.   There is no other way to see it.

 

There are too many comments that say that Ballard has an elite roster, but doesn't achieve because of no elite QB.   Whereas Grigson had a poor roster, but had elite achievement because of the elite QB. 

 

Huge double standard, IMO.

homer falling GIF

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, throwing BBZ said:

 

  Luck took way to many hits because he favored throwing the ball down the field (AFTER) his receivers had made their break. A flaw in his game.
  Grigson was being Mentored by Irsay who was in a bad way at the time.

  AND, we were in the Howard Mudd system of drafting lineman in the later rounds and developing them.

 

All excellent points.

 

It was a flaw in Luck's game and a flaw in the coaching staff. BA is a celebrated SB-winning HC, but he didn't Luck any favors in 2012 (as far as Luck getting hit). Then he had Chud as well.

 

And Irsay mentoring Grigson is an under-reported issue that I really wish we knew more about.

 

The OL approach is interesting. But Grigson did attempt to address the OL in FA. They just mostly got hurt.

 

Regarding those FA spending sprees. We know that Irsay wanted to win right away with Luck and we also had Irsay tweeting about getting on planes with briefcases full of cash for FAs. His fingerprints and impact were clearly all over those aggressive offseasons. 

 

Curious how much impact he had on the TRich deal as well. Still a terrible trade either way. 

 

And like you said, Irsay was just in a bad way at the time. 

 

It was also reported that Irsay gave more power to Pagano in the latter years, which certainly had an impact, not only on the roster, but on the FO/HC relationship as well.

 

Don't get me wrong, I don't think Grigson was a good GM. Ballard has definitely proven to be a better talent evaluator.

 

But it was a very different time then. And that context is valid. Fast forward to now, and Irsay's patient approach with Ballard is vastly different.

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

    • Love Prior and Williams as well.   I am familiar with that Raw clip. Yeah it came out when I was like 6 or 7.  It is very Raw. Eddie didn't play games.   But I must still be missing something as I don't know what that has to do with anything that you have seen in my post.?   As stated, I make a concerted effort to not claim to of been right about something after the fact and own up to my mistakes. Definitely am not going around saying it wasn't me, if I get caught being wrong.?   Anyway, like I said, I am sure I still have some post that slip through that seem way. Even with making an effort to not do so.   Still you have "Wasn't me" surrounding the statement  "But I saw it in one of your post"   So trying to figure out how to interpret that. 1. You saw me saying it wasn't me? 2. You saw me owning up to my mistakes? 3. You saw me post about respecting people more when they own their mistakes, instead of coming back after the fact claiming to be right?(which I know I have said on here multiple times)   Idk? Feeling like an * that it's had to be explained to me twice already(42itus and you) and will need a third attempt. Plus it's relevance to my signature? Lol. Damn it's only 3 in the morning. Need to crash back out for a few.   3's the magic number. 3 ways to interpret, 3 explanations and 3am.     I do lke the spelled out "eight seven", if I must say.
    • That's because QB is MUCH more more important position and returns much better value.    Depends on what you consider bust and what you consider hit. For example, some people don't consider QBs a hit unless they are perennial all pros and pro-bowlers, but consider solid but unremarkable linemen as hits. Example - is Ryan Kelly a hit? Most would say yes, but by the same measures players like Mitch Trubisky or Marcus Mariota or Carson Wentz should be considered hits too. There are studies done by some outlets that set a standard and judge it by that standard and the long-term results show very similar hit and bust rates for all positions in the same ranges in the draft. Now there are some slight deviations(for example, OL success rate in the 1st is higher than other positions, but again we are talking about something like 55% vs 45% hit rate. I have posted those here before... I need to search for it again... will post later if I find it.    Again, you are assuming the picks you make will pan out. In reality of the 2 extra picks you give up to move up in the draft for QB, 1 would very likely bust completely and the second one might be solid starter. Hell. lets assume you draft 2 very good players. You still have no long-term QB and sooner or later you will have to invest in that position in order to secure it long-term. So, congrats! You didn't give 2 extra picks this year. You will need to give them next year or the year after or the year after. Or ...you will need to suck and not need to give the extra picks. In which case - congrats, your 2 great players you picked resulted in nothing of substance and you now suck and you still need a QB.    When you combine all the factors - IF you believe in a QB in the draft - no price is too high. You figure out the QB and you will have plenty of chances to build around him. You don't figure it out and you will have a middling team on the QB carousel. 
    • Kind of expected to experience some growing pains on our OL with new starters.  Pryor at LT seems legit and Pinter can play both RG/Center.  Even impressed with French's play at Center although he did get a flag this weekend.  Smith is puzzling at times and seems to have lost his edge.   To me we lack depth players who don't need PS grooming.  One player that the Colts might consider is Phil Haynes (Seahawks) at RG.  Haynes is having a great camp and making a case as the starting RG.
    • These are false arguments.   First, no one trades TWO 1’s and TWO 3’s at least to move up for any other position.   But you do for a quarterback.    And you know that.    Second, I don’t think the bust rate is as high for most other positions as it is for quarterback where the failure rate for first round quarterbacks is well over 50 percent.    Plus,  there are other important factors.  Every pick you trade away impacts the quality of the team you put around the QB.  Plus, you have to eventually play the guy to see what you have.  And there will be growing pains along the way in most cases.   Are fans ready for several season of missing the playoffs because of poor quarterback play, PLUS even with an improved drafting position from a sub-500 record the team has traded so many picks, you don’t reap the benefit.     Combine all those factors, the cost of the trade up, plus the high bust rate, the loss of high picks and that’s why teams like the Colts are very cautious.   You really do have to hit it big.   Otherwise your franchise is really set back.    This isn’t remotely as simple as you like to portray that it is. 
    • We played.   We traded for Carson Wentz.   That didn’t turn out as we hoped.   Anyone can make a trade.   Making a successful trade is another story. 
  • Members

    • Kirie89

      Kirie89 6

      Member
      Joined:
      Last active:
    • Hammer

      Hammer 211

      Member
      Joined:
      Last active:
    • w87r

      w87r 6,091

      Moderators
      Joined:
      Last active:
    • MarquisJ

      MarquisJ 447

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