Jump to content
Indianapolis Colts
Indianapolis Colts Fan Forum

Colts Front Office Grades by Pro Football Network


Recommended Posts

19 minutes ago, DougDew said:

Yep, that's how teams win.  But it is dissimilar to the approach the Colts took.  I can't emphasize it enough.

 

They get IMPACTFUL players on cheap rookie deals.  Pro Bowl performances at positions that matter.  Our pro bowl performers on rookie deals were at G (Nelson) and WILL (Leonard).  There's was at QB (Burrow) and WR (Chase).

 

CIN fixed their interior oline for their franchise QB via FA, where they can be found.

 

And now our PB players are off of their rookie deals and are about to get paid.  A window missed, unless we suck and have an opportunity to draft high again.  Although JT is working out well in being both impactful and cheap.

 

And we got lucky with Ryan becoming available...that's about as lucky as Burrow being there.  Where would you rank the FO if Ryan wasn't here?  Hopefully Ryan can take us far.

 

I meant that CIN's approach to the OL is similar to the approach that another Colts GM took (not the current one), who used FA to try to immediately fix the holes on the OL, while drafting talent to develop. 

 

CIN's overall approach to team-building is actually pretty similar to the Luck era Colts. They were fortunate to get a stud franchise QB on a rookie deal and they have gone out of their way to invest in weapons to put around him. Then they used their flexibility in spending to be plug holes on the defense and offense in FA.

 

Colts got to the AFCCG in year 3 doing that...Bengals got to the SB in year 2. So CIN has definitely executed it better, though getting a top 5 pick in Burrow's second year to use on an elite prospect certainly helped. But it's clearly an effective approach.

 

As for ranking the FO, I think they are top 15. Ballard certainly knows how to maneuver around the draft. And he has drafted some really good players. And he has found some good value in FA, when he has chosen to actually use that route.

 

Lack of true team success is prob enough to keep them out of the top 10 IMO. And then you have the approach at QB.

 

  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, 2006Coltsbestever said:

Yeah that was a tough opening day opening day loss. I was pumped up with Andrew back. That loss did suck, freakin to Dalton too of all people lmao 

 

And at home too. 

And we had just beaten them the week before in preseason on the road... 

 

Both QBs opened up the game with INTs.... 

Luck had a very good game overall after that first drive. 

 

Hated the way that game ended (fumble for a TD). We still would have been short on that 3rd and long, but at least we would have had a chance to go for on 4th down.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, EastStreet said:

 

And at home too. 

And we had just beaten them the week before in preseason on the road... 

 

Both QBs opened up the game with INTs.... 

Luck had a very good game overall after that first drive. 

 

Hated the way that game ended (fumble for a TD). We still would have been short on that 3rd and long, but at least we would have had a chance to go for on 4th down.

Yeah we were driving for the win and Doyle fumbled. He rarely fumbled. It made me sick as well. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, 2006Coltsbestever said:

Yeah we were driving for the win and Doyle fumbled. He rarely fumbled. It made me sick as well. 

We were still a ways away, and needed a TD. IIRC, it was 3rd and long, and even if he didn't fumble, we'd have still been short. 

It would have been 4th and a couple or 4th and 5ish I think. Still would have had a late chance with time running out. IIRC I was hoping they would have targeted Ebron late, as he had a very good game one for Indy. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, EastStreet said:

We were still a ways away, and needed a TD. IIRC, it was 3rd and long, and even if he didn't fumble, we'd have still been short. 

It would have been 4th and a couple or 4th and 5ish I think. Still would have had a late chance with time running out. IIRC I was hoping they would have targeted Ebron late, as he had a very good game one for Indy. 

Yeah we would've been a couple of yards short setting up a 4th and 2, but we had the ball at around the 20. How I remember these things is funny, I can't even remember what I ate 2 days ago lmao 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

57 minutes ago, DougDew said:

Yep, that's how teams win.  But it is dissimilar to the approach the Colts took.  I can't emphasize it enough.

 

They get IMPACTFUL players on cheap rookie deals.  Pro Bowl performances at positions that matter.  Our pro bowl performers on rookie deals were at G (Nelson) and WILL (Leonard).  There's was at QB (Burrow) and WR (Chase).

 

 

 

 

To be fair to Ballard, he HAD to fix the offensive line and he did that by not drafting Darnold and trading down to the 6th spot and getting the best OL there was.  that trade also netted:

Braden Smith

Turray

Wilkens

Rock Ya sin

 

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

25 minutes ago, shasta519 said:

 

I meant that CIN's approach to the OL is similar to the approach that another Colts GM took (not the current one), who used FA to try to immediately fix the holes on the OL, while drafting talent to develop. 

 

CIN's overall approach to team-building is actually pretty similar to the Luck era Colts. They were fortunate to get a stud franchise QB on a rookie deal and they have gone out of their way to invest in weapons to put around him. Then they used their flexibility in spending to be plug holes on the defense and offense in FA.

 

Colts got to the AFCCG in year 3 doing that...Bengals got to the SB in year 2. So CIN has definitely executed it better, though getting a top 5 pick in Burrow's second year to use on an elite prospect certainly helped. But it's clearly an effective approach.

 

As for ranking the FO, I think they are top 15. Ballard certainly knows how to maneuver around the draft. And he has drafted some really good players. And he has found some good value in FA, when he has chosen to actually use that route.

 

Lack of true team success is prob enough to keep them out of the top 10 IMO. And then you have the approach at QB.

 

  

I can see that, but that would be comparing CIN to the Grigson Colts.  I think CIN has done a much better job than RG did.  Their defense has some good young drafted players. 

 

I think the ranking is about right.  The issue as I see it is that Ballard has gotten more mileage out of his high second round picks (Leonard, Pitt, Smith, JT)  than he has gotten out of his high to mid first round picks, (Nelson, Hooker, Defo, Paye) so far.   It just falls short when you look at getting players like Burrow and Chase. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

49 minutes ago, shasta519 said:

 

Whiffing on Wentz was technically only cost one season, but it also meant going down a different path that could prolong the QB search even more. And it has.

 

And after the failed Wentz experiment, they went back to the vet QB stopgap route, except they committed to two full years. So now, they might not even address it until the 5th offseason after Luck retired.

 

So for me, I think what lends to that inability to find stability is that they haven't seemed too concerned with drafting and developing a QB. Which is weird because this team's MO is to build through the draft and keep your own. But because they haven't looked to the draft, there still isn't any type of long-term plan or option in place after 3 full offseasons since Luck retired.

 

And I think we can agree that Ballard is very unlikely to ever trade a huge haul to get a proven QB.

 

So if we aren't going to get aggressive in the draft OR spend huge on a vet trade, the results will often be half-measure moves at the most important position. And unless another Tom Brady comes along in FA, those type of moves don't move the needle. 

 

As Mike would say, "no more half measures."

Probably the only way most will see getting Matt Ryan for 2 years as a true success, is if we win the SB. Winning the SB is so tough. If we just win the division and make the AFC Title Game that is a success in my eyes for 2022. I hate losing and winning the SB is the ultimate goal but only 1 team does that. Any team that makes the Final 4, that should be looked at as a very good season, great would be winning it all of course. I put $200 on the Colts to make the AFC Title Game at 9-1 odds, if I win, I win $1800. I lose, I lose just $200. Those odds are down to 7-1 now so I am glad I got my bet in over a month ago when I did. Colts are still a 22-1 odd to win the SB. If someone put $100 down on that and the Colts pulled the unthinkable, they would walk away with $2200 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, DougDew said:

I can see that, but that would be comparing CIN to the Grigson Colts.  I think CIN has done a much better job than RG did.  Their defense has some good young drafted players. 

 

I think the ranking is about right.  The issue as I see it is that Ballard has gotten more mileage out of his high second round picks (Leonard, Pitt, Smith, JT)  than he has gotten out of his high to mid first round picks, (Nelson, Hooker, Defo, Paye) so far.   Its great thing to do, but it just falls short when you look at getting players like Burrow and Chase. 


Their defense last season had more FAs starting than Cinci's own drafted guys. 

And really, most of their impact guys on D were FA signs. 

They did go early this last draft with defense, after spending all their 1s and 2s on O in 19, 20, and 21. 

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, 2006Coltsbestever said:

Probably the only way most will see getting Matt Ryan for 2 years as a true success, is if we win the SB. Winning the SB is so tough. If we just win the division and make the AFC Title Game that is a success in my eyes for 2022. I hate losing and winning the SB is the ultimate goal but only 1 team does that. Any team that makes the Final 4, that should be looked at as a very good season, great would be winning it all of course. I put $200 on the Colts to make the AFC Title Game at 9-1 odds, if I win, I win $1800. I lose, I lose just $200. Those odds are down to 7-1 now so I am glad I got my bet in over a month ago when I did. Colts are still a 22-1 odd to win the SB. If someone put $100 down on that and the Colts pulled the unthinkable, they would walk away with $2200 

Texans are a 125-1 odd to win the SB, so if you put just $100 on them you would walk away with $12,500 if they pulled a miracle off lmao 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 minutes ago, DougDew said:

I can see that, but that would be comparing CIN to the Grigson Colts.  I think CIN has done a much better job than RG did.  Their defense has some good young drafted players. 

 

I think the ranking is about right.  The issue as I see it is that Ballard has gotten more mileage out of his high second round picks (Leonard, Pitt, Smith, JT)  than he has gotten out of his high to mid first round picks, (Nelson, Hooker, Defo, Paye) so far.   It just falls short when you look at getting players like Burrow and Chase. 

 

Only comparing approaches. CIN has done a better job executing than Grigson did, but Grigson's approach still had success (despite what anybody says). And I think that's because it's the right approach if you get the QB pick right. 

 

So the moment Luck retired, it should have been about how do we get a young QB on a rookie deal who we can let Reich develop and then use all of our resources to surround him with talent and win a SB during that span.

 

But the FO doesn't seem to approach QB that way. And coincidence or not, it's been that way with every org. that Ballard has worked for. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, shasta519 said:

 

 

So the moment Luck retired, it should have been about how do we get a young QB on a rookie deal who we can let Reich develop and then use all of our resources to surround him with talent and win a SB during that span.

 

But the FO doesn't seem to approach QB that way. And coincidence or not, it's been that way with every org. that Ballard has worked for. 

I mostly agree with the approach Ballard has taken.   I am not a fan at giving up lots of draft picks in order to move up a couple spots and take a chance on a QB.  It's different if you have the number 1 pick and there is a Manning, Luck or Burrow there.  i've just seen too many teams give up a bunch to move up and the QB they select doesn't pan out.  The Jets are still trying to get back from giving away multiple picks to move up 3 spots and draft Darnold.  A team typically wastes 3 years before moving on.   The Jets wasted 6 years on Sanchez and Darnold.  It can work out but if it doesn't, the team is screwed because not only did they not get a good starting QB, they gave up picks that could have been used on other talent.  

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, DougDew said:

Ballard has never expressed it that way, that we settled for a G.  He seems to say that having the best all time G matters, even thinking its dumb to entertain the idea of moving him to LT.  

 

It also goes back to taking a one-dimensional FS with pick 15.

 

But circumstances dictate this too, I'll agree.  I'm not saying that Ballard is a chump.  I just think that CIN has capitalized on their draft capital better than the Colts have over the past few years.  And here they are able to "fix" their interior oline for their franchise QB in one FA offseason.  Kudos to them.


We had one pick in the top 10.   Cincinnati has had….  What?   How many?    Five?    More?  They have had many more opportunities.  
 

And nobody thought Hooker was over drafted at the time.   He was called the best free agent prospect since Ed Reed.    It was a shock to most that he fell to 15.

 

As for Q….   I never said we “settled”.   I think Ballard was thrilled to get him.   As you and I have discussed countless times, we had offers to trade back more and Ballard turned them down.   The player he wanted was Q. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, EastStreet said:


Their defense last season had more FAs starting than Cinci's own drafted guys. 

And really, most of their impact guys on D were FA signs. 

They did go early this last draft with defense, after spending all their 1s and 2s on O in 19, 20, and 21. 

Didn't they have a young Corner and Safety they drafted?  Or else signed them as young FA who developed well?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, shasta519 said:

 

Only comparing approaches. CIN has done a better job executing than Grigson did, but Grigson's approach still had success (despite what anybody says). And I think that's because it's the right approach if you get the QB pick right. 

 

So the moment Luck retired, it should have been about how do we get a young QB on a rookie deal who we can let Reich develop and then use all of our resources to surround him with talent and win a SB during that span.

 

But the FO doesn't seem to approach QB that way. And coincidence or not, it's been that way with every org. that Ballard has worked for. 


We had a roster that was ready to win.  We weren’t in position to struggle with a young quarterback as he learned the NFL….    It’s one thing to luck into Mac Jones as New England did or Lamar Jackson as Baltimore did.    
 

Look at Cleve with Mayfield, the Jets with Darnold, and maybe Wilson.   Arizona with Rosen.    GrBay with Love,  SF with Lance, Chi with Fields.    How many examples do you need?     
 

Heck, Mahomes and Watson went, I think 10 and 12 because teams DIDN’T realize how good they’d be.   

Acquiring a great quarterback is HARD!

 

Remember, everything is obvious with hindsight.   We’ve only been searching for three years….  20, 21 and now 22.   It’s not like we’re struggling… 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 minutes ago, NewColtsFan said:


We had one pick in the top 10.   Cincinnati has had….  What?   How many?    Five?    More?  They have had many more opportunities.  
 

And nobody thought Hooker was over drafted at the time.   He was called the best free agent prospect since Ed Reed.    It was a shock to most that he fell to 15.

 

As for Q….   I never said we “settled”.   I think Ballard was thrilled to get him.   As you and I have discussed countless times, we had offers to trade back more and Ballard turned them down.   The player he wanted was Q. 

No need to rehash a bunch of history over Ballard's draft picks.  The rankings are opinions more than analytics.

 

CIN could have picked Tua, or traded down for something.  I'm simply saying that they maximized what picks they have had.

 

Like CIN with Burrow, the Colts were lucky Ryan became available, or else our FO might be in the bottom 16 right now (Autry and Houston for Lewis and Ben, stuff like that).  IMO.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, NewColtsFan said:


We had a roster that was ready to win.  We weren’t in position to struggle with a young quarterback as he learned the NFL….    It’s one thing to luck into Mac Jones as New England did or Lamar Jackson as Baltimore did.    
 

Look at Cleve with Mayfield, the Jets with Darnold, and maybe Wilson.   Arizona with Rosen.    GrBay with Love,  SF with Lance, Chi with Fields.    How many examples do you need?     
 

Heck, Mahomes and Watson went, I think 10 and 12 because teams DIDN’T realize how good they’d be.   

Acquiring a great quarterback is HARD!

 

Remember, everything is obvious with hindsight.   We’ve only been searching for three years….  20, 21 and now 22.   It’s not like we’re struggling… 

The list of bust is more than the list of successful QB's taken with high first round picks.  You mentioned the Bears and Fields (who is not a bust...yet) but you cannot forget the Bears with Trubisky.  That went for 4 years before letting him go.  

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

2 hours ago, shasta519 said:

 

Only comparing approaches. CIN has done a better job executing than Grigson did, but Grigson's approach still had success (despite what anybody says). And I think that's because it's the right approach if you get the QB pick right. 

 

So the moment Luck retired, it should have been about how do we get a young QB on a rookie deal who we can let Reich develop and then use all of our resources to surround him with talent and win a SB during that span.

 

But the FO doesn't seem to approach QB that way. And coincidence or not, it's been that way with every org. that Ballard has worked for. 

It does not necessarily have to be QB.  The formula for teams winning,....unless you are the LAR...has been to get impactful players who play at high levels while still on their rookie deals.  That way, you get pro bowl/All pro play relative to cap hit and still have the ability salary cap wise to go get those high priced FAs to get you over the hump.  Superior talent at just about every position.  

 

The Colts have lost that window because Kelly, Hooker, Nelson, Leonard, and Smith simply never played the "correct" positions for this formula, and now the Colts are bumping up against the cap...paying for every bit of talent it gets instead of getting a lot of it for "free".   Hopefully  JT, Pitt, Pierce, Woods, Rogers, Cross, Paye, and Dayo... rookie-deal guys in impactful positions, play like probowlers.  Could happen...they have the talent.  Maybe the Colts FO will be ranked in the top 5 in a few years.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

39 minutes ago, DougDew said:

Didn't they have a young Corner and Safety they drafted?  Or else signed them as young FA who developed well?

Pretty sure 3/4 of the DL were FAs, and 3/4 of their secondary were FAs. 

IIRC, their LBer unit is mostly draft picks. 

 

I posted and article a couple months back about the construction of their team. More or less high draft picks on O, FAs on D. 

Now that they've hit their sweet spot, they'll need to use those early picks on D (like they did this draft) probably again next season and perhaps the season after that to round out the roster. 

 

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, EastStreet said:

Pretty sure 3/4 of the DL were FAs, and 3/4 of their secondary were FAs. 

IIRC, their LBer unit is mostly draft picks. 

 

I posted and article a couple months back about the construction of their team. More or less high draft picks on O, FAs on D. 

Now that they've hit their sweet spot, they'll need to use those early picks on D (like they did this draft) probably again next season and perhaps the season after that to round out the roster. 

 

They had a S that was ranked as a high caliber FA this offseason, IIRC.  Maybe they signed him as a FA originally.  And they had a corner that was also a highly ranked FA possibility a couple of offseasons ago.  Not sure if they resigned him or if that player took a high contract to another team.  Either way, the fact? that they were both listed as highly desirable free agents at the times they were available and after playing with CIN speaks well of the FO.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

 

Now that the Mayfield saga is done and played out,  I think this post belongs here....

 

Our front office was ranked 11th,  behind Cincy, the LAC and Cleveland.     I think Cincy and the LAC should be 9 and 10 behind the Colts at 8.     I think they're being celebrated a bit too soon.    But the biggest flaw for me is Cleveland.     I know the Browns have a very, very good roster.    This is a team that should be highly competitive for a long time.    But this off-season,  the Browns Front Office has given a literal MASTERCLASS on what NOT to do at the most important position 

 

Let's see all the different ways they managed to screw up their Quarterback room.

 

--   They publicly (but anonymously) trahsed Mayfield with their comment (we needed an adult in the QB room).   That'll help his trade value!

 

-- Then, after losing out on Watson,  they doubled-down and offered him the biggest fully guaranteed deal in NFL Hisotry 5/230 which is said to have infuriated the entire National Football League.

 

-- Anticipating that Watson might get suspended some or all of 2022, they gave him a $45 Mill signing bonus, with only a $1 Million salary.   That way the most Watson would lose if suspended all year, was his tiny salary.    THEN, at his intro press conference, the GM said that was NOT the reason lthat they structered the deal that way, but couldn't explain why they did.

The Browns looked terrible.

 

-- They claimed they had done due dilegence on Watson, then demonstrated over and over that they hadn't.

 

-- The Browns traded their back-up Case Keenum to Buffalo to clear the way to sign a better back-up, Jacoby Brissett, just in case Watson was suspended for a long time.

 

-- The Browns even signed former 3rd string quarterback Josh Dobbs to be their 3rd string quarterback.   And remember, Mayfield and his guaranteed contract was still on the roster als the 4th QB, but looking for a place.   Every move the Browns front office made devalued Mayfield, the guy Cleveland was hoping to trade for a decent amount considering he was the former #1 overall pick.

 

-- When the Watson saga got worse and worse,  rumors were flying that Cleveland might try to sign Jimmy Garropollo if SF cuts him, so Jimmy G might be the season long starter over Brissett.    And there were no public denials by Cleveland.

Suddenly, Brissett was not going to be good enough to be a season-long back-up.

 

-- Mayfield finally gets traded...  a 5 that could be a 4.   Cleveland has to eat over $10 Mill of his nearly $19 Mill salary.   No one should be surprised,  the Browns did everything wrong, and only diluted Mayfield's value and Cleveland lost any bit of leverage they might have had.

 

From 2000 miles away,  it feels like that comment about needing a grown-up in the room belongs to the Browns Front Office,  as well as the Browns QB room.

 

That front office gets ranked ahead of the Colts?!?     Don't make me laugh!       :spit:    Not even a little bit.

 

So, I'd have the Colts F.O. at 8th...   then the Bengals, then the Chargers and the Browns can be no higher than 11th, and maybe lower.    As others have noted,  there were some other pretty good franchises just outside the top-10.

 

 

 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

33 minutes ago, NewColtsFan said:

 

Now that the Mayfield saga is done and played out,  I think this post belongs here....

 

Our front office was ranked 11th,  behind Cincy, the LAC and Cleveland.     I think Cincy and the LAC should be 9 and 10 behind the Colts at 8.     I think they're being celebrated a bit too soon.    But the biggest flaw for me is Cleveland.     I know the Browns have a very, very good roster.    This is a team that should be highly competitive for a long time.    But this off-season,  the Browns Front Office has given a literal MASTERCLASS on what NOT to do at the most important position 

 

Let's see all the different ways they managed to screw up their Quarterback room.

 

--   They publicly (but anonymously) trahsed Mayfield with their comment (we needed an adult in the QB room).   That'll help his trade value!

 

-- Then, after losing out on Watson,  they doubled-down and offered him the biggest fully guaranteed deal in NFL Hisotry 5/230 which is said to have infuriated the entire National Football League.

 

-- Anticipating that Watson might get suspended some or all of 2022, they gave him a $45 Mill signing bonus, with only a $1 Million salary.   That way the most Watson would lose if suspended all year, was his tiny salary.    THEN, at his intro press conference, the GM said that was NOT the reason lthat they structered the deal that way, but couldn't explain why they did.

The Browns looked terrible.

 

-- They claimed they had done due dilegence on Watson, then demonstrated over and over that they hadn't.

 

-- The Browns traded their back-up Case Keenum to Buffalo to clear the way to sign a better back-up, Jacoby Brissett, just in case Watson was suspended for a long time.

 

-- The Browns even signed former 3rd string quarterback Josh Dobbs to be their 3rd string quarterback.   And remember, Mayfield and his guaranteed contract was still on the roster als the 4th QB, but looking for a place.   Every move the Browns front office made devalued Mayfield, the guy Cleveland was hoping to trade for a decent amount considering he was the former #1 overall pick.

 

-- When the Watson saga got worse and worse,  rumors were flying that Cleveland might try to sign Jimmy Garropollo if SF cuts him, so Jimmy G might be the season long starter over Brissett.    And there were no public denials by Cleveland.

Suddenly, Brissett was not going to be good enough to be a season-long back-up.

 

-- Mayfield finally gets traded...  a 5 that could be a 4.   Cleveland has to eat over $10 Mill of his nearly $19 Mill salary.   No one should be surprised,  the Browns did everything wrong, and only diluted Mayfield's value and Cleveland lost any bit of leverage they might have had.

 

From 2000 miles away,  it feels like that comment about needing a grown-up in the room belongs to the Browns Front Office,  as well as the Browns QB room.

 

That front office gets ranked ahead of the Colts?!?     Don't make me laugh!       :spit:    Not even a little bit.

 

So, I'd have the Colts F.O. at 8th...   then the Bengals, then the Chargers and the Browns can be no higher than 11th, and maybe lower.    As others have noted,  there were some other pretty good franchises just outside the top-10.

 

 

 

 

If you look at Power rank, roster rank, 3 year cap health rank, and QB of the future aspects, Cinci and LAR are easily better. 

 

Cleveland hinges on what they look like after Watson returns. We simply won't know till that happens. But we know they have good roster and power ranks. Cleveland expected him to miss time. If I had to bet, it'll be 6ish games. And that's not a big deal. JB can man the helm to start the season with that roster. They're likely a playoff team with that roster regardless if Watson plays this season or not. JB is one of the better backups in the league, so you have to give them props too for having him in place. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

57 minutes ago, EastStreet said:

 

If you look at Power rank, roster rank, 3 year cap health rank, and QB of the future aspects, Cinci and LAR are easily better. 

 

Cleveland hinges on what they look like after Watson returns. We simply won't know till that happens. But we know they have good roster and power ranks. Cleveland expected him to miss time. If I had to bet, it'll be 6ish games. And that's not a big deal. JB can man the helm to start the season with that roster. They're likely a playoff team with that roster regardless if Watson plays this season or not. JB is one of the better backups in the league, so you have to give them props too for having him in place. 


Im talking about moving down Cincy and the LAC a grand total of one spot.   One. 
 

And I’m talking about moving Cleveland down at least one spot, if not a few more.  That’s it. Nothing earth shattering.   No where have I said these teams aren’t worthy of a high ranking.   There are arguments for them.  I just think they’re a little too high for my comfort level, especially Cleveland with their Epic FAIL of an off-season.   A what-NOT-to-do that more resembled a clown car show.  

You can’t give Cleve credit if Watson only gets 6-8 games.   That has nothing to do with the Browns.   If that happens, it’s because the NFL has mishandled other controversial cases and the arbitrator may side with Watson because of that. 
 

The Colts made a mistake with Wentz.   And look how we masterfully got out of it and corrected skillfully with Ryan.    Night and Day difference.   Adults in the room.    We’re not perfect.   But we make many more good decisions than bad.   For me, our total body of work puts us 8th.   Obviously there’s room for disagreement. 
 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, NewColtsFan said:


Im talking about moving down Cincy and the LAC a grand total of one spot.   One. 
 

And I’m talking about moving Cleveland down at least one spot, if not a few more.  That’s it. Nothing earth shattering.   No where have I said these teams aren’t worthy of a high ranking.   There are arguments for them.  I just think they’re a little too high for my comfort level, especially Cleveland with their Epic FAIL of an off-season.   A what-NOT-to-do that more resembled a clown car show.  

You can’t give Cleve credit if Watson only gets 6-8 games.   That has nothing to do with the Browns.   If that happens, it’s because the NFL has mishandled other controversial cases and the arbitrator may side with Watson because of that. 
 

The Colts made a mistake with Wentz.   And look how we masterfully got out of it and corrected skillfully with Ryan.    Night and Day difference.   Adults in the room.    We’re not perfect.   But we make many more good decisions than bad.   For me, our total body of work puts us 8th.   Obviously there’s room for disagreement. 
 

 

Move up, down, doesn't matter. It's simply easy to understand why Cinci and LAC are ranked above Indy. They check all the boxes. 

 

Cleveland is just muddy right now. Could go either way. They get credit for having one of the best backups for time missed. Most though Watson would miss the entire year or more. If he gets a half year or less, I'd give them a little credit for making the correct gamble. 

 

And dude, please. Ryan to Indy was extreme luck and timing. It wasn't masterful. ATL stepped on their own ducks, were a cap dumpster fire, and Indy was top or Ryan's list. Perfect storm for us, not brilliance. 

 

I like Ballard. I personally think he is top 10 as a GM. I just see Cinci and LAR checking the boxes better at this point in time. We won't know about Cleveland for a while. They get an asterisk for the time being. 

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

59 minutes ago, EastStreet said:

 

Move up, down, doesn't matter. It's simply easy to understand why Cinci and LAC are ranked above Indy. They check all the boxes. 

 

Cleveland is just muddy right now. Could go either way. They get credit for having one of the best backups for time missed. Most though Watson would miss the entire year or more. If he gets a half year or less, I'd give them a little credit for making the correct gamble. 

 

And dude, please. Ryan to Indy was extreme luck and timing. It wasn't masterful. ATL stepped on their own ducks, were a cap dumpster fire, and Indy was top or Ryan's list. Perfect storm for us, not brilliance. 

 

I like Ballard. I personally think he is top 10 as a GM. I just see Cinci and LAR checking the boxes better at this point in time. We won't know about Cleveland for a while. They get an asterisk for the time being. 


Ive never said anything else about our good fortune with Atlanta.   Yes, we got lucky.   But our brilliance was that we remained patient and didn’t over react to a weird and strange off-season QB market.   We could’ve signed Mariotta.   We could’ve made a move for Mayfield or Jimmy G.    But we did none of those things.   We kept our powder dry.   Sometimes there’s value in not rushing.  We let things unfold.   And luck broke our way. 
 

Sorry you don’t see things that are right in front of you. 

  • Thanks 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, NewColtsFan said:


Ive never said anything else about our good fortune with Atlanta.   Yes, we got lucky.   But our brilliance was that we remained patient and didn’t over react to a weird and strange off-season QB market.   We could’ve signed Mariotta.   We could’ve made a move for Mayfield or Jimmy G.    But we did none of those things.   We kept our powder dry.   Sometimes there’s value in not rushing.  We let things unfold.   And luck broke our way. 
 

Sorry you don’t see things that are right in front of you. 

I lowkey wanted Mariotta.

 

@EastStreet do you have any stats or photos to prove your point?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 minutes ago, NewColtsFan said:


Ive never said anything else about our good fortune with Atlanta.   Yes, we got lucky.   But our brilliance was that we remained patient and didn’t over react to a weird and strange off-season QB market.   We could’ve signed Mariotta.   We could’ve made a move for Mayfield or Jimmy G.    But we did none of those things.   We kept our powder dry.   Sometimes there’s value in not rushing.  We let things unfold.   And luck broke our way. 
 

Sorry you don’t see things that are right in front of you. 

 

lol. The brilliance of waiting for luck. Ok. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, EastStreet said:

 

lol. The brilliance of waiting for luck. Ok. 


What a surprise….   You minimizing the successes that you weren’t even aware of.   You only have a 5-year track record of that.   
 

Please let us all know when you stop thinking you’re smarter than Chris Ballard or Frank Reich.   I’d hate to miss that seminal moment in Colts history.   But I’m not holding my breath!    Lol

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, AustinnKaine said:

that it wasn't a brilliant offseason move by ballard and co.

 

Do you have any stats that suggest it's more brilliance than luck/timing?

 

 

9 minutes ago, NewColtsFan said:


What a surprise….   You minimizing the successes that you weren’t even aware of.   You only have a 5-year track record of that.   
 

Please let us all know when you stop thinking you’re smarter than Chris Ballard or Frank Reich.   I’d hate to miss that seminal moment in Colts history.   But I’m not holding my breath!    Lol

 

Like I said, I think Ballard is top 10. 

That doesn't make the luck/timing that brought Ryan here, brilliant. 

 

The FO, Reich, or media could fart, and it would be a brilliant fart lol. 

The pitch would be perfect. The aroma, better than a fine Pino Noir. 

The wind exerted would be like the butterfly effect, and somehow cause world peace and end famine. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, EastStreet said:

 

Do you have any stats that suggest it's more brilliance than luck/timing?

 

 

 

Like I said, I think Ballard is top 10. 

That doesn't make the luck/timing that brought Ryan here, brilliant. 

 

The FO, Reich, or media could fart, and it would be a brilliant fart lol. 

The pitch would be perfect. The aroma, better than a fine Pino Noir. 

The wind exerted would be like the butterfly effect, and somehow cause world peace and end famine. 


Only you could claim you think Ballard is top-10 in the same thread in which you claimed the Colts front office is not worthy of being top-10.   And to you, there was no room for disagreement.   
 

But hey….   Keep being you!     :thmup:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

25 minutes ago, NewColtsFan said:


What a surprise….   You minimizing the successes that you weren’t even aware of.   You only have a 5-year track record of that.   
 

Please let us all know when you stop thinking you’re smarter than Chris Ballard or Frank Reich.   I’d hate to miss that seminal moment in Colts history.   But I’m not holding my breath!    Lol

 

 

Here's the problem with the bolded. 1.) He'll never have a chance to prove it in a GM role, and when he is right on here, you discredit him anyway because he's only a guy who posts on a forum. 2.) As good as Ballard is in the draft and what Reich accomplished as an Offensive Coordinator, they haven't won anything yet as a GM or Coach. Right now, they aren't anywhere near as smart as you may think. Smarter than fans? Yes. Smarter than other coaches and GMs? Not particularly. 

 

My sports teams are the Colts, Nuggets, Avalanche, and Braves. Two of them have won championships this year. The Braves and Avalanche deserve the benefit of the doubt, even if I don't agree with every decision they make. The Nuggets have the MVP the last two years in Jokic, and they had their 2nd and 3rd best players hurt and still made the playoffs. This is the only team I root for that makes the same dumb mistakes every year (slow starts, bad coaching mistakes etc...) and finds additional ways to choke (like last year in Jax). 

 

You notice why I don't come on here as often? The Avalanche were winning the Stanley Cup, the Braves are having a solid season, the Nuggets deserve the benefit of the doubt, all things considered. This team does not deserve the benefit of the doubt. Ballard and Reich may be smarter than fans, but their knowledge compared to other GMs and coaches is outdated until proven otherwise.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

37 minutes ago, Jared Cisneros said:

Here's the problem with the bolded. 1.) He'll never have a chance to prove it in a GM role, and when he is right on here, you discredit him anyway because he's only a guy who posts on a forum. 2.) As good as Ballard is in the draft and what Reich accomplished as an Offensive Coordinator, they haven't won anything yet as a GM or Coach. Right now, they aren't anywhere near as smart as you may think. Smarter than fans? Yes. Smarter than other coaches and GMs? Not particularly. 

 

My sports teams are the Colts, Nuggets, Avalanche, and Braves. Two of them have won championships this year. The Braves and Avalanche deserve the benefit of the doubt, even if I don't agree with every decision they make. The Nuggets have the MVP the last two years in Jokic, and they had their 2nd and 3rd best players hurt and still made the playoffs. This is the only team I root for that makes the same dumb mistakes every year (slow starts, bad coaching mistakes etc...) and finds additional ways to choke (like last year in Jax). 

 

You notice why I don't come on here as often? The Avalanche were winning the Stanley Cup, the Braves are having a solid season, the Nuggets deserve the benefit of the doubt, all things considered. This team does not deserve the benefit of the doubt. Ballard and Reich may be smarter than fans, but their knowledge compared to other GMs and coaches is outdated until proven otherwise.


Jared….  You’re entitled to any opinion you want.    But feel free to cite an instance where East was right and I attacked him?    I think you’ll have trouble with that one.   
 

I actually have a long record of acknowledging when East is right.   I’ve given him tons of likes.  He’s a good poster with some interesting observations.  
 

Typically when I disagree with East, I’ll take one of two approaches….  I’ll explain why, as I did in this discussion, or I’ll leave a disagreement emoji (sad, confusion, laughing) when I don’t want things to escalate too much.   Neither approach is very effective.   Look at tonight’s disagreement.   I explained my reasons and even said I know there’s room for disagreement.   East responded as he always does.  His view was the iron clad correct view and there was no room for disagreement.   To disagree with him is to be wrong. 


Im sorry you’re not spending as much time here.   Your call.   But frankly I’m highly unimpressed with the reasons.   The teams you support have won championships and we haven’t won enough to satisfy you.   From where I am, that makes you a front runner, or a fair weather fan.   To me, a good fan supports the team through good times and bad.   My favorite player surprisingly retired three years ago and yet I’m still here.   Do what you want, I want you to enjoy life and be happy.  That’s all I’ve ever wanted for anyone.   But I think you’re going to miss the ride, the journey, when better days come.   Either way, good luck.  Congrats on your other teams. 

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, NewColtsFan said:


Jared….  You’re entitled to any opinion you want.    But feel free to cite an instance where East was right and I attacked him?    I think you’ll have trouble with that one.   
 

I actually have a long record of acknowledging when East is right.   I’ve given him tons of likes.  He’s a good poster with some interesting observations.  
 

Typically when I disagree with East, I’ll take one of two approaches….  I’ll explain why, as I did in this discussion, or I’ll leave a disagreement emoji (sad, confusion, laughing) when I don’t want things to escalate too much.   Neither approach is very effective.   Look at tonight’s disagreement.   I explained my reasons and even said I know there’s room for disagreement.   East responded as he always does.  His view was the iron clad correct view and there was no room for disagreement.   To disagree with him is to be wrong. 


Im sorry you’re not spending as much time here.   Your call.   But frankly I’m highly unimpressed with the reasons.   The teams you support have won championships and we haven’t won enough to satisfy you.   From where I am, that makes you a front runner, or a fair weather fan.   To me, a good fan supports the team through good times and bad.   My favorite player surprisingly retired three years ago and yet I’m still here.   Do what you want, I want you to enjoy life and be happy.  That’s all I’ve ever wanted for anyone.   But I think you’re going to miss the ride, the journey, when better days come.   Either way, good luck.  Congrats on your other teams. 

I'm definitely not a fair weather fan. I've supported these teams since I was 6 years old. In fact, ironically, the latest of the 4 (and most bandwagonish) I started supporting was the Colts in 1998 when I was 10 and they got Peyton. My teams just happened to win 2 championships within the span of a year. Also, I live in Colorado, so the "fair weather" thing is a strange comment coming from you who knows this already. If you want to question why I don't root for the rockies, my little league team was the Braves when I was 6, and I didn't want to root for an expansion team in the Rockies at that time in 1993.

 

Honestly, I'm just sick of the band-aids at QB, and yes, I'm sick of Frank Reich. I felt the draft was good by Ballard, but as good as it was, we had no 1st round pick, so our ceiling is more limited unless we get lucky. I'm also annoyed that we didn't take a developmental QB like a Willis or a Ridder in the 3rd round, and the cherry on top is when Willis retired, that took the wind out of my sails. I feel that we have very little chance at a franchise QB in next years draft because we'll probably pick in the 20s, and the whole situation is getting tiresome when we are in the AFC. We don't care or focus on the passing game that much, and I feel that the whole offense is outdated. Hines is used ineffectively, and I don't trust Reich. We're basically in a 2 year window, and then we have to pay Nelson, Taylor, and Pittman. Don't see how we keep everyone even if we draft a QB on a rookie contract.

 

Sorry for the rant, it's just very refreshing for me to enjoy other sports right now. To me with the Colts, it's a "I'll believe it when I see it" type of thing. When I see a pattern for 5 years and notice the landscape of the AFC, nothing can convince me this team is going to make a run until it happens. They could, and it happened with the Bengals, but I have to see it. I said the same with the Braves though after they lost to the Dodgers in the NLCS after being up 3-1, so maybe lightning strikes twice. 

 

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

27 minutes ago, NewColtsFan said:


Jared….  You’re entitled to any opinion you want.    But feel free to cite an instance where East was right and I attacked him?    I think you’ll have trouble with that one.   
 

I actually have a long record of acknowledging when East is right.   I’ve given him tons of likes.  He’s a good poster with some interesting observations.  
 

Typically when I disagree with East, I’ll take one of two approaches….  I’ll explain why, as I did in this discussion, or I’ll leave a disagreement emoji (sad, confusion, laughing) when I don’t want things to escalate too much.   Neither approach is very effective.   Look at tonight’s disagreement.   I explained my reasons and even said I know there’s room for disagreement.   East responded as he always does.  His view was the iron clad correct view and there was no room for disagreement.   To disagree with him is to be wrong. 


Im sorry you’re not spending as much time here.   Your call.   But frankly I’m highly unimpressed with the reasons.   The teams you support have won championships and we haven’t won enough to satisfy you.   From where I am, that makes you a front runner, or a fair weather fan.   To me, a good fan supports the team through good times and bad.   My favorite player surprisingly retired three years ago and yet I’m still here.   Do what you want, I want you to enjoy life and be happy.  That’s all I’ve ever wanted for anyone.   But I think you’re going to miss the ride, the journey, when better days come.   Either way, good luck.  Congrats on your other teams. 

Also, just to clarify, when you disagree with East, you usually revert to the position that Ballard and Reich are smarter than him as if they are against each other. It's a ridiculous baseline argument, when the real arguments should be is East smarter than other posters or is Ballard and Reich smarter than other GMs and Coaches. Just a pet peeve of mine when anyone uses that argument.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

31 minutes ago, Jared Cisneros said:

Also, just to clarify, when you disagree with East, you usually revert to the position that Ballard and Reich are smarter than him as if they are against each other. It's a ridiculous baseline argument, when the real arguments should be is East smarter than other posters or is Ballard and Reich smarter than other GMs and Coaches. Just a pet peeve of mine when anyone uses that argument.


 

I’ll address this  privately.   No good will come from making this public. 
 

Edit:   I just tried to send you a private message.   I’m blocked.   Let me know if/ when you can receive….  

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.

×
×
  • Create New...