Jump to content
Indianapolis Colts
Indianapolis Colts Fan Forum

Just Whose Failure is It? Ballard or Irsay?


philba101

Recommended Posts

12 hours ago, NewColtsFan said:


Huh? 

Who said anything about a guy failing for the last six years?    Who?   Ballard?   For six years?    Really?   Seriously?    You think so?     
 

I’m sorry.   I think there is ZERO argument for failing for the last six years.   I think that’s only the view of frustrated fans.  But it is not supported by facts or logic. 

My point was not that Ballard failed every single year of the six seasons, but here we are at the end of those six years with the team clearly headed in the wrong direction. It is really difficult to look at the trajectory of this team right now under Ballard and Irsay and be confident that they are turning it around.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 91
  • Created
  • Last Reply
12 hours ago, Never_Quit said:

 

This. The way you destroy an organization is to come out and throw someone under the bus. Leaders always say it is on them. If Ballard failed, it is because Irsay did not support him correctly or give him the right tools to succeed - or at least he has to pretend that way. I think OP is reading too much into this.

I agree, I wasn't being critical of Irsay and Ballard taking credit for their failures, I love it when management is willing to admit that they were wrong and take responsibility for the results. I am just not convinced that the best path to move on from that point is by letting the same people who failed keep at it. It is not like Ballard has only been here a couple years. He has had six offseasons to make this right. My issue is why let Ballard choose the new coach and probably QB when he hasn't got it right yet? If he gets this wrong too, we are looking at another 2-3 years of what we saw this year.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

26 minutes ago, philba101 said:

I agree, I wasn't being critical of Irsay and Ballard taking credit for their failures, I love it when management is willing to admit that they were wrong and take responsibility for the results. I am just not convinced that the best path to move on from that point is by letting the same people who failed keep at it. It is not like Ballard has only been here a couple years. He has had six offseasons to make this right. My issue is why let Ballard choose the new coach and probably QB when he hasn't got it right yet? If he gets this wrong too, we are looking at another 2-3 years of what we saw this year.

My concern about Ballard picking the new coach is that last time he conducted his interviews and then concluded the Colts should hire Josh McDaniels who seems like a jerk and is now 17-28 (.353) as a head coach. How did that happen? What does it say about Ballard's judgement for hiring a head coach?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, crazycolt1 said:

Why start another finger pointing thread? I think we all know the results and the how and why's have been covered enough to cause nauseam. 

I guess the point of the thread was not to point blame at one particular person but to question why it seems this organization took so long to get to this realization, and now it seems (at least to me) they are not on the same page about how to fix it. Maybe I am wrong about this and the guys who created this mess can fix it in the foreseeable future. I am not confident in this path, but if I am wrong I will admit it. I get that this stuff has been re-hashed many times but it is just frustrating that the FO seems to be doubling-down on the problems they have created.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, BeanDiasucci said:

My concern about Ballard picking the new coach is that last time he conducted his interviews and then concluded the Colts should hire Josh McDaniels who seems like a jerk and is now 17-28 (.353) as a head coach. How did that happen? What does it say about Ballard's judgement for hiring a head coach?

I think you make a good point. With the recent firing of Reich it makes it appear as if Ballard did not get that right either, although it is probably not that simple. Regardless, it doesn't inspire confidence that we are going to have the same architect for the re-build.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ok, I'll join in.   

 

By reading the forum over the past few months, its pretty much consensus that there are big issues with the Colts;  Culture, overall talent level, roster structure, scheme, game planning, playcalling.   Here is my blame:

 

Culture;  Irsay is to blame.  Expects his QB to be a leader, but then criticizes the QBs leadership before the QB even takes a regular season snap.  Says stupid things like "All Chips In", where nobody knows what he's saying despite it carrying some sort of ultimatum.  ("I'm scared to not do enough...yet I don't know what doing enough is").  Irsay frequently shows his authority, but by babbling in a way that nobody can follow what direction he's giving.

 

Talent/roster/scheme:  Ballard.   He makes the decisions in these areas, period.  He hires coaches that tell him what scheme they are going to use when coaching.  He'll hire either run-first or a pass-first offensive HC.  He'll hire either a 43 or a 34 defensive minded HC, or avoid hiring the type of coach who coaches a scheme he does not want.  Ballard has reiterated the idea that you pay good players no matter where they play, which dictates roster construction and the talent at the positions the HC has to coach.  

 

Play calling/Game Planning.  Frank.  He game plans with the players he has...there is some debate as to how much better he really could have been given what he had.  His playcalling lacked innovation, especially at times when it was obvious the defense was expecting certain types of plays.  Seemed to have tunnel vision in game planning and play calling.

 

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, philba101 said:

I guess the point of the thread was not to point blame at one particular person but to question why it seems this organization took so long to get to this realization, and now it seems (at least to me) they are not on the same page about how to fix it. Maybe I am wrong about this and the guys who created this mess can fix it in the foreseeable future. I am not confident in this path, but if I am wrong I will admit it. I get that this stuff has been re-hashed many times but it is just frustrating that the FO seems to be doubling-down on the problems they have created.

I understand frustration but we have yet to see what is going to be done. No matter what direction the Colts go its never going to be the right move for some. The NFL is an imperfect sport. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, DougDew said:

Ok, I'll join in.   

 

By reading the forum over the past few months, its pretty much consensus that there are big issues with the Colts;  Culture, overall talent level, roster structure, scheme, game planning, playcalling.   Here is my blame:

 

Culture;  Irsay is to blame.  Expects his QB to be a leader, but then criticizes the QBs leadership before the QB even takes a regular season snap.  Says stupid things like "All Chips In", where nobody knows what he's saying despite it carrying some sort of ultimatum.  ("I'm scared to not do enough...yet I don't know what doing enough is").  Irsay frequently shows his authority, but by babbling in a way that nobody can follow what direction he's giving.

 

Talent/roster/scheme:  Ballard.   He makes the decisions in these areas, period.  He hires coaches that tell him what scheme they are going to use when coaching.  He'll hire either run-first or a pass-first offensive HC.  He'll hire either a 43 or a 34 defensive minded HC, or avoid hiring the type of coach who coaches a scheme he does not want.  Ballard has reiterated the idea that you pay good players no matter where they play, which dictates roster construction and the talent at the positions the HC has to coach.  

 

Play calling/Game Planning.  Frank.  He game plans with the players he has...there is some debate as to how much better he really could have been given what he had.  His playcalling lacked innovation, especially at times when it was obvious the defense was expecting certain types of plays.  Seemed to have tunnel vision in game planning and play calling.

 

 

 

 

I've never known how to evaluate Frank.  For instance, there was great criticism on his teams being unprepared this season.  Well last season we had a great deal of success in the early, usually scripted 1st drive or two.  one of the best teams in the league on early downs. Then the criticism was he doesn't make adjustments.  

 

Then this year, we had virtually no points while he was here on early drives, and then as the game went on the the offense seemed to stagnate.  So then the criticism was he was unprepared and then I don't know the talent got it done or something.

 

I personally feel it's pretty hard to be a varied play caller with the talent he's been dealing with.  The line limits going deep and long crossers.  No one bit on the play action of Ryan this year which was the hope.  IMO and I think the evidence is pretty clear on this, Taylor is a straight ahead downhill type guy. 

 

People praise Shanahan.  Well with that talent he could probably draw up plays in the sand. 

I have seen Shanahan offenses that weren't the greatest as early as last season lol.  They got hot at the end but were very pedestrian on O despite the wealth of talent.  Not saying the dude ain't innovative but we averaged more points than them last season.  they were a pedestrian offense until about week 10 of last season, when they started using Deebo out of the backfield a ton.  We don't have player like that.

 

I am not a Reich supporter, but I don't really understand the play calling thing.  I think I do late in games he got entrenched at times, but the Colts have had pretty good offenses in his season with questionable talent.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, Nickster said:

I've never known how to evaluate Frank.  For instance, there was great criticism on his teams being unprepared this season.  Well last season we had a great deal of success in the early, usually scripted 1st drive or two.  one of the best teams in the league on early downs. Then the criticism was he doesn't make adjustments.  

 

Then this year, we had virtually no points while he was here on early drives, and then as the game went on the the offense seemed to stagnate.  So then the criticism was he was unprepared and then I don't know the talent got it done or something.

 

I personally feel it's pretty hard to be a varied play caller with the talent he's been dealing with.  The line limits going deep and long crossers.  No one bit on the play action of Ryan this year which was the hope.  IMO and I think the evidence is pretty clear on this, Taylor is a straight ahead downhill type guy. 

 

People praise Shanahan.  Well with that talent he could probably draw up plays in the sand. 

I have seen Shanahan offenses that weren't the greatest as early as last season lol.  They got hot at the end but were very pedestrian on O despite the wealth of talent.  Not saying the dude ain't innovative but we averaged more points than them last season.  they were a pedestrian offense until about week 10 of last season, when they started using Deebo out of the backfield a ton.  We don't have player like that.

 

I am not a Reich supporter, but I don't really understand the play calling thing.  I think I do late in games he got entrenched at times, but the Colts have had pretty good offenses in his season with questionable talent.

I agree with 95% of what you are saying.  On the field talent dictates what a coach can do over the course of a game and a season.  For example, Eberflus had to play with DBs who were basically being signed off of the street, and he kept catching flak last season like he was incompetent...........until a team PROMOTED HIM to HC, LOL.

 

My beef with Frank was that he seemed to try finesse or cutsie plays when the situation suggested more power.   I never saw a series where we went with 3 TEs, as an example.  Can't figure out why we didn't practice executing screen passes until we got them right.  He just seemed to have tunnel vision at times.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, DougDew said:

I agree with 95% of what you are saying.  On the field talent dictates what a coach can do over the course of a game and a season.  For example, Eberflus had to play with DBs who were basically being signed off of the street, and he kept catching flak last season like he was incompetent...........until a team PROMOTED HIM to HC, LOL.

 

My beef with Frank was that he seemed to try finesse or cutsie plays when the situation suggested more power.   I never saw a series where we went with 3 TEs, as an example.  Can't figure out why we didn't practice executing screen passes until we got them right.  He just seemed to have tunnel vision at times.

 

One thing I didn't like about Frank is it seems like we ran bunch too much.  I get why it's great to rub people etc.  and a lot of teams do it a lot.  But it also narrows the defense pre snap which happened a lot. 

Another thing I didn't like is he has this dumb idea seemingly that you can interchange personnel.  Now of course you don't want to tip your hand, but he was stubborn about getting the right personnel doing things they could be successful at IMO.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, NewColtsFan said:


I hate to break this to you and others….  Luck’s snowboarding accident — as stupid as it was — had nothing to do with his  retirement.   Zero.  
 

The shoulder injury that set his career back was the one against Tennessee in Memphis.   The one where he’s standing on the sidelines and someone pats him on the chest and Luck winces badly.   That’s the injury that forced him to sit out the 2017 season.  That’s not my opinion.  Luck said so in an interview he gave way back when he was playing.   He said his doctors all agreed.   Besides, Luck’s favorite season was 2018. 

 

Also….   Where did you pull that Irsay was “counting” on Luck returning?    Irsay asking Luck if he had any interest in coming back is not the same as “counting” on his return.   Entirely different. 

You are missing my point. His choice to go snowboarding was a risky move and he showed no regard for the team. So you have to ask one question. Why did you go snowboarding when you have had several injuries? It tells me he had one foot out the door 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, philba101 said:

I agree, I wasn't being critical of Irsay and Ballard taking credit for their failures, I love it when management is willing to admit that they were wrong and take responsibility for the results. I am just not convinced that the best path to move on from that point is by letting the same people who failed keep at it. It is not like Ballard has only been here a couple years. He has had six offseasons to make this right. My issue is why let Ballard choose the new coach and probably QB when he hasn't got it right yet? If he gets this wrong too, we are looking at another 2-3 years of what we saw this year.

 

Who should Irsay bring in as GM that would "get it right"?  My point isn't to defend Ballard.  But I think finding a GM is as hard as finding a QB.  And I think Irsay knows that.  The next GM might whiff on a QB and we would be in this same position again in a few years.

 

With Ballard at least Irsay has a known quantity and maybe he still feels Ballard can get the job done.  I can't say I am convinced anymore; I am just trying to look at it from Irsay's position.

 

I remember a story from years ago about a young and ambitious man who worked hard to get the job he wanted working for a very successful businessman.  The young man worked hard and did a good job.  But one time he made a huge mistake and cost his boss $1 million (that was a lot of money back then).  He went to see his boss and offered his resignation.  His boss said, "What are you doing?  I just paid $1 million to train you."

 

You could say Ballard has made the same mistake over and over and there is some truth to that.  But maybe he has learned and will improve and maybe Irsay wants to benefit from spending the money to train him.

 

Or maybe not...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, philba101 said:

My point was not that Ballard failed every single year of the six seasons, but here we are at the end of those six years with the team clearly headed in the wrong direction. It is really difficult to look at the trajectory of this team right now under Ballard and Irsay and be confident that they are turning it around.


Every fan makes their own evaluation. 
 

For me, if Saturday gets the job,  I’ll be spending much less time invested here.  (Yeah, I know, that would be good news for some here!).   But personally I’ve seen enough good from Ballard to believe he can turn things around if given the full opportunity.   Others won’t agree.   Like I said, each fan makes their own evaluation. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, indyagent17 said:

You are missing my point. His choice to go snowboarding was a risky move and he showed no regard for the team. So you have to ask one question. Why did you go snowboarding when you have had several injuries? It tells me he had one foot out the door 

 


Luck spent three years of his life trying to get back to being able to play at a high level.   Three years.   That doesn’t strike me as someone who had his foot out the door.   
 

Luck suffered a sprained shoulder in the snow boarding accident.  In the recent ESPN profile Luck said he had sprained both shoulders numerous times and had always been able to come back from them.   
 

The shoulder sprain from snow boarding was entirely different than the severe damage caused by the football hit against Tennessee.   I think the check out didn’t come until after the 2018 season.   Luck didn’t like the person he had become.  He hated that guy.  A complete control freak.  And he became that person in order to play football at the highest level.  It put a huge strain on what was once a very happy marriage.  Then he suffered the mystery lower leg injury at the Pro Bowl in Feb of 19.   I think THAT’S when the foot out the door happened.   As he said when he retired, four straight years of constant pain and rehab sucked the joy out of playing the game he had always loved. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, DougDew said:

Play calling/Game Planning.  Frank.  He game plans with the players he has...there is some debate as to how much better he really could have been given what he had.  His playcalling lacked innovation, especially at times when it was obvious the defense was expecting certain types of plays.  Seemed to have tunnel vision in game planning and play calling.

 

 

 

 

I disagree with the above highlighted. We’ve seen frequently Frank shoe-horn players into his scheme. He made the gameplan and expected them to carry it out instead looking at what he had to deal with. 
There’s reason we had the “Players not Plays” comment this year. Ballard had to thump his skull for him to get it… and he still didn’t. 
 

That said, I think Frank, Ballard and Irsay all had a hand in it. No point in trying to blame one over the others. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, DougDew said:

I agree with 95% of what you are saying.  On the field talent dictates what a coach can do over the course of a game and a season.  For example, Eberflus had to play with DBs who were basically being signed off of the street, and he kept catching flak last season like he was incompetent...........until a team PROMOTED HIM to HC, LOL.

 

My beef with Frank was that he seemed to try finesse or cutsie plays when the situation suggested more power.   I never saw a series where we went with 3 TEs, as an example.  Can't figure out why we didn't practice executing screen passes until we got them right.  He just seemed to have tunnel vision at times.

 

but here is the thing about Frank as a play caller or whatever that I think gets lost because there was such a little cabal of Never Reichers on this board.  

 

This offense has been very successful.  IMO the output exceeds the talent.

 

Here is where we ranked in points scored in his tenure.

2018  5th

2019  16th (with Jacoby friggin Brisset!!!!)

2020   9th

2021   9th

2022  30th

 

So to me this is impressive with the talent we had.  Until this year we were always top half and usually top 10.  5 years.  5 very different QBs with very different styles and still very consistent excellence in scoring points until this disaster

 

So the play calling narrative falls flat to me.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Solid84 said:

I disagree with the above highlighted. We’ve seen frequently Frank shoe-horn players into his scheme. He made the gameplan and expected them to carry it out instead looking at what he had to deal with. 
There’s reason we had the “Players not Plays” comment this year. Ballard had to thump his skull for him to get it… and he still didn’t. 
 

That said, I think Frank, Ballard and Irsay all had a hand in it. No point in trying to blame one over the others. 

What I saw was players being used to their capabilities, outside of PC and AP competing for not enough long passes the O could throw this year.  To me, I saw the plays being limited by the players.  I think Ballard thinks the players on the roster were capable of running a variety of different plays successfully, and that's where the head thumping needs to be targeted, IMO.   He's reinforced that comment of paying good players regardless of position.  I think he's the one who sees these players as interchangeable and talented enough to do many different things.

 

Same thing happened to Flus last year with all of the injuries.  He had to play soft zone to protect his inferior street players from getting burned man to man.  He called the plays that he could with what he had.   And then got a good number of interviews and then promoted.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 hours ago, philba101 said:

Reading the letter from Mr. Irsay makes me wonder who really is responsible for the Colts failures over the last few years? Just a few days ago Chris Ballard stood up before everyone and proclaimed the following: “I failed,” Ballard said. “I’m not going to sit up here and make excuses. “I failed a lot of people. I never take lightly what’s at stake here. It’s not the wins and losses, but people’s lives are on the line — player’s families, coaches’ families, front office people in this building — and I don’t ever take that lightly.”  “I’m disappointed where we’re at,” Ballard continued. “Ultimately, it falls on my shoulders. I won’t walk away from that, I won’t run from it.”

 

Now Jim Irsay is saying the fault is his. It is almost like these two guys don't even talk to each other. 

"So as I've always said, the responsibility for making us better ultimately falls on me, and our offseason work has already begun. That includes our search for our next head coach, preparing for an important draft in April and continuing to bolster the talented core of players already on our roster."

 

Those who were hoping Jim Irsay would fire Chris Ballard because he has clearly failed to improve this team over the last six years are gravely disappointed. Even with Ballard admitting his failures, Irsay decided to double-down on the failures by endorsing him to pick our next coach and QB. How smart is that? If Irsay really believes that the "responsibility for making us better ultimately falls on me," then why double-down on your original GM pick that has admittedly failed for the past six years? It sounds as if those who were hoping that Jim Irsay would get out of the way and let Chris Ballard do his job, are going to be disappointed as well. Does the above statement sound like Irsay is taking a step back from being a meddling owner? 

 

Please, someone make the case for how any of this makes sense?

 

Irsays is the Boss and in charge so the blame falls on him.

Ballard Failed big-time which is why Irsay felt he needs to start meddling, which he did and I'm sure will continue to do so. 

Ballards concept of team building is old and antiquated in today's game which not only falls on him but irsay  too. Didn't irsay  interview him before hiring and ask him what is thoughts and plans were if he was given the job of GM??

But irsay was smitten with Pagano's interview as well. Which makes me wonder how he impressed in a job interview??... I guess the "keep chopping wood" slogan won Irsay over Lol. 

 

Imo, Irsay is mostly the Blame because he's in charge and now likes his role as acting GM which along with financial reasons is why Ballard is retained not to mention Ballard has saved Irsays tons of money by not participating in High Price FA's and among the league leaders annually in cap space, and will continue to do so.

 

The TV Revenue and Ballard as GM are cash cows to Irsay. 

No need to change things. haha

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, LJpalmbeacher2 said:

The TV Revenue and Ballard as GM are cash cows to Irsay. 

No need to change things. haha

Do you understand how the money is distributed in the NFL? 

I'm pretty sure you do but just throw negative comments around for effects. No matter what you think Ballard has done some positive things. 

The way you push your negative narrative around you think there is no glimmer of hope. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, DougDew said:

What I saw was players being used to their capabilities, outside of PC and AP competing for not enough long passes the O could throw this year.  To me, I saw the plays being limited by the players.  I think Ballard thinks the players on the roster were capable of running a variety of different plays successfully, and that's where the head thumping needs to be targeted, IMO.   He's reinforced that comment of paying good players regardless of position.  I think he's the one who sees these players as interchangeable and talented enough to do many different things.

 

Same thing happened to Flus last year with all of the injuries.  He had to play soft zone to protect his inferior street players from getting burned man to man.  He called the plays that he could with what he had.   And then got a good number of interviews and then promoted.

 

Like I said, Ballard is just as guilty, and I agree to an extent.

 

However, it’s on Frank when he didn’t use Hines like they talked about during the offseason and kept running him up the gut. It’s on Frank when he pulls players right after they’ve made a big play.
 

Frank may not have had the talent he wanted, but that’s not an excuse to misuse the talent he had. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 hours ago, Solid84 said:

Like I said, Ballard is just as guilty, and I agree to an extent.

 

However, it’s on Frank when he didn’t use Hines like they talked about during the offseason and kept running him up the gut. It’s on Frank when he pulls players right after they’ve made a big play.
 

Frank may not have had the talent he wanted, but that’s not an excuse to misuse the talent he had. 

The stuff about pulling players too much I agree with.  That is a function of situational football and the analytics telling you a certain player should run a certain play, and not going with a hotter hand.  I have always not liked the play-management when it looked like analytics and odds-charts were driving some decisions.

 

Hines up the gut is simply a function of personnel.  Our RBs got smaller as we worked down the depth chart, so there were really no better options for Frank to run the running plays the offense runs (because JT is a straight ahead runner).  After 4 years of having Hines as #2 RB, Ballard corrected that personnel deficiency by trading for Moss, who is a better runner than Hines.  

 

Maybe we can get a RB that's BIGGER than JT, Hines, and Moss who can push the pile and maybe offer a lead block when we want to call a play that needs one.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 hours ago, LJpalmbeacher2 said:

 

Irsays is the Boss and in charge so the blame falls on him.

Ballard Failed big-time which is why Irsay felt he needs to start meddling, which he did and I'm sure will continue to do so. 

Ballards concept of team building is old and antiquated in today's game which not only falls on him but irsay  too. Didn't irsay  interview him before hiring and ask him what is thoughts and plans were if he was given the job of GM??

But irsay was smitten with Pagano's interview as well. Which makes me wonder how he impressed in a job interview??... I guess the "keep chopping wood" slogan won Irsay over Lol. 

 

Imo, Irsay is mostly the Blame because he's in charge and now likes his role as acting GM which along with financial reasons is why Ballard is retained not to mention Ballard has saved Irsays tons of money by not participating in High Price FA's and among the league leaders annually in cap space, and will continue to do so.

 

The TV Revenue and Ballard as GM are cash cows to Irsay. 

No need to change things. haha

Take it for what it is worth 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 hours ago, LJpalmbeacher2 said:

 

Irsays is the Boss and in charge so the blame falls on him.

Ballard Failed big-time which is why Irsay felt he needs to start meddling, which he did and I'm sure will continue to do so. 

Ballards concept of team building is old and antiquated in today's game which not only falls on him but irsay  too. Didn't irsay  interview him before hiring and ask him what is thoughts and plans were if he was given the job of GM??

But irsay was smitten with Pagano's interview as well. Which makes me wonder how he impressed in a job interview??... I guess the "keep chopping wood" slogan won Irsay over Lol. 

 

Imo, Irsay is mostly the Blame because he's in charge and now likes his role as acting GM which along with financial reasons is why Ballard is retained not to mention Ballard has saved Irsays tons of money by not participating in High Price FA's and among the league leaders annually in cap space, and will continue to do so.

 

The TV Revenue and Ballard as GM are cash cows to Irsay. 

No need to change things. haha

 

  How goofy! We hired Ballard to build a team. 

 It's Draft, Draft, build roster, coach up, save cap to eventually fill in gaps and then re-sign the best players you have. Simple, historically correct, wash, rinse repeat.

  Yet this somehow fly's over many heads. There is no reason to listen to such people as it is intellectually a waste of time. Ignored

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Pursuing Matt Ryan was a mistake and that falls on both.

 

We probably should have brought in a veteran LT to start while the rookie developed, thats on Ballard and it cost us games this year.

 

Q and Kelly regressed and I would put that squarely on THEM, not the front office

Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 hours ago, LJpalmbeacher2 said:

 

Irsays is the Boss and in charge so the blame falls on him.

Ballard Failed big-time which is why Irsay felt he needs to start meddling, which he did and I'm sure will continue to do so. 

Ballards concept of team building is old and antiquated in today's game which not only falls on him but irsay  too. Didn't irsay  interview him before hiring and ask him what is thoughts and plans were if he was given the job of GM??

But irsay was smitten with Pagano's interview as well. Which makes me wonder how he impressed in a job interview??... I guess the "keep chopping wood" slogan won Irsay over Lol. 

 

Imo, Irsay is mostly the Blame because he's in charge and now likes his role as acting GM which along with financial reasons is why Ballard is retained not to mention Ballard has saved Irsays tons of money by not participating in High Price FA's and among the league leaders annually in cap space, and will continue to do so.

 

The TV Revenue and Ballard as GM are cash cows to Irsay. 

No need to change things. haha

 

  How goofy! We hired Ballard to build a team. 

 It's Draft, Draft, build roster, coach up, save cap to eventually fill in gaps and then re-sign the best players you have. Simple, historically correct, wash, rinse repeat.

  Yet this somehow fly's over many heads. There is no reason to listen to such people as it is intellectually a waste of time. Ignored

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Interesting, not one person mention the players.   Coaches, GM or a owner do not play.   

 

Hmm, everyone forgets last year at this time we were thinking we were a QB away from the super bowl. Bottom line is the players did not produce this past season  like in 2021. The Colts went from a top 5 O-line to last in the league. The Colts went from 28 plus scoring offense to meager 15 pts per game.

 

Stop the blame game threads and move on, 2023 will be here again soon. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 hours ago, strt182 said:

When do the guys on the field get part of the blame also? How about everybody on the team has a bit of fault. Except maybe the long snapper i don't think he screwed anything up this year. 

To some degree the players are always responsible for their individual level of play. The GM and coach have to consider what players will work well together to make a successful team. This is not always an easy task. I have seen teams with a bunch of superstars who don't play well together. As a GM if you consistently have players underperforming then you have to identify why. Is it the coach and his scheme? Are the talent evaluators doing a poor job? One of my beefs with Ballard over the years is that he has just absolutely refused to bring in receivers with proven production via FA. Of course bringing in a player who has produced on another team does not guarantee that they will do the same on your team, but at least you know the player can produce in the NFL. The Colts too heavily relied on drafting players with potential in hopes they could coach them to a decent production level. For players like Patmon, Dulin, Strachan, Cain, Fountain, etc, the production just never happened. The Colts did get some production from Pascal and it took four years to get decent production from Campbell (injury considered). Would it have been better for the team to just buy a FA with proven production in hopes that they could duplicate it on our team, maybe, but it definitely wouldn't have been cheaper. Ballard has always taken the cheaper route when it comes to receivers.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, DougDew said:

The stuff about pulling players too much I agree with.  That is a function of situational football and the analytics telling you a certain player should run a certain play, and not going with a hotter hand.  I have always not liked the play-management when it looked like analytics and odds-charts were driving some decisions.

 

Hines up the gut is simply a function of personnel.  Our RBs got smaller as we worked down the depth chart, so there were really no better options for Frank to run the running plays the offense runs (because JT is a straight ahead runner).  After 4 years of having Hines as #2 RB, Ballard corrected that personnel deficiency by trading for Moss, who is a better runner than Hines.  

 

Maybe we can get a RB that's BIGGER than JT, Hines, and Moss who can push the pile and maybe offer a lead block when we want to call a play that needs one.

While I agree the RBs behind JT got smaller and smaller, maybe Frank should’ve started running around the tackles instead of up the gut when the smaller guys were in. 
That’s an example of misuse of talent. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 hours ago, strt182 said:

When do the guys on the field get part of the blame also? How about everybody on the team has a bit of fault. Except maybe the long snapper i don't think he screwed anything up this year. 

I mean, is anyone in doubt the players absolutely quit this year? 
 

I’m in the “total team effort” boat. We failed top to bottem this season. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, Solid84 said:

While I agree the RBs behind JT got smaller and smaller, maybe Frank should’ve started running around the tackles instead of up the gut when the smaller guys were in. 
That’s an example of misuse of talent. 

But Hines and JT don't have that kind of outside talent for a play caller to use.  Their game is straight line speed more than wiggle speed.  Sometimes, NFL RBs improvise and bounce it outside on their own when the hole was stuffed.  It doesn't always have to be a called play.   JT and Hines did that rarely, because they know they are not great at it...they just ran into the pile.   Moss is good at it, I saw at least two plays this year where he turned it way outside on his own.

 

Frank tried outside runs with JT early in his rookie year and he was bad at it.  He may be better now.  Hines excels at kick returns where there isn't a lot of cutting sideways at full speed.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 1/18/2023 at 9:59 AM, DougDew said:

Ok, I'll join in.   

 

By reading the forum over the past few months, its pretty much consensus that there are big issues with the Colts;  Culture, overall talent level, roster structure, scheme, game planning, playcalling.   Here is my blame:

 

Culture;  Irsay is to blame.  Expects his QB to be a leader, but then criticizes the QBs leadership before the QB even takes a regular season snap.  Says stupid things like "All Chips In", where nobody knows what he's saying despite it carrying some sort of ultimatum.  ("I'm scared to not do enough...yet I don't know what doing enough is").  Irsay frequently shows his authority, but by babbling in a way that nobody can follow what direction he's giving.

 

Talent/roster/scheme:  Ballard.   He makes the decisions in these areas, period.  He hires coaches that tell him what scheme they are going to use when coaching.  He'll hire either run-first or a pass-first offensive HC.  He'll hire either a 43 or a 34 defensive minded HC, or avoid hiring the type of coach who coaches a scheme he does not want.  Ballard has reiterated the idea that you pay good players no matter where they play, which dictates roster construction and the talent at the positions the HC has to coach.  

 

Play calling/Game Planning.  Frank.  He game plans with the players he has...there is some debate as to how much better he really could have been given what he had.  His playcalling lacked innovation, especially at times when it was obvious the defense was expecting certain types of plays.  Seemed to have tunnel vision in game planning and play calling.

 

 

 

 

“His play calling lacked innovation.” Yes. Watching the playoffs after watching every snap of the Colts, it’s incredible how often other teams manage to get guys WIDE open pretty regularly. Colts seldom do. I realize part of that is player related — Pitt is not a burner, for example— but a big part has to be play design. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 1/18/2023 at 6:42 AM, philba101 said:

I agree, in his letter to the fans, it doesn't sound like Irsay is ready to step back and let the GM and coaches do their jobs.

If that is true, we'll never get a GM or HC that's worth a d***. The GM should seek input from any sources that know what their jobs are, and have actual first-hand knowledge of the personnel - especially coaches. In the final analysis, it should be his decision alone who to hire as HC and lobby for coordinators, and who to draft. The GM, alone, should be responsible for those decisions - not a committee where everyone blames each other (like we have now).

 

That is a boat-load of responsibility. If you're the kind of GM a team should want, it is actually a smaller risk than the circular blame game.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, CoachLite said:

If that is true, we'll never get a GM or HC that's worth a d***. The GM should seek input from any sources that know what their jobs are, and have actual first-hand knowledge of the personnel - especially coaches. In the final analysis, it should be his decision alone who to hire as HC and lobby for coordinators, and who to draft. The GM, alone, should be responsible for those decisions - not a committee where everyone blames each other (like we have now).

 

That is a boat-load of responsibility. If you're the kind of GM a team should want, it is actually a smaller risk than the circular blame game.

Ballard already stated in his press conference that he will lead the coaching search and will make recommendations, but Irsay will have the final say on who will be the next coach. I am guessing Irsay wants this decision because he didn't like how it ended with Reich.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • This is how I feel...   From a roster building standpoint, it seems to make most sense. Especially given the talent at skill positions in the draft. This is assuming we are tagging/resigning Pittman, which I believe we do. But a depth piece in free agency there and a day 2 pick might not be a bad thing. It's certainly more of Ballard's way of doing things. I can't imagine we don't pick up Paye's 5th year. Assuming as much, and drafting someone like Verse would time out well with not relying on him too much from the get-go. He would be a good rotational piece early while we evaluate and give Paye another 2 seasons to earn a bigger paycheck. Dayo, to me, is the odd duck in the picture, with him going into the final year of his contract. You are probably correct in the thought that DT is more pressing. If we don't sign/replace Grover, I'm not sure what the plan is. But the clock is ticking on he and Buckner, no matter which way you look at it.  Also, Ballard has repeatedly stated that he and Steichen see eye-to-eye on the concept of building the trenches. So I think there will be continued investment there. 
    • I read something that said the leaked scores were only partial. And now that I'm thinking about it more, I think they were saying the low score that was published was from his first attempt, and he might have retaken the test and done better. It's kind of fuzzy, but that might be the case.    Either way, my point was that I remember notable pushback against the leaked scores, and their importance. So if certain people are now saying that they didn't care about the S2 scores a year ago, that doesn't sound like revisionist history to me. One of those unnamed execs could be Ballard, who was very vocal about not liking how Stroud was talked about. And we know the Colts subscribe to S2...     Some suggestions... basically unsubstantiated rumors that get repeated enough that they begin to be accepted as fact. Who knows what the Panthers were doing last year, but if they let the S2 test decide which QB to draft, they deserve all the dysfunction they've experienced. I don't think even the Panthers are that lost. More likely, Bryce Young was the guy they decided on, and maybe the higher S2 was in his favor, but would have just been one of several factors that they used.      The way it's described, there's potentially value in the S2 testing. But using Stroud as the example, if you watch him play, and then look at a low S2 score, and can't figure out how to reconcile the disparity between the tape and the test score, then you don't know how to evaluate. Overall, I think way too much is being made of the S2 thing, similar to how way too much was made of Wonderlic scores. It's just one piece of info, and probably carries a small amount of importance overall.    But if a team wants to use S2 testing to prepare a development plan, especially for a QB, there's no real reason they can't have him take the test after the draft. If that's really part of the value, and the player declines the test before the draft because he doesn't want to be scrutinized over it, then ask him to take it once you've drafted him.
    • Ask Philip Rivers to give him advice on parenthood, AR should stick around in the NFL for a while then. 😉
    • Yes, I think so too.
  • Members

×
×
  • Create New...