Convince me that I'm wrong about the current state of the Colts vs. the AFC elite

[Superman]

1 minute ago, Nickster said:

 

What reaction do you have to this statement though SUPE? 

 

Ballard has hit in the draft mostly in positions that the league doesn't value as much as the positions he has not swung at and/or hit on. 

 

I think that's also an oversimplification, and more of the same discussion that people have been volleying back and forth for 2-3 years. I'm not super interested in it at this point, as I think most of us have stated our piece plenty of times by now.

[Nickster]

2 minutes ago, Superman said:

 

I think that's also an oversimplification, and more of the same discussion that people have been volleying back and forth for 2-3 years. I'm not super interested in it at this point, as I think most of us have stated our piece plenty of times by now.

Well that's a reaction lol. 

 

I really wasn't aware of what you're opinion was on the matter.  And I guess well.  I'm still not. 

It seems fairly obvious to me even if it is simple.  I don't see much if any evidence to the contrary.  

[Goatface Killah]

4 minutes ago, Nickster said:

 

What reaction do you have to this statement though SUPE? 

 

Ballard has hit in the draft mostly in positions that the league doesn't value as much as the positions he has not swung at and/or hit on. 

He has swung on every single position and has hit on many.

 

Pittman

Pierce

Campbell

Woods

Raimann

Odeyingbo

Paye

 

All look like hits to me. 

 

Its your expectations that are completely out of wack. 

[Nickster]

3 minutes ago, Goatface Killah said:

He has swung on every single position and has hit on many.

 

Pittman

Pierce

Campbell

Woods

Raimann

Odeyingbo

Paye

 

All look like hits to me. 

 

Its your expectations that are completely out of wack. 

 

I don't have any expectations,  I just want to see some winning ball.  lol.   I don't see many guys as "hits" there.  Some guys that might develop, and a couple that might play to there draft level slot.  

 

But I don't see personally anything that seems to be leading us in a winning direction there. 

 

You'd think with all those hits and the other guys in positions that the league doesn't value as much that we would look a little better than we do wouldn't you?

 

 

[Nickster]

9 minutes ago, Superman said:

 

I think that's also an oversimplification, and more of the same discussion that people have been volleying back and forth for 2-3 years. I'm not super interested in it at this point, as I think most of us have stated our piece plenty of times by now.

 

Do you think it's possible that some of the seemingly obvious regression of this team is attributable to the theory that some guys have been bandying about for last three years about lacking impact talent in impact positions?

[Indyfan4life]

1 minute ago, Nickster said:

 

I don't have any expectations,  I just want to see some winning ball.  lol.   I don't see many guys as "hits" there.  Some guys that might develop, and a couple that might play to there draft level slot.  

 

But I don't see personally anything that seems to be leading us in a winning direction there. 

 

You'd think with all those hits and the other guys in positions that the league doesn't value as much that we would look a little better than we do wouldn't you?

 

 

Let's be real here. ANY defense is going to fall off when they are on the field for 75%+ of the game, and having your ALL-PRO LB out that forces a ton of turnovers himself doesn't help. If the Colts offense was even marginally better, the defense would be better. It was also obvious having Paye out with injuries hurt the pass rush.

[Goatface Killah]

Just now, Nickster said:

 

I don't have any expectations,  I just want to see some winning ball.  lol.   I don't see many guys as "hits" there.  Some guys that might develop, and a couple that might play to there draft level slot.  

 

But I don't see personally anything that seems to be leading us in a winning direction there. 

 

You'd think with all those hits and the other guys in positions that the league doesn't value as much that we would look a little better than we do wouldn't you?

 

 

But you tried to say Ballard hasnt even swung at those positins and he clearly did. Why is it so hard for you to be objective? Young players take time and all those guys have shown clear signs of development. They all have talent they have displayed on an NFL field. Youre just being obtuse and have unreasonable expectations. 

 

No I dont think that all you need is a couple young players at key positions and you automatically win. Thats crazy talk. It takes more than talent to win in the NFL. It takes good to great QB play mostly and we havent had that.

[Nickster]

1 minute ago, Indyfan4life said:

Let's be real here. ANY defense is going to fall off when they are on the field for 75%+ of the game, and having your ALL-PRO LB out that forces a ton of turnovers himself doesn't help. If the Colts offense was even marginally better, the defense would be better. It was also obvious having Paye out with injuries hurt the pass rush.

 

This is an egregious myth on this board though INDY.  We were 15th in TOP at 29:47.  One slot above bang average.  We did not spend an unusual amount of time on Defense.  We just didn't.

 

Leonard was a TO machine in only 1 year.  That was last season.  Most likely his TO production would revert back to the mean which was somewhere around 4 for him for his career.  He was also going to be playing a different position in a different defense.   So sure he would have probably helped some, but I don't think it's as much as you seem to think.

 

Paye was never in college a great pass rusher and has also never been that so far in the Pros.   He just has never been.  Could he be someday?  Maybe.  But we actually accumulated more sacks with Paye out of the lineup than we did with him in it I think I saw someone write or post.

I like Paye, but this is the League.  People get hurt. Every team has very significant injuries, and the Colts weren't unusually injured this season.  

[Nickster]

10 minutes ago, Goatface Killah said:

But you tried to say Ballard hasnt even swung at those positins and he clearly did. Why is it so hard for you to be objective? Young players take time and all those guys have shown clear signs of development. They all have talent they have displayed on an NFL field. Youre just being obtuse and have unreasonable expectations. 

 

No I dont think that all you need is a couple young players at key positions and you automatically win. Thats crazy talk. It takes more than talent to win in the NFL. It takes good to great QB play mostly and we havent had that.

 

OK I see what you are saying then.    Maybe we swung and had a couple singles but I haven't seen any high OPS type hits here. 

Listen DUDE.   Objectively,  Looking at the record and the way we ended last season we pretty much suck.  You are what your record says you are. 

 

We actually, as much as people want to act like it didn't happen, OBJECTIVELY looking at the numbers, had pretty decent QB play from Wentz last year and Rivers the year before.  This year it was really bad.

 

But it seems funny that you throw out the word objective.  Man.  We were a 4 win team!   And objectively speaking, that is looking at the numbers, we had above average QB play for the 2 years previous to this one. 

[Solid84]

16 minutes ago, Indyfan4life said:

Let's be real here. ANY defense is going to fall off when they are on the field for 75%+ of the game, and having your ALL-PRO LB out that forces a ton of turnovers himself doesn't help. If the Colts offense was even marginally better, the defense would be better. It was also obvious having Paye out with injuries hurt the pass rush.

The offense had an average ToP of 29:47 this season. If that leaves the defense gassed I suspect they need to work on their conditioning…

[Superman]

3 minutes ago, Nickster said:

 

Do you think it's possible that some of the seemingly obvious regression of this team is attributable to the theory that some guys have been bandying about for last three years about lacking impact talent in impact positions?

 

It's possible. A star level WR might have made up for some of the problems at QB at OL this season, but I think that impact would have been limited. I think the big drop off in 2022 is because LT was absolutely terrible, Nelson had a bad start to the season, Kelly was very inconsistent (not as bad as I would have said a couple months ago, but still not very good), and Matt Ryan turned the ball over way too much. Add to that what I believe was poor coaching on the offensive side of the ball, and I think there were too many issues to overcome, even if we had a standout WR.

 

But I think this "impact talent" and "impact position" designation is something that is overblown, and mostly rooted in the belief that it's wrong to pay Nelson and Leonard. I don't think the Titans model is ideal, but three years ago they were in the AFCCG, and their leading WR had 52 total catches (by the way, AJ Brown was a 2nd rounder just like MPJ was). I don't think the Colts intention was ever to build a run heavy offense that didn't rely on dynamic pass catchers, or to be run stopping defense that couldn't rush the passer. I think they didn't get production out of young receivers and pass rushers for various reasons. The makeup of the OL changed as AC retired and Nelson/Smith emerged, and then JT was outstanding, and they continued to roll with what they had.

[Goatface Killah]

12 minutes ago, Nickster said:

 

This is an egregious myth on this board though INDY.  We were 15th in TOP at 29:47.  One slot above bang average.  We did not spend an unusual amount of time on Defense.  We just didn't.

 

Leonard was a TO machine in only 1 year.  That was last season.  Most likely his TO production would revert back to the mean which was somewhere around 4 for him for his career.  He was also going to be playing a different position in a different defense.   So sure he would have probably helped some, but I don't think it's as much as you seem to think.

 

Paye was never in college a great pass rusher and has also never been that so far in the Pros.   He just has never been.  Could he be someday?  Maybe.  But we actually accumulated more sacks with Paye out of the lineup than we did with him in it I think I saw someone write or post.

I like Paye, but this is the League.  People get hurt. Every team has very significant injuries, and the Colts weren't unusually injured this season.  

4 turnovers forced a year is elite. A turnover could turn a loss into a win. Youre downplaying the importance of turnovers. Which is your M-O. Diminish what they do well. Exaggerate the things they dont. 

 

Paye wouldve had around 10 sacks last year if he was healthy for the entire season. He has absolutely looked like a good pass rusher so far. 

 

As far as the defense what skewed their points allowed was the turnovers on offense. The Colts turned the ball over constantly, which is why people assume the T.O.P. was out of wack.

 

7 minutes ago, Nickster said:

 

OK I see what you are saying then.  

Listen DUDE.   Objectively,  Looking at the record and the way we ended last season we pretty much suck.  You are what your record says you are. 

 

We actually as much as people want to act like it didn't happen OBJECTIVELY looking at the numbers, had pretty decent QB play from Wentz last year and Rivers the year before.  This year it was really bad.

 

But it seems funny that you throw out the word objective.  Man.  We were a 4 win team!   And objectively speaking, that is looking at the numbers, we had above average QB play for the 2 years previous to this one. 

I dont think Carson Wentz played well in important moments so I disagree we had "good" QB play that season. They didnt get rid of him because they thought he was good. This is a stat guy view of his play. Dude cost us 2 games with really bad turnovers and then played his worst game of the year in the most important game of the year. He was not good. If he was good we wouldve made the playoffs and he wouldve got another year here.

 

We had good QB play under Rivers and we made the playoffs and almost won a game. We had good QB play with Luck his final season and we made the playoffs and actually won a game. Notice a trend?

 

Nobody has said we were a good team but just becsuse we only won 4 games doesnt mean everybody sucks. Thats not objectivity, DUDE. 

 

 

[Indyfan4life]

2 minutes ago, Nickster said:

 

This is an egregious myth on this board though INDY.  We were 15th in TOP at 29:47.  One slot above bang average.  We did not spend an unusual amount of time on Defense.  We just didn't.

 

Leonard was a TO machine in only 1 year.  That was last season.  Most likely his TO production would revert back to the mean which was somewhere around 4 for him for his career.  He was also going to be playing a different position in a different defense.   So sure he would have probably helped some, but I don't think it's as much as you seem to think.

 

Paye was never in college a great pass rusher and has also never been that so far in the Pros.   He just has never been.  Could he be someday?  Maybe.  But we actually accumulated more sacks with Paye out of the lineup than we did with him in it I think I saw someone write or post.

I like Paye, but this is the League.  People get hurt. Every team has very significant injuries, and the Colts weren't unusually injured this season.  

Paye was 3rd on the team with 6 sacks and 10 TFL. He trailed only Buckner's 8, and Ngakoue's 9.5 while playing in 12 games. So you're telling me if he had played a full season that his production wouldn't be any higher, nor would it have contributed any better to the defense?

[Indyfan4life]

4 minutes ago, Solid84 said:

The offense had an average ToP of 29:47 this season. If that leaves the defense gassed I suspect they need to work on their conditioning…

Oh, alright. Guess we're not factoring in all the Matt Ryan turnovers that put the defense right back on the field. Nah. Let's ignore that.

[Solid84]

1 minute ago, Indyfan4life said:

Oh, alright. Guess we're not factoring in all the Matt Ryan turnovers that put the defense right back on the field. Nah. Let's ignore that.

Turnovers are of course factored in to the ToP, so why are you trying to deflect here? It is what it is. 
 

The defense was for the most part the only thing that worked with this team. But that doesn’t change the fact that they only played 3 quarters per game. 

[Indeee]

27 minutes ago, Superman said:

 

Is there anyone arguing that the Colts skill players are on the same page as the best teams in the AFC?

 

I also don't think the bolded is true. It's a sensationalized soundbite that tries to oversimplify a nuanced topic.

I'm not sure arguing is the correct word or way to view it, but some are and have been really slow to recognize that this team's skill positions are very underwhelming in the Ballard era whether it be from player development, the player, or both as compared to the best teams. I've just always been from the school of thought that if a player was going to be truly special and maximize or increase their drive then they would take the bull by the horns so to speak. This team has been voided of true playmakers with personal drive for a while now and outside of JT there hasn't been one player who has commanded or demanded the attention mantra of a truly elite player. They are all kind of just there and that is why I deem none of them to be that special. It's just the way I see it, doesn't mean I'm right or wrong. There's also a school of thought where a QB or player can elevate those around them very similar to how sanders elevated our defense during the 2006 season. I just know that if we are hoping that we can grab a QB like that that will elevate our current players, I think we are in for a tough sled, which is why I personally have been adamant on focusing on the skill positions more. Homing in on the self-motivated players whose ceilings are really high from a talent and competitive nature. Those guys are there, proven or otherwise. I just think our analyzers are not really good at eval or at very least, prioritizing certain players in certain positions. 

[Goatface Killah]

13 minutes ago, Solid84 said:

Turnovers are of course factored in to the ToP, so why are you trying to deflect here? It is what it is. 
 

The defense was for the most part the only thing that worked with this team. But that doesn’t change the fact that they only played 3 quarters per game. 

The PPG is skewed by the games like Dallas for example where the Colts gave up 54 points which was fueled entirely by turnovers. The Colts had a few games like that.

 

The Colts statistically had a poor defense last year but they clearly played very well most of the year.

 

I think at the end of the year they had lost whatever mojo they had earlier in the year when things were still in reach and skewed the stats even further. 

 

The first 12 games they gave up 20PPG.

 

The last 5 games they gave up amost 37PPG.

[Nickster]

22 minutes ago, Superman said:

 

It's possible. A star level WR might have made up for some of the problems at QB at OL this season, but I think that impact would have been limited. I think the big drop off in 2022 is because LT was absolutely terrible, Nelson had a bad start to the season, Kelly was very inconsistent (not as bad as I would have said a couple months ago, but still not very good), and Matt Ryan turned the ball over way too much. Add to that what I believe was poor coaching on the offensive side of the ball, and I think there were too many issues to overcome, even if we had a standout WR.

 

But I think this "impact talent" and "impact position" designation is something that is overblown, and mostly rooted in the belief that it's wrong to pay Nelson and Leonard. I don't think the Titans model is ideal, but three years ago they were in the AFCCG, and their leading WR had 52 total catches (by the way, AJ Brown was a 2nd rounder just like MPJ was). I don't think the Colts intention was ever to build a run heavy offense that didn't rely on dynamic pass catchers, or to be run stopping defense that couldn't rush the passer. I think they didn't get production out of young receivers and pass rushers for various reasons. The makeup of the OL changed as AC retired and Nelson/Smith emerged, and then JT was outstanding, and they continued to roll with what they had.

So I was going to ask you for examples to the contrary after reading your 1st paragraph. 

 

There are the Titans.  It's just my belief that that 2 game run was largely an anomaly rather than some sort of model to build around.  And they DID have an impact stud WR that year.  Brown is way better than anyone we have .  So yeah 52 catches but that ignores the other worldly 20.2 average gain on those catches.  One of Ballards's failures I think that needs to be acknowleged is that he drafted lesser players at the same positions that later pics produced better players. TN barely made the post that year and had a good but fairly fortunate to game run that season in the post but have done nothing in the post since. 

 

and so that's been one of my points in these debates.  The TN model has not been that successful overall.  I think they too were the beneficiaries of a weak run of schedules here in a weak division for a part of the regular season success they have had. 

 

What happened when they failed to re-sign their stud WR this year?  Not good things. 

[Nickster]

15 minutes ago, Indyfan4life said:

Oh, alright. Guess we're not factoring in all the Matt Ryan turnovers that put the defense right back on the field. Nah. Let's ignore that.

Well man the number is the number and in the 2nd half of the season the team wasnt nearly as turnover prone as it had been in the first part of it.

It's a drum you guys keep banging TOP, but it's just not based in objective reality. 

[Indeee]

53 minutes ago, Goatface Killah said:

You are acting like you are predicting the future, but youre really just reacting to the past, in hindsight. 

 

If they ever win youll just say they did what you suggested and finally listened to you.

That actually is zero truth. Anyone who has really been listening to me spout off, knows I have been screaming about skill positions since TY was the DeFacto number 1 which he most certainly was not. On the Colts yes, but in the league? No. 

 

this team has had terrible skill tree going all the way back to Grigson. Ballard has just picked up where he left off. 

 

There are a couple times when I have been totally wrong about some stuff where my opinions were directed but overall, my story has never changed or waivered and to this point they have never done anything that I really suggested here (not that they would ever anyway) however they haven't won anything either. So yea, there's that. 

 

 

[Superman]

2 minutes ago, Indeee said:

I'm not sure arguing is the correct word or way to view it, but some are and have been really slow to recognize that this team's skill positions are very underwhelming in the Ballard era whether it be from player development, the player, or both as compared to the best teams. I've just always been from the school of thought that if a player was going to be truly special and maximize or increase their drive then they would take the bull by the horns so to speak. This team has been voided of true playmakers with personal drive for a while now and outside of JT there hasn't been one player who has commanded or demanded the attention mantra of a truly elite player. They are all kind of just there and that is why I deem none of them to be that special. It's just the way I see it, doesn't mean I'm right or wrong. There's also a school of thought where a QB or player can elevate those around them very similar to how sanders elevated our defense during the 2006 season. I just know that if we are hoping that we can grab a QB like that that will elevate our current players, I think we are in for a tough sled, which is why I personally have been adamant on focusing on the skill positions more. Homing in on the self-motivated players whose ceilings are really high from a talent and competitive nature. Those guys are there, proven or otherwise. I just think our analyzers are not really good at eval or at very least, prioritizing certain players in certain positions. 

 

I disagree. I think some people are just okay with waiting to see how players perform before declaring that they're not good enough, whereas other people have close to zero patience with young players.

 

As for focusing on skill positions vs having a good QB, there's nothing that says we can't do both. 

 

Big picture, I don't think anyone -- on this site, in the media, or even in Colts HQ -- looks back at the last three years and feels the decision making was top notch. We don't have a good QB, partly because we played musical chairs at the position, partly because we spent a first rounder on Carson Wentz, partly because we chose not to draft a QB in 2020. I think it was a major contributing factor to the HC losing his job. It's not something that anyone is debating.

 

And now, instead of adding talent around a promising young QB, we're resetting, and still have to go for broke to acquire the young QB. Which makes it kind of pointless, IMO, to keep banging on the drum about skill players. Until we have a QB, it doesn't matter, because we can't compete in the AFC -- against Mahomes, Allen, Burrow, Lawrence, Herbert, etc. -- without a good QB, bottom line. We can add all the skill players you want, and it's still going to leave us behind the class of the conference.

 

And here's my point: Everyone already knows and agrees with that. Your OP here is presented as if it's super insightful, or as if anyone is still wondering whether our supporting cast is good enough. We went 4-12-1, everyone knows and agrees that the roster isn't good enough. Our best WR averaged 9 yards/catch, we know we need better production at WR. None of this is controversial. I think the pushback comes from posters making it seem like there's an opposing viewpoint.

[Indyfan4life]

11 minutes ago, Solid84 said:

Turnovers are of course factored in to the ToP, so why are you trying to deflect here? It is what it is. 
 

The defense was for the most part the only thing that worked with this team. But that doesn’t change the fact that they only played 3 quarters per game. 

I’m not deflecting anything? I’m stating a fact that is being ignored because we have some people who choose to only see and speak about what they think is accurate. Cutting down even 1/4th of Ryan’s turnovers would have kept our defense off the field more than they were. When the offense was actually scoring and sustaining drives, the defense was typically better. That’s all I’m saying. Acting like the defense wasn’t on the field far more than what they should have been though is simply wrong. 

[Solid84]

4 minutes ago, Indyfan4life said:

I’m not deflecting anything? I’m stating a fact that is being ignored because we have some people who choose to only see and speak about what they think is accurate. Cutting down even 1/4th of Ryan’s turnovers would have kept our defense off the field more than they were. When the offense was actually scoring and sustaining drives, the defense was typically better. That’s all I’m saying. Acting like the defense wasn’t on the field far more than what they should have been though is simply wrong. 

Yes, cutting down his turnovers eould have given the defense more time off the field. But, they already got reasonable time off the field, so that shouldn’t have been an issue?

 

Look, I’m not saying the offense didn’t suck something awful, but the defense was average and that’s just what it is. Nothing about this team was going to carry us anywhere this year. 
 

Edit: 

Also, considering the amount of turnovers Ryan had, it’s commendable how much time the offense actually had on the field. You think they’d be deadlast in ToP. But they were average. 

[Nickster]

2 minutes ago, Indyfan4life said:

I’m not deflecting anything? I’m stating a fact that is being ignored because we have some people who choose to only see and speak about what they think is accurate. Cutting down even 1/4th of Ryan’s turnovers would have kept our defense off the field more than they were. When the offense was actually scoring and sustaining drives, the defense was typically better. That’s all I’m saying. Acting like the defense wasn’t on the field far more than what they should have been though is simply wrong. 

That's just not based in reality.  For instance turnovers deep in your own territory don't lead to massive TOP changes.  yes we had a lot of TOS but the notion that we had a tired D that was living on the field all the time is simply demonstrably inaccurate. 

 

How much should the D have been on the field IDK.  But they were on it less than most teams.  That is not debatable. 

[Goatface Killah]

13 minutes ago, Indeee said:

That actually is zero truth. Anyone who has really been listening to me spout off, knows I have been screaming about skill positions since TY was the DeFacto number 1 which he most certainly was not. On the Colts yes, but in the league? No. 

 

this team has had terrible skill tree going all the way back to Grigson. Ballard has just picked up where he left off. 

 

There are a couple times when I have been totally wrong about some stuff where my opinions were directed but overall, my story has never changed or waivered and to this point they have never done anything that I really suggested here (not that they would ever anyway) however they haven't won anything either. So yea, there's that. 

 

 

And he has drafted skill players. You just keep acting like he hasnt. 

 

If he actually signed Christian Kirk last year, there is no way he has the kind of year he had in Jax playing with Lawrence and you are sitting here today taking Ballard to the cleaners over his decision to bring him in. You wouldve also ridiculed Ballard for taking Campbell because he wouldve probably been cut to make room for Kirk. And you would also criticize them for having no cap space this year because they gave a bunch of money to Kirk last year. This is how people like you operate, in hindsight.

 

Very little of what you say is even realistic. You cant sign every major free agent and hit on every pick.

 

 

[Superman]

4 minutes ago, Nickster said:

So I was going to ask you for examples to the contrary after reading your 1st paragraph. 

 

There are the Titans.  It's just my belief that that 2 game run was largely an anomaly rather than some sort of model to build around.  And they DID have an impact stud WR that year.  Brown is way better than anyone we have .  One of Ballards's failures I think that needs to be acknowleged is that he drafted lesser players at the same positions that later pics produced better players. TN barely made the post that year and had a good but fairly fortunate to game run that season in the post but have done nothing in the post since. 

 

and so that's been one of my points in these debates.  The TN model has not been that successful overall.  I think they too were the beneficiaries of a weak run of schedules here in a weak division for a part of the regular season success they have had. 

 

What happened when they failed to re-sign their stud WR this year?  Not good things. 

 

Aren't we past that part of the discussion, though? I'm not arguing that we should copy the Titans, I'm saying I don't think that's a good way to build. I'm also saying I don't think that was the Colts intention, I think it's more a matter of circumstance that they somewhat resembled that makeup.

 

And on AJ Brown, yes, he's one of the best WRs in the league. But he was a 2nd rounder, just like MPJ. So it speaks to the idea that all this hand-wringing about Ballard's allocation of resources is missing the point. There's nothing wrong with drafting WRs in the 2nd round and beyond, in fact, it's worked quite nicely for several teams in recent years.

 

The bigger issue, IMO, is whether we've drafted the right players, and developed them properly. And at these "impact positions," like WR, Edge, LT, etc., I think we've had a bigger problem with evaluation and development than we have with targeting the positions themselves. If half of our Edge picks had hit, we'd be in pretty good shape. If we sign Leno instead of Fisher, LT is solid. 

 

But it seems like this discussion keeps getting dragged back to "Ballard doesn't value impact positions highly enough," and I think that's a mistaken viewpoint. In a way, I think there could be a bigger problem -- I don't think we've selected the right players at Edge and LT specifically.

[Indy87]

On 1/24/2023 at 10:38 AM, Indeee said:

Let's have an honest, open-minded discussion here:

 

My take.

 

While most are excited with anticipation of our new HC/Staff and pondering over which QB would best fit our team, I can't help but have a much wider lens. 

 

When I think of the next decade in the AFC, I'm not seeing where the Colts can actually make a splash at all with this current roster, especially offensively. Yes, this team needs a QB, at least a stable one in the worst way but this offense from the skill positions is putrid. It's nowhere close to being elite. In fact, I would say that this year's draft should be entirely offense for the first 4-5 rounds and I'm not talking about drafting O-line or RB. 

 

Outside of JT, who on this offense scares defenses? I mean look at our competition.

 

Bengals: Burrow, Chase, Higgins, Boyd, Mixon, and Hurst.

 

Chiefs: Mahomes, Kelce, Mckinnon, Pacheo, Toney, Schuster, and Scantling/Hardman.

 

Bills: Allen, Diggs, Davis, McKensie, Knox, and Singletary.

 

Jags: Lawrence, Ridley, Kirk, Ettiene, Jones, and Engram.

 

Chargers: Herbert, Allen, Williams, Eckler, Palmer, and Everette. 

 

Dolphins: Tua, Waddle, Hill, Mostert, and Geseki. 

 

That is a gauntlet, and the Dolphins, Bills, and Chiefs are the least stacked IMHO, albeit still highly dangerous. 

 

Is Pittman, Campbell, and Pierce anywhere near what our competition already has in place at WR? I mean these guys struggle to gain separation most days. There are some on here actually suggesting that Pittman be traded. Who knows? It might just happen. Ballard himself basically recently eluded that Pittman is not a number one, something all of us should have known when he was drafted, heck i for one said it, and Pierce is terrible. Pierce is a WR3, if. 

 

Does anyone on here think Jelani Woods is a "Move" tight end? Meaning, is Jelani in the mold from a route running/quickness standpoint as Engram or Kelce or Everette? If he is, he isn't/hasn't been used that way and wouldn't most agree that if a player shows that type of skill in a practice standpoint that the team would try to utilize that in game? 

 

I think sometimes we as fans get caught up in what I call "fool's gold football".  We are so hopeful and forgiving that we stop using our eyes and instead, see with our minds. We start playing the what if game that's always predicated on what our minds are seeing in terms of hoping what our team can be. We lose sight of what it actually is.  Unfortunately, this has happened to a lot of us on this forum for the past few years and here we are. Most times I get crucified on here but I'm a realist. 

 

When Peyton was here, other than the Chargers always having our number, it was just the Patriots we had to worry about normally. Not now. Now there is at least 6 teams, and the Steelers are close to entering that mix with Pickett, Harris, Pickens, Johnson, and Friermuth.

 

I'm sorry, but this Colts team is years away from entering that gauntlet with this current offensive roster. Can the Colts win a game here and there, sure, but this team is nowhere near competing for a SB anytime soon. Again, this about winning Super Bowls, and we can't even win the division. 

 

Yes, we need a stable QB, however without a formidable skill tree around that QB, we are just spinning wheels. Where is that Skill tree going to come from? 

 

This team is in trouble, and it will take at least 3-4 more years to get somewhat close without an awful lot of luck. Ballard built this team for the 80's style of play and unfortunately it might have set us back that long. 

 

Convince me I'm wrong. Seriously. I'm trying to make waves here; the waters are already extremely choppy. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

all the teams you listed have an above avg to elite QB. maybe list a few teams who dont have that QB and tell me their skill positions guys are heads and shoulders above the guys we have. 

[throwing BBZ]

4 minutes ago, Solid84 said:

Yes, cutting down his turnovers eould have given the defense more time off the field. But, they already got reasonable time off the field, so that shouldn’t have been an issue?

 

Look, I’m not saying the offense didn’t suck something awful, but the defense was average and that’s just what it is. Nothing about this team was going to carry us anywhere this year. 
 

Edit: 

Also, considering the amount of turnovers Ryan had, it’s commendable how much time the offense actually had on the field. You think they’d be deadlast in ToP. But they were average. 

 

  I would describe us as playing a "prevent" type defense most of the time.

  It was just flat out weird. Our back seven played deep enough that there were easy targets available way to often.

 Gus is a pacifist, just not aggressive enough. FIRE HIM!

If Irsay and/or Ballard try to argue with HC prospects that they keep Gus...

[Nickster]

11 minutes ago, Superman said:

 

Aren't we past that part of the discussion, though? I'm not arguing that we should copy the Titans, I'm saying I don't think that's a good way to build. I'm also saying I don't think that was the Colts intention, I think it's more a matter of circumstance that they somewhat resembled that makeup.

 

And on AJ Brown, yes, he's one of the best WRs in the league. But he was a 2nd rounder, just like MPJ. So it speaks to the idea that all this hand-wringing about Ballard's allocation of resources is missing the point. There's nothing wrong with drafting WRs in the 2nd round and beyond, in fact, it's worked quite nicely for several teams in recent years.

 

The bigger issue, IMO, is whether we've drafted the right players, and developed them properly. And at these "impact positions," like WR, Edge, LT, etc., I think we've had a bigger problem with evaluation and development than we have with targeting the positions themselves. If half of our Edge picks had hit, we'd be in pretty good shape. If we sign Leno instead of Fisher, LT is solid. 

 

But it seems like this discussion keeps getting dragged back to "Ballard doesn't value impact positions highly enough," and I think that's a mistaken viewpoint. In a way, I think there could be a bigger problem -- I don't think we've selected the right players at Edge and LT specifically.

 

"Ballard has hit in the draft mostly in positions that the league doesn't value as much as the positions he has not swung at and/or hit on."

 

So this was the quote that I asked you to respond to.  Yeah he's taken some swings.  At EDGE as you've said a lot.  at WR he's taken some swings and there are many much better players who were drafted after those .  So yeah I can see how maybe it gets lost that our "talent" is primarily middle of the field talent, but I just think he's really failed at the positions that matter and any successes he's had have been primarily in lesser positions. And I think that is why we stink.  

 

I think what you are saying is that it's circumstantial that our best players are in positions that the league values less, not intentional.  But then he still seems to value size and straight line speed over the less obviuos wiggle or I think I 've seen you term it twitchy talent at pass catcher.   

[Solid84]

3 minutes ago, throwing BBZ said:

 

  I would describe us as playing a "prevent" type defense most of the time.

  It was just flat out weird. Our back seven played deep enough that there were easy targets available way to often.

 Gus is a pacifist, just not aggressive enough. FIRE HIM!

If Irsay and/or Ballard try to argue with HC prospects that they keep Gus...

I would like to see us be more aggressive. Both with blitzing and our coverage. I’ve seen enough of “bend-but-don’t-break”… especially when it’s more like “break-and-break-again”

[Goatface Killah]

Lets look at how Cincinnati built their offense.

 

They drafted Boyd 7 years ago. They drafted Joe Mixon the following year. 

 

Then they stunk for 2 entire seasons to the point they got the #1 pick and landed Joe Burrow. There was no miraculous evaluation done he just fell right into their laps with the #1 pick because they were the worst team in football the previous year. They also drafted Tee Higgins that year. Great draft.

 

Then they were awful again and got a chance to draft Jamarr Chase who was clearly the best WR in his draft class.

 

How is any of this great drafting? Like who cant take the clear best player in the draft at his position?

 

But sure lets BBQ Chris Ballard because he hasnt had the number 1 pick with Burrow on the board or had an opportunity to take a guy like Jamarr Chase.

[Nickster]

5 minutes ago, throwing BBZ said:

 

  I would describe us as playing a "prevent" type defense most of the time.

  It was just flat out weird. Our back seven played deep enough that there were easy targets available way to often.

 Gus is a pacifist, just not aggressive enough. FIRE HIM!

If Irsay and/or Ballard try to argue with HC prospects that they keep Gus...

 

he plays cover 3 primarily.  It's actually a pretty aggressive version of it too.   I high deep safety and usually at least 5 guys on the LOS and often Gilmore in the face of the outside reciever.  He doesn't blitz often but actually plays pretty close to the LOS on most downs except for the center fielder. 

[Nickster]

3 minutes ago, Goatface Killah said:

Lets look at how Cincinnati built their offense.

 

They drafted Boyd 7 years ago. They drafted Joe Mixon the following year. 

 

Then they stunk for 2 entire seasons to the point they got the #1 pick and landed Joe Burrow. There was no miraculous evaluation done he just fell right into their laps with the #1 pick because they were the worst team in football the previous year. They also drafted Tee Higgins that year. Great draft.

 

Then they were awful again and got a chance to draft Jamarr Chase who was clearly the best WR in his draft class.

 

How is any of this great drafting? Like who cant take the clear best player in the draft at his position?

 

But sure lets BBQ Chris Ballard because he hasnt had the number 1 pick with Burrow on the board or had an opportunity to take a guy like Jamarr Chase.

 

I agree with you here Goat.  CInn has been able to become good because they've really sucked and then hit after one of the suck years at QB.  

 

 

[shasta519]

20 minutes ago, Goatface Killah said:

Then they were awful again and got a chance to draft Jamarr Chase who was clearly the best WR in his draft class.

 

How is any of this great drafting? Like who cant take the clear best player in the draft at his position?

 

But sure lets BBQ Chris Ballard because he hasnt had the number 1 pick with Burrow on the board or had an opportunity to take a guy like Jamarr Chase.

 

That's fair. But Ballard has received praise for years for his "great drafting" for picking Nelson at #6, who was arguably the safest prospect in years.

Edit: And he hasn't had a chance to draft a WR like Chase, but he definitely has had a chance to draft other elite WRs and passed. 

[DiogoSales]

Disagree

 

1 - Many of the personnel that you just mentioned are not elite, chiefs has Pat/Kelce and a bunch of averages.

 

2 - Purdy/CMC/Deebo/Ayuk/Kittle

Jimmy/Morstead/Deebo/Ayuk/Kittle

 

This is the ofensive Power of the team that is on the NFC champ game 4 out of last 5. The diference? Coaching.

[Goatface Killah]

44 minutes ago, Nickster said:

So I was going to ask you for examples to the contrary after reading your 1st paragraph. 

 

There are the Titans.  It's just my belief that that 2 game run was largely an anomaly rather than some sort of model to build around.  And they DID have an impact stud WR that year.  Brown is way better than anyone we have .  So yeah 52 catches but that ignores the other worldly 20.2 average gain on those catches.  One of Ballards's failures I think that needs to be acknowleged is that he drafted lesser players at the same positions that later pics produced better players. TN barely made the post that year and had a good but fairly fortunate to game run that season in the post but have done nothing in the post since. 

 

and so that's been one of my points in these debates.  The TN model has not been that successful overall.  I think they too were the beneficiaries of a weak run of schedules here in a weak division for a part of the regular season success they have had. 

 

What happened when they failed to re-sign their stud WR this year?  Not good things. 

Nickster, if youre gonna call the Titans model "not that successful overall" i have to question what would actually make you happy. 

 

They have won several division titles and went to the AFC Championship which you referred to as an "anomoly".

 

Earlier you suggested the Colts were exactly what the record says they were. 

 

If you believe that Im fine with it, but lets be consistent and not move the goal post based off how we feel in the moment.

 

Are you just gonna poo poo on everything they do unless they win the chip? 

 

That was my point about your expectations being out of whack. 

[Goatface Killah]

6 minutes ago, shasta519 said:

 

That's fair. But Ballard has received praise for years for his "great drafting" for picking Nelson at #6, who was arguably the safest prospect in years.

I dont give him credit for great drafting for picking Nelson. I giving him credit for recognizing how much we needed him at that time and doing so in the face of criticism.

 

We were very much on the right track after that draft.

 

 

[ClaytonColt]

1 hour ago, Indyfan4life said:

Let's be real here. ANY defense is going to fall off when they are on the field for 75%+ of the game, and having your ALL-PRO LB out that forces a ton of turnovers himself doesn't help. If the Colts offense was even marginally better, the defense would be better. It was also obvious having Paye out with injuries hurt the pass rush.

That would be an amazing point IF our defense was ever on the field for 75% of the game.

 

Since they weren't though its largely pointless.

[Nickster]

24 minutes ago, Goatface Killah said:

Nickster, if youre gonna call the Titans model "not that successful overall" i have to question what would actually make you happy. 

 

They have won several division titles and went to the AFC Championship which you referred to as an "anomoly".

 

Earlier you suggested the Colts were exactly what the record says they were. 

 

If you believe that Im fine with it, but lets be consistent and not move the goal post based off how we feel in the moment.

 

Are you just gonna poo poo on everything they do unless they win the chip? 

 

That was my point about your expectations being out of whack. 

No not at all.  I’m not an championship or bust type of fan.  I think you want your team trying for that though.  But it seems beyond clear that we are not headed in a good direction as an org.
 

 TN made a major mistake not resigning Brown.  That was a bad move IMO.  I’m don’t know what all went into that from a cap allocation standpoint.  But giving up their elite pass catcher has proven obviously harmful to their squad.  AJ brown is the exact type of impact player that I think is necessary for championship contention here in the 20s.  KC had to let Hill go but they still had a ++ pass catcher in Kelce.  
 

TN won division titles in a very bad division and they haven’t won a playoff game since their run when they squeaked into the playoffs.   That’s the only example tha I can think of in the recent past of a running back oriented team doing anything in the post .  That’s all I’m saying .  It doesn’t seem the way to build contenders. 

[throwing BBZ]

On 1/24/2023 at 12:09 PM, Defjamz26 said:

You can’t “contend” with the talent level we have. You can beat up on some bad teams and then upset a real contender from time to time. When we have elite talent at OT, CB, WR, QB, and Edge then we can contend. And it may be hard to have it at every position but you at least need 3/5 and QB and WR are a must.

 

 Cinci doesn't have elite talent at OT, CB, do they?

 KC WR,CB ?

  Phlly CB?

    Keenan Allen is 30 years old and darn good. Pittman absolutely is very close to him. A better QB and OC is what he needs. Mike Williams is a big play guy, when healthy. It is to early to tell where Pierce will be in 2-3 years, but he certainly has a lot of tools.  Most here don't think Elite with those two but when Herbert has them together they kick but.

 Yes we need one more really quick WR, cross our fingers.

And we have 3 pcs of a good OL. 

  I feel good about WOODS becoming an excellent weapon, and also the guy that got hurt.

 Last draft had a covid caused extra thousand ish in it so finding late rd jewels will be harder. 

 Ballard absolutely will bid on a FA RG. lol

  We have solid young building blocks.