Jump to content
Indianapolis Colts
Indianapolis Colts Fan Forum

How can you trust Ballard?


mirobi48

Recommended Posts

19 hours ago, DougDew said:

I get the idea that CAR wanted to get in position for a QB and maybe had to get to 1 since 2,3,4, and 5 were not options, but that doesn't change OPs interpretation that if IND wanted to go to number 1 after they finished their due diligence, they were slow on the draw.

 

Sometimes waiting to get all of the information you can possibly get on something is too slow and scared compared to others who can see things with less info.

 

 A big ugh Dougy mincing words to come up with a sour interpretation.

So the other 31 teams should have had the right (same) #1 QB on their board when the Panthers did. 

 Just wondering, do you believe the reporting was correct right after the trade was made, that Carolina said they could trade out of #1? Conviction or just gamblers?

  We will look back in a year or two to see if they paid the right price.

Because imo, they paid for a future top-5 QB. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't trust Ballard, especially when it comes to straightening out the O line.

It's seems like he plans, to go again, with the same starting players (maybe make one change at RG?) and somehow believes they will dramatically improve this year from last.

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

6 hours ago, NewColtsFan said:


I think this is a mostly good post that I mostly agree with.   But there was one sentence near the end that I think you tripped up on.  
 

Ballard has had most resources?   Really? 
 

The Colts are a small market team, so having money to take a more aggressive approach to roster building isn’t a resource that he’s had.   
 

Now, it’s fair if you say he knew what he was getting into when he joined the Colts.   I’m only saying that as one of the smaller market teams Ballard’s financial resources are more limited than other franchises.  


I just meant that he has had plenty of draft capital and cap space to build up a team. That he wasn’t restricted in those avenues. 
 

Some of that is to his credit because he is shrewd at draft day trades. Just in his first two seasons, he had a top 15 pick, #6 pick and (5) R2 picks. By the end of his 3rd draft, he had been able to draft (10) top 64 players. That’s a lot of capital. And even since then, he’s had plenty of capital and hasn’t really had to pick late ever. 
 

Also, the cap was in good shape as well when he got here. And actually, Luck retiring would have opened up a lot of cap space as well. So he’s had the financial ability to get players. 
 

I do agree that IND might not be the most attractive spot for FAs, but plenty of teams deal with that. 
 

Luck retiring had a huge impact, but still, the resources have been there to be better than a 4-win team after 6 offseasons of roster building.
 

When Ballard got here, he said “it will never be about one guy” and now it is about one guy. And Ballard has preached about sustained success and delayed gratification. I think it’s safe to say the fans have yet to get either.

 

By his own words and goals set forth, he failed. He even said he failed. 
 

Will he adapt and have more success? It’s certainly possible. And I hope he does.

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

55 minutes ago, throwing BBZ said:

 

 A big ugh Dougy mincing words to come up with a sour interpretation.

So the other 31 teams should have had the right (same) #1 QB on their board when the Panthers did. 

 Just wondering, do you believe the reporting was correct right after the trade was made, that Carolina said they could trade out of #1? Conviction or just gamblers?

  We will look back in a year or two to see if they paid the right price.

Because imo, they paid for a future top-5 QB. 

This isn't that complicated.  In the eyes of many here, Ballard was not too slow.  It was CAR that was desperate.

 

I simply contend that CAR knew who they wanted and got in position to get him, because they figured that when other teams finished their due diligence on QBs, enough teams would come to the same conclusion about who the number 1 guy was.

 

And Ballard says there is not enough difference in the QBs to make the trade up.  Fine.  From an overall talent grade, they may be the same.  But based upon who he settles for at pick 4, there is going to be a tremendous difference in skill sets/ traits that has to be navigated.  AR is a different guy than shrimpy Young, and Levis is different than both.  Its not like he has Mayfield, Darnold, and Rosen to choose from.

 

So instead of going up and getting the guy that fits what you want to do, Ballard is apparently going to settle for who the QB is (one of two choices probably), then decide what his team is going to look like from there.   Is there a component here that I'm missing?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 hours ago, Jared Cisneros said:

This is definitely not a reason to trust Ballard. If 31 members of this forum were the other 31 GMs of the other 31 teams, you'd have a point. Unfortunately, Ballard is competing against 31 other GMs that know what they are doing, and most have better team-building philosophies than Ballard (which is why it took 4 years to finally draft a franchise QB after Luck retired). Ballard is a losing GM even as a good drafter, which shows that his veteran QB route didn't work out for the most part, and his focus on O-Line/D-Line in the draft was outdated. We have also paid some of the least important positions to long-term deals. 

 

Ballard is on thin ice, and this draft will determine whether he survives as a GM. Being better than anyone on this forum still makes him a losing GM with no division titles and 1 playoff win heading into his 7th year.

Yeah Yeah Comedy GIF by CBS

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Zoltan said:

They just knew they wanted the first pick of the 4.

 

I think that's as good an explanation as any. I don't think it has to be desperation or impetuousness or anything like that. They just decided they wanted to have control of the top of the draft, and make sure they get their guy. Which basically any team could have done if it was critically important to them.

 

This is also why I say tanking is unnecessary. The Panthers won 7 games last year, then moved up from #9 to #1 for a typical, established price. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, 2006Coltsbestever said:

Will everyone has an opinion. Sounds like you like Levis which is fine. I can have the same logic you have though and say it makes me laugh when people say Bryce Young won't be a good PRO because of his size. That is just an opinion which makes me laugh by the way and nothing factual about it :thmup:

I've never stated Bryce won't be a good pro. He's a heck of a college QB, so he should do fine transitioning to the talent level in the NFL. What I do think is he won't hold up for injury concern reasons because of his size. Both are assumptions though. He could be terrible in the NFL and never get hurt. We will see. 

 

As for Levis, I just don't like the trashing of him. Same as you with Young apparently. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Superman said:

 

I think that's as good an explanation as any. I don't think it has to be desperation or impetuousness or anything like that. They just decided they wanted to have control of the top of the draft, and make sure they get their guy. Which basically any team could have done if it was critically important to them.

 

This is also why I say tanking is unnecessary. The Panthers won 7 games last year, then moved up from #9 to #1 for a typical, established price. 

True. But it doesn’t always work that way either. I think Carolina jumped because of the circumstances of this year and the uncertainty of the QBs. If a Luck or Burrow type of player was in the mix, it would be much harder to convince a team at 1 to give up that opportunity. 
 

They saw this year as a perfect opportunity to jump up considering how willing Chicago was. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, RollerColt said:

True. But it doesn’t always work that way either. I think Carolina jumped because of the circumstances of this year and the uncertainty of the QBs. If a Luck or Burrow type of player was in the mix, it would be much harder to convince a team at 1 to give up that opportunity. 
 

They saw this year as a perfect opportunity to jump up considering how willing Chicago was. 

 

In the 2020 draft, the Bengals weren't moving from #1. But the Dolphins, who were supposed to be "Tanking for Tua" in 2019, wound up drafting him at #5 anyway. And Herbert went at #6. And the Colts probably could have gone up to #3 or #4 if they wanted (and probably should have, IMO). 

 

My point is just that you don't have to race to the bottom to be in position to draft a good QB. Maybe you can't always secure the #1 pick, but you can probably get close to the top of the draft. The Niners in 2021 are another example.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 minutes ago, El Potro said:

I've never stated Bryce won't be a good pro. He's a heck of a college QB, so he should do fine transitioning to the talent level in the NFL. What I do think is he won't hold up for injury concern reasons because of his size. Both are assumptions though. He could be terrible in the NFL and never get hurt. We will see. 

 

As for Levis, I just don't like the trashing of him. Same as you with Young apparently. 

Fair enough.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, Superman said:

 

In the 2020 draft, the Bengals weren't moving from #1. But the Dolphins, who were supposed to be "Tanking for Tua" in 2019, wound up drafting him at #5 anyway. And Herbert went at #6. And the Colts probably could have gone up to #3 or #4 if they wanted (and probably should have, IMO). 

 

My point is just that you don't have to race to the bottom to be in position to draft a good QB. Maybe you can't always secure the #1 pick, but you can probably get close to the top of the draft. The Niners in 2021 are another example.

Good points, I thought you just meant getting to 1. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 hours ago, BlueShoe said:


I believe Levis has a lot of upside, and have mentioned it. His last season can be compared to Josh Allen’s last collegiate season. That was my prediction for him this year too. There are a lot of Josh Allen comparisons. 
 

But Levis’s ego might be too big for the big leagues. It’s a problem for him. It’s his biggest problem. 

 

 Place your bet, will he balance his mouthy confidence with enough humility to overcome his weaknesses? 

 Jay Cutler is a good comp regarding arm and mentality. He never quit throwing interceptions, he took his money, chased exotic women, and used his notoriety to live a public lifestyle.

 Levis following that path would be a concern. 

I could see him following a FB path similar to Herbert too!

 JMO Blue you post most similar to Superman, and I wish we had even a few more like that.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

26 minutes ago, throwing BBZ said:

 

 Place your bet, will he balance his mouthy confidence with enough humility to overcome his weaknesses? 

 Jay Cutler is a good comp regarding arm and mentality. He never quit throwing interceptions, he took his money, chased exotic women, and used his notoriety to live a public lifestyle.

 Levis following that path would be a concern. 

I could see him following a FB path similar to Herbert too!

 JMO Blue you post most similar to Superman, and I wish we had even a few more like that.

 

 

Thank you for the kind words... 

 

That is the thing with Levis. We do not know how he will respond once he gets in a NFL locker room. He could grow up, and find the humility that he needs... That could happen, and if he does then look out. He could be great. If we are talking physical traits, Levis checks all the boxes for me. To be a great QB in the NFL, a player has to be a great leader of men. It is my biggest concern with Levis. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, DougDew said:

This isn't that complicated.  In the eyes of many here, Ballard was not too slow.  It was CAR that was desperate.

 

I simply contend that CAR knew who they wanted and got in position to get him, because they figured that when other teams finished their due diligence on QBs, enough teams would come to the same conclusion about who the number 1 guy was.

 

And Ballard says there is not enough difference in the QBs to make the trade up.  Fine.  From an overall talent grade, they may be the same.  But based upon who he settles for at pick 4, there is going to be a tremendous difference in skill sets/ traits that has to be navigated.  AR is a different guy than shrimpy Young, and Levis is different than both.  Its not like he has Mayfield, Darnold, and Rosen to choose from.

 

So instead of going up and getting the guy that fits what you want to do, Ballard is apparently going to settle for who the QB is (one of two choices probably), then decide what his team is going to look like from there.   Is there a component here that I'm missing?

 

 That in the interview process, Steichen sold Irsay and Ballard on his ability to attack defenses with any of the top 4's skill sets.

 My best Guess is our franchise would be biased against Young for size and durability. But still believing he will go in the 1st two.

 I think we will surely take Levis if available. Richardson?

 There are two juicy defensive players in this draft and the trade back options are many. Trading back one with Seattle could be very helpful.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, throwing BBZ said:

 

 That in the interview process, Steichen sold Irsay and Ballard on his ability to attack defenses with any of the top 4's skill sets.

 My best Guess is our franchise would be biased against Young for size and durability. But still believing he will go in the 1st two.

 I think we will surely take Levis if available. Richardson?

 There are two juicy defensive players in this draft and the trade back options are many. Trading back one with Seattle could be very helpful.

Agreed.  I was looking at the embedded idea that Ballard sits on his * and isn't bold enough.   If he's going to let the QB come to him and then have his coach figure it out, that's less bold than ranking what skill sets you desire in a Qb and then going and getting that player.

 

I've thought all along that this offseason looks like Ballard wanting Levis early on, and simply has decided that he will be in striking distance to get him at pick 3 or 4.  So Ballard isn't sitting on his *,  He's decided what QB he wants and the strategy he needs to get him...and he doesn't need to get to pick 1 to get his guy.  Sure Richardson might be a late option in this process, but there is nothing that Levis has done to drop his stock at all, IMO.

 

But until the time that Ballard picks Levis at 4, or goes up and gets him at 3 when he has too, its fair to ask if he's just sitting and waiting for the player to come to him when other clubs might be more bold in getting into position to get their guy.

 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 hours ago, DougDew said:

Isn't that the same thing as OPs interpretation?

 

The Colts were slower than CAR in knowing if they should trade up or stay put.

 

That's different than what some are saying here (running to quickly defend Ballard per usual)..... that he did finish his due diligence enough to know that it wasn't worth moving up.

The Colts had just hired a new HC who had been totally involved in the Super Bowl. I commend Ballard for not making a rash decision on giving up the farm but wanting to give the new HC some time to study the QBs and be involved in the decision.

I may add that there a some who run too fast to criticize Ballard for most ever move he makes prior to knowing the facts. 

 

 

 

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, hoosierhawk said:

The Colts had just hired a new HC who had been totally involved in the Super Bowl. I commend Ballard for not making a rash decision on giving up the farm but wanting to give the new HC some time to study the QBs and be involved in the decision.

I may add that there a some who run too fast to criticize Ballard for most ever move he makes prior to knowing the facts. 

 

 

 

 

I think CAR moved up after the combine?  It sort of said they they saw all they needed to see to confirm what they already thought about each QB, and that further discussion and pro-days wasn't going to move their rankings much.   

 

Not criticizing Ballard, but i think CAR did move very decisively given their opportunity.  That's different than CAR just giving up a bunch of capital to move up to then see if any QB of the four was worth the first pick, which I think some are saying. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, shasta519 said:


I just meant that he has had plenty of draft capital and cap space to build up a team. That he wasn’t restricted in those avenues. 
 

Some of that is to his credit because he is shrewd at draft day trades. Just in his first two seasons, he had a top 15 pick, #6 pick and (5) R2 picks. By the end of his 3rd draft, he had been able to draft (10) top 64 players. That’s a lot of capital. And even since then, he’s had plenty of capital and hasn’t really had to pick late ever. 
 

Also, the cap was in good shape as well when he got here. And actually, Luck retiring would have opened up a lot of cap space as well. So he’s had the financial ability to get players. 
 

I do agree that IND might not be the most attractive spot for FAs, but plenty of teams deal with that. 
 

Luck retiring had a huge impact, but still, the resources have been there to be better than a 4-win team after 6 offseasons of roster building.
 

When Ballard got here, he said “it will never be about one guy” and now it is about one guy. And Ballard has preached about sustained success and delayed gratification. I think it’s safe to say the fans have yet to get either.

 

By his own words and goals set forth, he failed. He even said he failed. 
 

Will he adapt and have more success? It’s certainly possible. And I hope he does.


Good and fair response.   Appreciate it. 
 

Thanks.     :thmup:

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 hours ago, Jared Cisneros said:

I don't trust Ballard personally, at least not with the QB situation. IMO, the only way Ballard can be right here is if all 4 QBs hit, or if all 4 QBs bust, and those are the two extremes. If it's the former, he'll look like a genius. If it's the latter, then he looks even worse for taking the 4th QB when they all bust (the only upside is we wouldn't have given up draft capital to move up). 

 

It looks like an attempt to save draft capital more than anything, and I don't really buy the "4 QBs are the same" schtick. I just think that's an excuse to save draft picks. I think Ballard has them ranked in a specific order and has preferences, he just doesn't want to admit that or there will be pressure from fans, the media, and possibly Jim Irsay to trade up and get his top guy.

Do you really think that Ballard makes 100 % of all personnel decisions on his own, that he works in a vacuum, that he disregards all his staff, the HC and Irsay?

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

56 minutes ago, DougDew said:

Agreed.  I was looking at the embedded idea that Ballard sits on his * and isn't bold enough.   If he's going to let the QB come to him and then have his coach figure it out, that's less bold than ranking what skill sets you desire in a Qb and then going and getting that player.

 

I've thought all along that this offseason looks like Ballard wanting Levis early on, and simply has decided that he will be in striking distance to get him at pick 3 or 4.  So Ballard isn't sitting on his *,  He's decided what QB he wants and the strategy he needs to get him...and he doesn't need to get to pick 1 to get his guy.  Sure Richardson might be a late option in this process, but there is nothing that Levis has done to drop his stock at all, IMO.

 

But until the time that Ballard picks Levis at 4, or goes up and gets him at 3 when he has too, its fair to ask if he's just sitting and waiting for the player to come to him when other clubs might be more bold in getting into position to get their guy.

 

So Ballard quickly zeroed in on Levis but because he sees things others don’t he was sure other teams wouldn’t zero in on him? Under that scenario, a GM who, as unlikely as it seems, was as as smart as Ballard and saw the same traits in Levis, could have moved up to 1 to take Levis, like Carolina is apparently doing with Stroud. Ballard loses his guy. As is, Ballard could still be in a bidding war at 3 for Levis. I don’t know — you know more than I do, but I see Ballard as incredibly passive due to the inability to make a tough decision he thinks may backfire. When has he made a truly bold move in six years — maybe that’s the better question. Was Buckner bold? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

37 minutes ago, ShuteAt168 said:

So Ballard quickly zeroed in on Levis but because he sees things others don’t he was sure other teams wouldn’t zero in on him? Under that scenario, a GM who, as unlikely as it seems, was as as smart as Ballard and saw the same traits in Levis, could have moved up to 1 to take Levis, like Carolina is apparently doing with Stroud. Ballard loses his guy. As is, Ballard could still be in a bidding war at 3 for Levis. I don’t know — you know more than I do, but I see Ballard as incredibly passive due to the inability to make a tough decision he thinks may backfire. When has he made a truly bold move in six years — maybe that’s the better question. Was Buckner bold? 

I do not know more than you do, trust me.

 

Yes, I see your point.  That's if only CAR was finished with their diligence and Ballard was still working on his.  CAR took the fight to the other 31 teams to get their man while the others were still think about it.

 

But there is the idea too that Stroud is a better fit for Frank than he is Steichen, and Levis is a better for for Steichen than Frank, and Ryans wants to start off his rookie job being comfortable with a QB he can relate to, so Young is a better fit for HOU than Levis.  So they can certainly have zero'd in on their respective favorites early on...and it kind of sounds like they have... and the other teams know which team favors who.

 

If any one of those teams do something unexpected, that could result in Ballard staying put at 4 being a really bad move.

 

Your question about if Ballard is bold is for others to answer.  I have not really gone much into that discussion.  I just know that it has been discussed.

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, DougDew said:

Agreed.  I was looking at the embedded idea that Ballard sits on his * and isn't bold enough.   If he's going to let the QB come to him and then have his coach figure it out, that's less bold than ranking what skill sets you desire in a Qb and then going and getting that player.

 

I've thought all along that this offseason looks like Ballard wanting Levis early on, and simply has decided that he will be in striking distance to get him at pick 3 or 4.  So Ballard isn't sitting on his *,  He's decided what QB he wants and the strategy he needs to get him...and he doesn't need to get to pick 1 to get his guy.  Sure Richardson might be a late option in this process, but there is nothing that Levis has done to drop his stock at all, IMO.

 

But until the time that Ballard picks Levis at 4, or goes up and gets him at 3 when he has too, its fair to ask if he's just sitting and waiting for the player to come to him when other clubs might be more bold in getting into position to get their guy.

 

 

 If you believe there are only two "can't miss" defenders in this draft and AZ may have a preference, i don't worry that AZ will keep us in the bidding war. Seattle has great draft capital and would leave AZ where they would still be in great shape.

 Irsay, Ballard and Steichen will be aggressive if need be.imo

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

57 minutes ago, ShuteAt168 said:

So Ballard quickly zeroed in on Levis but because he sees things others don’t he was sure other teams wouldn’t zero in on him? Under that scenario, a GM who, as unlikely as it seems, was as as smart as Ballard and saw the same traits in Levis, could have moved up to 1 to take Levis, like Carolina is apparently doing with Stroud. Ballard loses his guy. As is, Ballard could still be in a bidding war at 3 for Levis. I don’t know — you know more than I do, but I see Ballard as incredibly passive due to the inability to make a tough decision he thinks may backfire. When has he made a truly bold move in six years — maybe that’s the better question. Was Buckner bold? 

 

 All QB decisions go through Irsay, he has to accept the logic. And Irsay today said you build through the draft.

 So picks are the Gold that determines the Bold.

And he values the picks in the first 3rounds.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, 1959Colts said:

I don't trust Ballard, especially when it comes to straightening out the O line.

It's seems like he plans, to go again, with the same starting players (maybe make one change at RG?) and somehow believes they will dramatically improve this year from last.

You don't trust him to get the line back right after he had built to be one of the best lines in the league? Raimann has shored up the LT spot, everyone else had stepped up their game after Saturday came in. If you don't get ride of Kelly then the only weak spot is at RG. Do you want the whole thing scrapped?

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, hoosierhawk said:

Do you really think that Ballard makes 100 % of all personnel decisions on his own, that he works in a vacuum, that he disregards all his staff, the HC and Irsay?

Nope, but by year 7, he should be having the final say on the QB decision. Obviously, unless you trade up to no1, you don't have full control, but Ballard has been known to value draft picks and has said so himself. So I just see the "4 QB's being equal" as a way to take pressure off him trading up so he doesn't have to give up draft picks. 

 

I think Steichen is willing to go along with any of the QBs honestly, and Irsay is as long as Ballard's job is on the line. Irsay also knows less about the QBs in the draft and can be coerced to agree with Ballard. I think Ballard listens to his staff, but Ballard ultimately has the final say on trading up, and he values the draft picks more and is hoping Levis or Richardson will work out where he can keep his picks as well and is willing to risk his job on it. 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, throwing BBZ said:

 

 All QB decisions go through Irsay, he has to accept the logic. And Irsay today said you build through the draft.

 So picks are the Gold that determines the Bold.

And he values the picks in the first 3rounds.

I agree, one would think that, but Irsay was just quoted as saying he didn’t want Wentz from the jump. So it’s uncertain how much he controls. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Jared Cisneros said:

Nope, but by year 7, he should be having the final say on the QB decision. Obviously, unless you trade up to no1, you don't have full control, but Ballard has been known to value draft picks and has said so himself. So I just see the "4 QB's being equal" as a way to take pressure off him trading up so he doesn't have to give up draft picks. 

 

I think Steichen is willing to go along with any of the QBs honestly, and Irsay is as long as Ballard's job is on the line. Irsay also knows less about the QBs in the draft and I thinkcan be coerced to agree with Ballard.I think Ballard listens to his staff, but Ballard ultimately has the final say on trading up, and he values the draft picks more and is hoping Levis or Richardson will work out where he can keep his picks as well and is willing to risk his job on it. 

 

 

" Should be having the final say", "has been know", "so I just see the 4 QBs being equal", "I think Steichen is willing to go along with any QBs honestly", " I think Ballard listens to his staff, but Ballard ultimately has the final say on trading up,", "  and is hoping Levis or Richardson will work out". Lots of assumptions there for a man who seems to be in the know.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, twfish said:

You don't trust him to get the line back right after he had built to be one of the best lines in the league? Raimann has shored up the LT spot, everyone else had stepped up their game after Saturday came in. If you don't get ride of Kelly then the only weak spot is at RG. Do you want the whole thing scrapped?

The line has been bad for the last few years. Kelly has been terrible ever  since he got the big contract. I did not see everyone step up during the Saturday period. The line basically stunk all year. I understand we simply cannot scrap the whole thing, but doing nothing else, other than change a RG, and expecting our O line problems to be solved is foolish

  • Confused 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 minutes ago, 1959Colts said:

The line has been bad for the last few years. Kelly has been terrible ever  since he got the big contract. I did not see everyone step up during the Saturday period. The line basically stunk all year. I understand we simply cannot scrap the whole thing, but doing nothing else, other than change a RG, and expecting our O line problems to be solved is foolish


I like BR at left tackle. He improved drastically over the last half of the season. I would like to bring a veteran in to push him, and for insurance. 
 

Right guard is a huge problem for the Colts. It needs to be addressed multi-fold. Draft, free agency, and/or possible trade scenarios. 
 

Q is still a bad dude. His struggles are mostly because of the bad play around him. I believe we will see him bounce back and become the All Pro we all know. 
 

While it might sound insensitive, I think RK’s issues started with the loss of his child. He hasn’t been the same since. And it’s understandable. Not sure if a person can really ever come back from something like that. Nor do I expect it. That said, RK is very talented and he could come back to form. 
 

Braden’s issues are similar to Q’s. Bad play around him. Trying to do too much. 
 

So yeah… We still have issues on the offensive line. But it can be fixed, and there is still time. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, BlueShoe said:


I like BR at left tackle. He improved drastically over the last half of the season. I would like to bring a veteran in to push him, and for insurance. 
 

Right guard is a huge problem for the Colts. It needs to be addressed multi-fold. Draft, free agency, and/or possible trade scenarios. 
 

Q is still a bad dude. His struggles are mostly because of the bad play around him. I believe we will see him bounce back and become the All Pro we all know. 
 

While it might sound insensitive, I think RK’s issues started with the loss of his child. He hasn’t been the same since. And it’s understandable. Not sure if a person can really ever come back from something like that. Nor do I expect it. That said, RK is very talented and he could come back to form. 
 

Braden’s issues are similar to Q’s. Bad play around him. Trying to do too much. 
 

So yeah… We still have issues on the offensive line. But it can be fixed, and there is still time. 

Yes. It's certainly possible it can be fixed. But I believe Ballard is too loyal to certain veteran players. I am afraid Kelly is washed, for whatever reasons, I thnk Qs dropoff was mostly because he was out of shape. CB should add some new players as options, and give them the opportunity to win the starting jobs. Just penciling in the same four starters, without real competition, to me, is going to be just another repeat of the same ole, same ole

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 3/28/2023 at 10:27 PM, NewColtsFan said:


You may be 100 percent right.   Maybe. 
 

But I don’t subscribe to the view for any rookie quarterback that they are who they are.    Name the quarterback and odds are high they got better over the course of their career.    Rookie quarterbacks are not finished products.  They can and do get better if given the right support.   The only question is how much better.  
 

Obviously, this is not a 100 percent view.  Guys like Jamarcus Russell or Jeff George are examples against.   But most QBs can get better.   I don’t see a reason to think Levis can’t improve.    The only question would be….    How much? 
 

And my answer for the Colts this year and beyond is….   Shane Steichen.   I’ll trust his judgement until he gives me enough reason not to.  
 

 

He's 24 at beginning of the season and that  scares me that scouts still see him as a project . U looked a Young and Stroud who are younger and more finished products. Why hasn't he cleaned up his mechanics and throwing? That's concerning and the fact that he couldn't beat out the no name qb at Penn State. Who knows maybe he has valid reasons and the Colts will know those answers and if they draft him and I  would be good with it. I do think they would pick him over Richardson. I think the number one thing that Steichen wants is work ethic and commitment to get better. Levi from what I have heard checks those boxes. I haven't heard that bout Richardson, however that maybe true bout him as well. I do think Levi has to lay off the weights. One scout believes he is to tight and strong and that is why he lacks touch. He presents as having the body of a linebacker. I bet if the Colts draft him , they would probably develop  a program that would increase his flexibility which I think would benefit his throwing.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 3/29/2023 at 11:37 AM, DougDew said:

This isn't that complicated.  In the eyes of many here, Ballard was not too slow.  It was CAR that was desperate.

 

I simply contend that CAR knew who they wanted and got in position to get him, because they figured that when other teams finished their due diligence on QBs, enough teams would come to the same conclusion about who the number 1 guy was.

 

And Ballard says there is not enough difference in the QBs to make the trade up.  Fine.  From an overall talent grade, they may be the same.  But based upon who he settles for at pick 4, there is going to be a tremendous difference in skill sets/ traits that has to be navigated.  AR is a different guy than shrimpy Young, and Levis is different than both.  Its not like he has Mayfield, Darnold, and Rosen to choose from.

 

So instead of going up and getting the guy that fits what you want to do, Ballard is apparently going to settle for who the QB is (one of two choices probably), then decide what his team is going to look like from there.   Is there a component here that I'm missing?

That's an interesting take.  Wait for who falls to you at 4, take that person, then make your draft-board work for that QB.  I assume that's what you are surmising might happen, which is a very interesting opinion.  It actually could hold some weight, Ballard is unpredictable at times.  So since we are most likely going to get Levis (he will be the only one left when the #3 pick gets jumped by a QB-needy team or a desperate team like the Titans, who want nothing more than to ruin our draft each year).  Ballard might be content to take a huge chance on Will Levis, who while looking decent in his pro-day, is likely to require mentoring, NFL-QB 101 school of hard knocks, and some wings and some prayers to be a well-rounded signal-caller.  I think what would spoil Ballard's plan, even more, is if Young is the only one falling to 4, which might shock some.  (it's pretty clear Ballard leans to the side of longer players).  He might not know how to act with a 5'10/5'11" QB......

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 hours ago, 1959Colts said:

Yes. It's certainly possible it can be fixed. But I believe Ballard is too loyal to certain veteran players. I am afraid Kelly is washed, for whatever reasons, I thnk Qs dropoff was mostly because he was out of shape. CB should add some new players as options, and give them the opportunity to win the starting jobs. Just penciling in the same four starters, without real competition, to me, is going to be just another repeat of the same ole, same ole

I'm not so sure that starters are penciled in as the absolute starters season wide. The positions are earned through training camp and pre season games. The coaches will start with who they think gives us the best chance to win a game. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, chrisfarley said:

That's an interesting take.  Wait for who falls to you at 4, take that person, then make your draft-board work for that QB.  I assume that's what you are surmising might happen, which is a very interesting opinion.  It actually could hold some weight, Ballard is unpredictable at times.  So since we are most likely going to get Levis (he will be the only one left when the #3 pick gets jumped by a QB-needy team or a desperate team like the Titans, who want nothing more than to ruin our draft each year).  Ballard might be content to take a huge chance on Will Levis, who while looking decent in his pro-day, is likely to require mentoring, NFL-QB 101 school of hard knocks, and some wings and some prayers to be a well-rounded signal-caller.  I think what would spoil Ballard's plan, even more, is if Young is the only one falling to 4, which might shock some.  (it's pretty clear Ballard leans to the side of longer players).  He might not know how to act with a 5'10/5'11" QB......

Waiting for the player to come to you is not necessarily a criticism, because nobody knows how the draft is going to fall, so the only team that knows who they are going to take is the team that has the number 1 pick.  And that's why Frank said they moved up, to have control.

 

The fact that Ballard was not interested in moving up...so we assume....is that he is probably interested in a QB that he knows is not rated the number 1 QB.  The two guys mentioned as number 1 from time to time have been Stroud and Young.

 

So sitting at 4 could very well be a "bold enough" strategy.   Its probably the actual player Ballard picks that some aren't going to like.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, DougDew said:

Waiting for the player to come to you is not necessarily a criticism, because nobody knows how the draft is going to fall, so the only team that knows who they are going to take is the team that has the number 1 pick.  And that's why Frank said they moved up, to have control.

 

The fact that Ballard was not interested in moving up...so we assume....is that he is probably interested in a QB that he knows is not rated the number 1 QB.  The two guys mentioned as number 1 from time to time have been Stroud and Young.

 

So sitting at 4 could very well be a "bold enough" strategy.   Its probably the actual player Ballard picks that some aren't going to like.


That’s only IF he plans to stay at 4. Or even plans to take a QB at 4. 
 

What if the Colts board looks like this…

 

1. Anderson

2. Young

3. Stroud

 

And Seattle moves up to take AR…

 

Then Ballard gets the best player on his board at 4. 
 

This is going to be fun. :) 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, DougDew said:

Waiting for the player to come to you is not necessarily a criticism, because nobody knows how the draft is going to fall, so the only team that knows who they are going to take is the team that has the number 1 pick.  And that's why Frank said they moved up, to have control.

 

The fact that Ballard was not interested in moving up...so we assume....is that he is probably interested in a QB that he knows is not rated the number 1 QB.  The two guys mentioned as number 1 from time to time have been Stroud and Young.

 

So sitting at 4 could very well be a "bold enough" strategy.   Its probably the actual player Ballard picks that some aren't going to like.

So Frank finally has control of something! Great!!:lol:

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, crazycolt1 said:

I'm not so sure that starters are penciled in as the absolute starters season wide. The positions are earned through training camp and pre season games. The coaches will start with who they think gives us the best chance to win a game. 

So, if Ryan Kelly is outperformed in training camp and preseason (or if he struggles mid season) you believe he would be benched as starting center? I doubt that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

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

Create an account

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

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...