Chris Ballard Presser at 4:15

[adubb84]

 

The “JT praise / Let’s bash the colts” tirade is getting old quick. There’s no real analysis on how the other side sees things. 

[LJpalmbeacher2]

7 hours ago, ShuteAt168 said:

Yep. Look, no one hates to cut players more than Chris does, no one is more honest with the players, shoot no one is more honest to the media, look, no one values relationships more than Chris. I thought he did well today on the JT stuff, but he could dial back the “I’m the smartest most sincere most honest guy in the room” act a bit for my tastes. But I know a lot of fans like CB so maybe it’s justso me. 

 

It's not just you.

His act (and record and team roster lacking) is growing old on plenty.

[Moosejawcolt]

5 hours ago, IndyEric07 said:

I still am wondering wth is CB thinking at the WR position!? The lady asked about the depth and he says they have plenty of time to sort all that depth out!? Does he not know the 1st game is less than a week away??? Does he not know it takes a long time for QBs and WRs to get their timing down? Im sure McKenzie/Strahan/etc will be lifted from the PS at some point, but CB needs to trade for a sure top 4 wr depth wise asap!

I think there is a little Bellichek in Steichen in terms of how he will use players. He must see more talent on the team side than wr. Remember that Richardson has accuracy issues and having big targets will give him confidence. Who knows, maybe he is going to run some unique formations and put out 3 TE's  at a time lol.

[LJpalmbeacher2]

2 hours ago, 1959Colts said:

Maybe Downs will get some more separation?

 

He might but most likely it will be to move the chains...... not long TD's.

But what little I seen of him I like him.

[2006Coltsbestever]

Hey Chris, 2006 here. What do you think about the main talking heads at ESPN talking crap about the team everyday and some saying we are a joke?

 

Don't worry Chris I can answer that, they have no idea about our team, spread rumors that aren't true, and like to stir up crap. 

 

 

By the way the GM of the Dolphins said, I didn't offer the Colts anything, I just explored the trade option. That came right from his mouth. I just heard it on the radio. Yet 1000's of people on Twitter and some in the media was saying Miami is offering this and that. What a joke. . 

 

Here I am saying the whole time we weren't trading him. Too easy to predict.

[NewColtsFan]

58 minutes ago, Superman said:

 

 

No, the question doesn't make Holder biased. It's the fact that he has clearly taken the side of Taylor and his agent -- who are obviously feeding him one-sided information -- that makes him biased. And that has been evident outside of today's presser.

 

To set the table, I'd like to state that I do not claim to represent this community. I don't know if it's 95% anti Taylor, but I agree a lot of the fans here are upset with him. That's not my responsibility. I'm not anti Taylor, and I don't think that my distaste for the way Holder has covered this is reflective of any bias against Taylor. I think Taylor has a losing argument, but I am nowhere near as put off by this contract situation as other fans appear to be.

 

But I think this particular question was pushing an agenda. The topic is fair game, but the question was loaded, and slanted toward Taylor's side. If he had asked Ballard 'would the Colts ever agree not to use the tag on a player going into the last year of his contract', that would have been more objective. 

 

What happened is Ballard was asked if he sees Taylor continuing to be part of the team, and he said he hopes so, he's never said otherwise, and then brought up the narrative about using the tag. He said 'we've never used it,' basically saying it's premature for everyone to assume they'd just tag Taylor.

 

Then Holder said 'That is a big concern of his.' So now he's speaking for Taylor. Then Holder says 'I think this is true, he offered to come in if you guys would take the tag off the table. Would you...' And Ballard starts responding, denying that the Colts agreed to that, then starts saying he's never lied to Taylor. I don't think that line of questioning was objective, and I think that's the first priority of a journalist.

 

I think it's clear that I am not opposed to tough questions. I wasn't against them two weeks ago when you were telling me they were inappropriate, and I'm not against them now. I don't think this was a tough question. I think he was promoting the agenda of Taylor and his agent. And I think he's been pushing that agenda -- pro Taylor, anti Colts -- for at least a couple weeks now.

I’ve been off-line for a while and see that you’ve made a series of posts.   So I’ll try to answer them one at a time as best I can.  
 

If Chris Ballard can say that Taylor is not getting a new contract right now because of a 4-win season,  then I think Stephon Holder is entitled to use the same 4-win logic to look at the Ballard/Irsay regime with a very critical eye.   Literally a year ago we were all talking about the Colts being the AFC South favorite , Matt Ryan was going to get a 3-4 year extension, Frank Reich was safe and Jeff Saturday was an ESPN analyst.   Perhaps the Ballard/Irsay duo is deserving of a more critical look. 
 

As for Holder, I’m fine with his questions that show he’s spoken with Taylor and the agent.   Completely fine.   And every other reporter wishes they had the access Holder has.   Holder was literally telling Ballard this is the Taylor/agent position.  Nothing wrong with that.   That does not make Holder pro-Taylor or anti-Colts.   It’s up to Ballard to respond as he wishes.  But I don’t see anything wrong with his line if questioning.  Ballard and Irsay have earned every tough question they get.  
 

You and I completely disagree on the objective aspect.  I don’t see/hear anything from todays presser that has me wondering about Holder’s objectivity.  
 

Heads up:  in another of your posts I’ll point out a flaw I think Holder made in a written piece he did for ESPN.   I don’t know if he did it before or after the Ballard presser, but something he wrote jumped out at me, and if I were his editor, I’d ask him to tweek it. 
 

[NewColtsFan]

1 hour ago, Superman said:

Definitely an objective reporter here...

 

 

As opposed to this from Hicks (who also had an awful take earlier today, btw):

 

 

No surprise here, we disagree again.   Holder puts his viewpoint out in public for all to see.   There’s no hidden agenda.   Holder see it different from Zack Hicks, who I’m not even sure we consider him a journalist?   Isn’t he a guy with a Twitter account and perhaps a podcast?   
 

But either way, you see the fact that two different people see the same thing differently as a big Ah-Ha moment.   As opposed to just seeing that two people see it differently.   Of course you agree with one and are trying to prove a case against the other, and that might have a little something to do with it.   I think it’s a Big Nothing Burger.  
 

I think Holder pointing out the Colts viewpoints which could be seen as contradictory is very fair game.   I don’t see it as pro-Taylor or anti-Colts.  Sorry. 

 

[NewColtsFan]

1 hour ago, Superman said:

 

Go across the locker room and ask Taylor's teammate, with whom he shares an agent, about how "hard it is" to get an extension done with the Colts. 

 

Ballard kept his cool. I'd have gone in a little harder on that one.

Ok….  As promised, here’s something I take issue with Holder over.   After the Ballard presser, Holder wrote an article for ESPN, and in the middle of the story he dropped this in and it jumped out at me.  
 

“But his relationship with the team is in disrepair.  And Ballard tried to calm that.”

 

Really?  Taylor’s relationship with his teammates is in disrepair?   First I’ve read of this.   Roughly 2-3 weeks ago Buckner and Franklin — both Captains — and Jackson, who is in the RB room with Taylor, all said they were good with JT and supported him completely.   Now it’s in disrepair?    To be clear, not saying it’s not, and it would be understandable if it is, but the comment is badly in need of context.   Something that offers support for the disrepair comment.   Otherwise it’s just hanging out there without substantiation. 
 

 

But on balance, this is my only issue today with Holder.  Nothing more.  I think your viewpoints are fan viewpoints and they’re going to be popular here.   But on a journalism level,  I think you’ve mischaracterized his comments and his intent.   Sorry, not personal.  Just  wanted to offer my perspective…. 

[stitches]

7 hours ago, Superman said:

 

Meh. Fifth round picks get cut all the time, and 7th round picks get kept all the time. I don't think it's a big deal either way.

 

But I do appreciate how emphatic he was about the players at that position. I think it's going to be tough sledding at times, but I think Bradley's defense is conducive to having young corners learning on the fly, so I'm not as worried about that spot as others have been. And I think they hoped they could sneak Rush through waivers and get him back on the PS, and I bet they'll put in a claim if he ever gets waived again this season.

 

6 hours ago, NewColtsFan said:

“This can so easily be held against him if it does not pan out the way he sees it.”

 

First off, in this community the bar is pretty low for what can be held against him.   
 

Second, you’re talking about a 5th rounder who didn’t work out as hoped and a 7th rounder who did.   What is it you think can be “held against him.” ???

 

On the list of things Ballard has done wrong, I seriously doubt this would reach the top 25?   Top 50?   
 

 

I don't know. I just feel like there is a difference between just saying you really like a guy and what Ballard said here. He's directly putting two players against each other and saying "yeah... I made that bet... write it down and take it to the bank". Not saying he shouldn't believe in his own decisions, but this seems kind of different. It kind of gives me different expectations for Jones. I kind of expect him to be starting by the end of the year now...

[Dark Superman]

Chris Ballard loves Tony Brown so much he's gonna hand him a contract next year that will make him the highest-paid Cornerback in the league.

[Defjamz26]

8 hours ago, Superman said:

I'm listening back because I missed the first half of the presser. Holder is basically representing Taylor. He said 'I know one of his concerns is the tag, is it true he offered to come in if you agreed not to use the tag?' 

 

I've never been anti Holder, but he's off the rails on this issue. Totally in the bag for one side against the other. Lots of other media guys appear to be doing the same.

I thought it was clear that Holder has been talking to JT and his agent, and is on their side.

 

While that may seemed biased, I think it’s fair. Holder has been accused many times by Colts fans (myself included) of carrying water for the Colts. If he is actually on the side of a player for once, and holding the organization accountable, then there must be some merit to that.

 

Ultimately I think Holder feels the way a lot of fans do. Taylor is the best offensive player on this team, and he’s just as valuable as the guys that have gotten extensions by Ballard. I get the scheme/philosophy fit but it’s JT. 
 

It’s also weird to say “We only won 4 games last year” in reference to Taylor, when:

1. He only played 11/17 games last year and there’s a statistic from 2021 that showed the Colts have a negative W/L ratio when he doesn’t go over 109 yards

2. When he was fully healthy in 2021 you won 9 games literally off of his back because the QB and receivers were terrible.

 

Again I understand both sides in this situation. Neither has played it correctly IMO.

 

My personal opinion? San Francisco has already shown us what the right answer is.

[krunk]

25 minutes ago, Defjamz26 said:

I thought it was clear that Holder has been talking to JT and his agent, and is on their side.

 

While that may seemed biased, I think it’s fair. Holder has been accused many times by Colts fans (myself included) of carrying water for the Colts. If he is actually on the side of a player for once, and holding the organization accountable, then there must be some merit to that.

 

Ultimately I think Holder feels the way a lot of fans do. Taylor is the best offensive player on this team, and he’s just as valuable as the guys that have gotten extensions by Ballard. I get the scheme/philosophy fit but it’s JT. 
 

It’s also weird to say “We only won 4 games last year” in reference to Taylor, when:

1. He only played 11/17 games last year and there’s a statistic from 2021 that showed the Colts have a negative W/L ratio when he doesn’t go over 109 yards

2. When he was fully healthy in 2021 you won 9 games literally off of his back because the QB and receivers were terrible.

 

Again I understand both sides in this situation. Neither has played it correctly IMO.

 

My personal opinion? San Francisco has already shown us what the right answer is.

I think in code Ballard means "We want to see how you fit with the new coach and QB bc Shane came in the door with a few issues about your fit in his system. We pay our great players, but we don't force them on our coaches without them being 100 about it. You've had no snaps at all with him, and we would like to see how that meshes(get Steichen opinion from experience with you) before we pay you. That's why it's always "we need him to be healthy".

 

Notice how Shane Steichen hasn't been banging the table for Taylor. He always refers back to Ballard. I think if Shane came in the door 100 about it they go ahead and pay him. I don't think Shane is completely sold. I also think just in general they want to get the right guys and fits around AR.

[Colt.45]

4 hours ago, NewColtsFan said:

Ok….  As promised, here’s something I take issue with Holder over.   After the Ballard presser, Holder wrote an article for ESPN, and in the middle of the story he dropped this in and it jumped out at me.  
 

“But his relationship with the team is in disrepair.  And Ballard tried to calm that.”

 

Really?  Taylor’s relationship with his teammates is in disrepair?   First I’ve read of this.   Roughly 2-3 weeks ago Buckner and Franklin — both Captains — and Jackson, who is in the RB room with Taylor, all said they were good with JT and supported him completely.   Now it’s in disrepair?    To be clear, not saying it’s not, and it would be understandable if it is, but the comment is badly in need of context.   Something that offers support for the disrepair comment.   Otherwise it’s just hanging out there without substantiation. 
 

 

But on balance, this is my only issue today with Holder.  Nothing more.  I think your viewpoints are fan viewpoints and they’re going to be popular here.   But on a journalism level,  I think you’ve mischaracterized his comments and his intent.   Sorry, not personal.  Just  wanted to offer my perspective…. 

 

 

Team not teammates. I read that as ballard/irsay not the players

[Colt.45]

I'll watch this conference at some point but thanks to all who have summarized. I'm excited to hear about Jaylon Jones. An SEC corner who dropped for special reasons and could be a steal....everyone loves those stories.

 

The Holder thing has been clear almost from the jump - He's got contacts within JTs camp and we all know his history with Miami. Nothing he has done so far is out of pocket. From a Colts fan perspective, it's easy to see why people might think he's biased but he's presenting a side of the story that everyone's asking about.

Also, isnt this the same Holder who was dropping exclusives from Jim Irsay and giving the owner's side?

 

The season's about to start, what are CBs expectations for the season ahead? Sorry if i missed it in the comments. We've heard his opinion on several things, i wonder if he lay out clear expectations.

[Defjamz26]

1 hour ago, krunk said:

I think in code Ballard means "We want to see how you fit with the new coach and QB bc Shane came in the door with a few issues about your fit in his system. We pay our great players, but we don't force them on our coaches without them being 100 about it. You've had no snaps at all with him, and we would like to see how that meshes(get Steichen opinion from experience with you) before we pay you. That's why it's always "we need him to be healthy".

 

Notice how Shane Steichen hasn't been banging the table for Taylor. He always refers back to Ballard. I think if Shane came in the door 100 about it they go ahead and pay him. I don't think Shane is completely sold. I also think just in general they want to get the right guys and fits around AR.

Yeah that’s fair. And it doesn’t seem like Ballard is budging on that. And when you put it like that, they didn’t extend any other guys yet either, because Pittman is also due next year.
 

But, what I think JT is saying on his side is “Hey I understand but I’d like to get extended now because I’ve well outplayed my current contract and I’d like some security in case I’m injured, especially since my position is devalued even more based on how much work I get”. He also doesn’t want to perform as good as a Nick Chubb does and only make $4.5 million when Chubb will make about $14.5 million.

 

To me it seems like the two sides are at an impasse. Regardless of how this ends up playing out, I don’t see him playing here in 2024. Only way that’s not true would be if JT got a new agent.

 

 

[Defjamz26]

I guess we should also give some credit to Ballard and Irsay. We criticized them last year (Irsay more than Ballard) about interfering in coaching decisions and processes. From the presser it looks like Ballard (and Irsay from his comments back in July) is leaving things in the coaches hand. Which is a fair trade off if part of the terms for the hire was that he would retain certain coaches. But he will get final say in roster decisions. That’s how Josh Downs (undersized by typical Ballard metrics) got drafted.

[Jackie Daytona]

6 hours ago, Moosejawcolt said:

I think there is a little Bellichek in Steichen in terms of how he will use players. He must see more talent on the team side than wr. Remember that Richardson has accuracy issues and having big targets will give him confidence. Who knows, maybe he is going to run some unique formations and put out 3 TE's  at a time lol.

I'd buy this size argument for the bizarre amount of TEs....if one of our Top two TEs was large, Granson isn't, and if all but one of the WR when Steichen got here were not over 6'-1" and over 200# (they were).

 

Talent?  That's a totally different can of worms.....by size?  There were no small catch radii on this team when AR showed up lol.

[RollerColt]

25 minutes ago, Jackie Daytona said:

I'd buy this size argument for the bizarre amount of TEs....if one of our Top two TEs was large, Granson isn't, and if all but one of the WR when Steichen got here were not over 6'-1" and over 200# (they were).

 

Talent?  That's a totally different can of worms.....by size?  There were no small catch radii on this team when AR showed up lol.

All of our tight ends are at least 6’3 or higher…

[csmopar]

10 hours ago, w87r said:

About what?

 

Disdain for Taylor?

yep. 

[Mr. Irrelevant]

7 hours ago, Superman said:

Definitely an objective reporter here...

 

 

As opposed to this from Hicks (who also had an awful take earlier today, btw):

 

 

I agree with you here, but now I’m starting to wonder if Holder is just not a very smart person. I just listened to the presser and I got the same impression as Zach Hicks to what Ballard was trying to say with the “we only won 4 games last year”. Ballard did also mention a new head coach and if you have been following the NFL just a little bit you should get it.

 

I think you have to be a bit dense to come up with that tweet Holder did, if he in fact believe it itself and have not just done a copy/paste from Taylor’s agent. Which I can unfortunately not rule out anymore, sigh…

[krunk]

1 hour ago, Jackie Daytona said:

I'd buy this size argument for the bizarre amount of TEs....if one of our Top two TEs was large, Granson isn't, and if all but one of the WR when Steichen got here were not over 6'-1" and over 200# (they were).

 

Talent?  That's a totally different can of worms.....by size?  There were no small catch radii on this team when AR showed up lol.

Woods is 6'7" is that not large or did I miss something?

[krunk]

2 hours ago, Defjamz26 said:

Yeah that’s fair. And it doesn’t seem like Ballard is budging on that. And when you put it like that, they didn’t extend any other guys yet either, because Pittman is also due next year.
 

But, what I think JT is saying on his side is “Hey I understand but I’d like to get extended now because I’ve well outplayed my current contract and I’d like some security in case I’m injured, especially since my position is devalued even more based on how much work I get”. He also doesn’t want to perform as good as a Nick Chubb does and only make $4.5 million when Chubb will make about $14.5 million.

 

To me it seems like the two sides are at an impasse. Regardless of how this ends up playing out, I don’t see him playing here in 2024. Only way that’s not true would be if JT got a new agent.

 

 

I definitely think it's a coach Steichen issue bc if Frank Reich were here after a 4 win season we know JT would be paid already. The 4 win season claim is smoke bc we know and they would know what JT can do in Franks system and how he fits so there wouldn't be a let's see what you can do requirement.

[Restinpeacesweetchloe]

It seems James Boyd had the same opinion as holder. I don’t get it either.  It’s a silly take.

[Superman]

6 hours ago, stitches said:

 

I don't know. I just feel like there is a difference between just saying you really like a guy and what Ballard said here. He's directly putting two players against each other and saying "yeah... I made that bet... write it down and take it to the bank". Not saying he shouldn't believe in his own decisions, but this seems kind of different. It kind of gives me different expectations for Jones. I kind of expect him to be starting by the end of the year now...

 

So if Rush winds up being better, Ballard has egg on his face. That's fine, but I think that would be the case even if he hadn't been so emphatic. There are still people banging the table for AQ Shipley...

 

I didn't expect Rush to be starting by the end of the year, so I don't really have that expectation for Jones. It would be nice, but our CB room isn't all that serious so it's not a very high bar. We're talking about two late round picks, and we took three CBs in the draft. I think it was always a stretch that all three would make the final roster, especially before Rodgers got suspended. 

[lollygagger8]

Stephen Holder has always been one who thinks he's in the know, but doesn't ever really have insider info. 

 

Kravitz is the worst, but I've never been a Holder fan. Not sure how he even continues to have a job. 

[chad72]

Our pass catchers, whoever they are, better come to play to support AR because he is not going to throw like a vet and there will be catches where the WRs and TEs have to bail him out to help him and the team. 

 

The true question is, do we have such abilities in our WRs and TEs group when we trot them out there? Only time will tell. But there is nothing that will keep opponent DCs awake at night with our pass catchers on paper, IMO. But if our OL blocks their hearts out, AR and the offense will have a puncher's chance.

[RollerColt]

3 minutes ago, chad72 said:

Our pass catchers, whoever they are, better come to play to support AR because he is not going to throw like a vet and there will be catches where the WRs and TEs have to bail him out to help him and the team. 

 

The true question is, do we have such abilities in our WRs and TEs group when we trot them out there? Only time will tell. But there is nothing that will keep opponent DCs awake at night with our pass catchers on paper, IMO. But if our OL blocks their hearts out, AR and the offense will have a puncher's chance.

I think and hope that Pittman can be that guy. I also have hope for the TEs. Ogletree was showing promise this preseason as having reliable hands. 

[throwing BBZ]

6 hours ago, Dark Superman said:

Chris Ballard loves Tony Brown so much he's gonna hand him a contract next year that will make him the highest-paid Cornerback in the league.

 

  I read up on Brown. Went to Alabama as a 5 star recruit. Perhaps the top corner in the country. 4.35 speed.

 With all of that, it is fair to say he has shown an inability to cover well enough. At 28 he has proven to Ballard/our staff, to be very high level warrior with exceptional lockeroom presence. Much like Dulin. 

 He deserves a multi-year contract with some number of Millions guaranteed for being this kind of guy. I don't bother to speculate $$$ amounts. That is the Capologist's job.

 

[Crunked]

Here is where the frustration is for me: Saying you pay good players/stating we only won 4 games last year/Ballards history of extending paying players in the past ahead of their expiring contract. <- These things contradict each other. This is a mess created by Ballard that combined with his "adjusted view" /outside criticism of Ballard paying non critical positions premium contracts has put him in a situation where if he pays him then his critics go "see he continues to reward the wrong positions" if he doesn't pay him Well here we are.....I can't say which way "He should go" but I think he has painted himself in a corner, and he likes to always spin it to where he comes out on top.....and either way he goes here he won't do that, and its bothering him. The presser for me was him saying, I need to try and talk Taylor out of painting me in the corner........ I will be shocked if he succeeds cause to me the paint is already applied we are all just watching it dry

[masterlock]

Ballard needs to stop making it personal when it comes to his relationship with the players. This is a business, and his job is to MANAGE the team, not be a friend to the players, or care about their feelings, blah, blah, blah. I would've much preferred he say something to the effect of, "Johnathan's a great player whose still under contract, and we fully expect him to suit up as soon as he is medically cleared." 

[Restinpeacesweetchloe]

14 minutes ago, masterlock said:

Ballard needs to stop making it personal when it comes to his relationship with the players. This is a business, and his job is to MANAGE the team, not be a friend to the players, or care about their feelings, blah, blah, blah. I would've much preferred he say something to the effect of, "Johnathan's a great player whose still under contract, and we fully expect him to suit up as soon as he is medically cleared." 

I get it but I also think it’s important to create and nurture a good environment. Indy is a small market and there has to be a draw for players to want to stay here. He is trying to fix this relationship and saying what you want him to won’t get that done.

[NewColtsFan]

16 minutes ago, masterlock said:

Ballard needs to stop making it personal when it comes to his relationship with the players. This is a business, and his job is to MANAGE the team, not be a friend to the players, or care about their feelings, blah, blah, blah. I would've much preferred he say something to the effect of, "Johnathan's a great player whose still under contract, and we fully expect him to suit up as soon as he is medically cleared." 

Dear God….     

[Restinpeacesweetchloe]

1 hour ago, chad72 said:

Our pass catchers, whoever they are, better come to play to support AR because he is not going to throw like a vet and there will be catches where the WRs and TEs have to bail him out to help him and the team. 

 

The true question is, do we have such abilities in our WRs and TEs group when we trot them out there? Only time will tell. But there is nothing that will keep opponent DCs awake at night with our pass catchers on paper, IMO. But if our OL blocks their hearts out, AR and the offense will have a puncher's chance.

Something Ballard mentioned yesterday about granson is he has had chemistry with every QB he has played with here. I think we already see it with him and Richardson. Granson just seems to get open and always is there to help his QB.  Pierce and Pittman can high point and go up for jump balls so I think they will be fine.

[RollerColt]

4 minutes ago, Restinpeacesweetchloe said:

I get it but I also think it’s important to create and nurture a good environment. Indy is a small market and there has to be a draw for players to want to stay here. He is trying to fix this relationship and saying what you want him to won’t get that done.

Very well stated Chloe. Well stated indeed. 

[Colt.45]

2 hours ago, lollygagger8 said:

Stephen Holder has always been one who thinks he's in the know, but doesn't ever really have insider info. 

 

Kravitz is the worst, but I've never been a Holder fan. Not sure how he even continues to have a job. 

 

Holder's given the public more on JTs side than anyone else, is that not insider info? 

Holder (and Mike Chappell) tend to get exclusives from Irsay, is that not insider info?

 

Why is Holder getting pelted for poking at Ballard's faulty logic? Ballard brought up winning 4 games so it's fair to ask what happens if you win 4 games again, how is that not a logical question to follow up with? 

 

You dont have to look too far on these pages to see folks complaining about the 'soft' Indy media. Now they're trying to hold the GMs feet to the fire based on his own comments, and folks are talking as if Holder (and Boyd and whoever else) are carrying water for the player and his agent. Odd.

 

If you want to talk Xs and Os and Holder's knowledge of the game, then yeah i'd agree, I actively flee from his analysis, he parrots others talking points and it isnt his strong suit but attacking a journo for doing his/her job seems really unfair. Where else are you (and other Colts fans) expecting to get reporting that you crave from? The national media? Good luck. 

 

*Bob Kravitz was let go by the Athletic IIRC. 

 

[AKB]

12 hours ago, Superman said:

 

 

No, the question doesn't make Holder biased. It's the fact that he has clearly taken the side of Taylor and his agent -- who are obviously feeding him one-sided information -- that makes him biased. And that has been evident outside of today's presser.

 

To set the table, I'd like to state that I do not claim to represent this community. I don't know if it's 95% anti Taylor, but I agree a lot of the fans here are upset with him. That's not my responsibility. I'm not anti Taylor, and I don't think that my distaste for the way Holder has covered this is reflective of any bias against Taylor. I think Taylor has a losing argument, but I am nowhere near as put off by this contract situation as other fans appear to be.

 

But I think this particular question was pushing an agenda. The topic is fair game, but the question was loaded, and slanted toward Taylor's side. If he had asked Ballard 'would the Colts ever agree not to use the tag on a player going into the last year of his contract', that would have been more objective. 

 

What happened is Ballard was asked if he sees Taylor continuing to be part of the team, and he said he hopes so, he's never said otherwise, and then brought up the narrative about using the tag. He said 'we've never used it,' basically saying it's premature for everyone to assume they'd just tag Taylor.

 

Then Holder said 'That is a big concern of his.' So now he's speaking for Taylor. Then Holder says 'I think this is true, he offered to come in if you guys would take the tag off the table. Would you...' And Ballard starts responding, denying that the Colts agreed to that, then starts saying he's never lied to Taylor. I don't think that line of questioning was objective, and I think that's the first priority of a journalist.

 

I think it's clear that I am not opposed to tough questions. I wasn't against them two weeks ago when you were telling me they were inappropriate, and I'm not against them now. I don't think this was a tough question. I think he was promoting the agenda of Taylor and his agent. And I think he's been pushing that agenda -- pro Taylor, anti Colts -- for at least a couple weeks now.

I agree, Holder sounded like he was advocating for Taylor. Rather than asking an unbiased question, I also thought it was peculiar that he was almost negotiating a live interview with Ballard about Taylor. It was definitely odd. 

 

The way I heard it is, we aren't just gonna let Taylor leave because that isn't the best thing for the Colts, and the only way it will happen is if the compensation is fair.

 

I don't think that is crazy or unfair to Taylor. He is a top 3 back in this league behind probably only Henry and CMC, so with that being said, we should have slightly less compensation than what the 9ers got, or what a 24 year old Henry would have gotten (or close to it)

 

When we let Gilmore walk for a low-round pick people were about to protest downtown. Imagine if we let a generational running back, and the best back we've seen as a Colt in a very long time walk out for a 4th rounder and some average player.

 

No thanks, he signed his contract, so he should play. And if not, we will see what tools we have available, not gonna sit here in a national interview and say something could turn into a lie.

 

Holder and the media in general for Indy is not very good. But  that's a discussion for another time 

 

WE WON FOUR GAMES LAST YEAR

[cdgacoltsfan]

1 hour ago, masterlock said:

Ballard needs to stop making it personal when it comes to his relationship with the players. This is a business, and his job is to MANAGE the team, not be a friend to the players, or care about their feelings, blah, blah, blah. I would've much preferred he say something to the effect of, "Johnathan's a great player whose still under contract, and we fully expect him to suit up as soon as he is medically cleared." 

You obviously watch Kent Sterling....You're basically plagiarizing his rap.

[Colt.45]

1 hour ago, Restinpeacesweetchloe said:

Something Ballard mentioned yesterday about granson is he has had chemistry with every QB he has played with here. I think we already see it with him and Richardson. Granson just seems to get open and always is there to help his QB.  Pierce and Pittman can high point and go up for jump balls so I think they will be fine.

 

When Granson was drafted, my full expectation was that he'd become a true asset in year 3 at the earliest. Like Dallas Clark.

I continue to hold onto that expectation. I think Granson will have a good season this year then watch out next season. Folks will wonder where he came out from.

[KB]

1 minute ago, Colt.45 said:

 

Holder's given the public more on JTs side than anyone else, is that not insider info? 

Holder (and Mike Chappell) tend to get exclusives from Irsay, is that not insider info?

 

Why is Holder getting pelted for poking at Ballard's faulty logic? Ballard brought up winning 4 games so it's fair to ask what happens if you win 4 games again, how is that not a logical question to follow up with? 

 

You dont have to look too far on these pages to see folks complaining about the 'soft' Indy media. Now they're trying to hold the GMs feet to the fire based on his own comments, and folks are talking as if Holder (and Boyd and whoever else) are carrying water for the player and his agent. Odd.

 

If you want to talk Xs and Os and Holder's knowledge of the game, then yeah i'd agree, I actively flee from his analysis, he parrots others talking points and it isnt his strong point but attacking a journey for doing his/her job seems really unfair. 

 

*Bob Kravitz was let go by the Athletic IIRC. 

 

If we win 4 games again then nobody deserves a second contract. Pretty simple. Those player don't equate to wins. It should also mean Ballard should go since those wete his best 2 draft picks recently. I like Ballard and alot of the things he's done. All the things he says about JT and the team are a direct reflection of him, and he I'm sure he knows that.

[AKB]

1 minute ago, Colt.45 said:

 

When Granson was drafted, my full expectation was that he'd become a true asset in year 3 at the earliest. Like Dallas Clark.

I continue to hold onto that expectation. I think Granson will have a good season this year then watch out next season. Folks will wonder where he came out from.

I think Granson will have value like Conklin from the Jets, basically the same player type. 

 

But Dallas Clark? NO, I don't think so 45