Is your view of Ballard changing?

[Nevbot]

If I am being honest, I wish I could see Sam E run this O with Steichen calling the plays and Sam running around on some half field read options plays. 

We could go after a mobile young signal caller, but I figure that it would take him at least a year or two in our system to provide quality backup value, unless he is a vet that has played in Shane's system elsewhere ala Minshew- and those guys are limited. 
So we come back to Sam.  He will be two years in Shane's system next year, almost past his rookie deal with some starting experience.  He is plenty mobile, and you can't tell me that his arm is much less than Minshew's.

My point being- I don't see a scenario where Sam doesn't probably compete for the backup spot next year.  Having said that, he are spending pennies on the position and given AR's rookie campaign, we probably need a much better insurance policy than Sam in case of the worst.  Ballard surely doesn't want to travel down that road again. 

 

Sam intrigues me in this system but unfortunately I doubt we will ever get the chance to actually see it happen- and if we do- we are probably screwed to some extreme anyway. 

 

 

 

[ColtStrong2013]

1 hour ago, Nevbot said:

If I am being honest, I wish I could see Sam E run this O with Steichen calling the plays and Sam running around on some half field read options plays. 

We could go after a mobile young signal caller, but I figure that it would take him at least a year or two in our system to provide quality backup value, unless he is a vet that has played in Shane's system elsewhere ala Minshew- and those guys are limited. 
So we come back to Sam.  He will be two years in Shane's system next year, almost past his rookie deal with some starting experience.  He is plenty mobile, and you can't tell me that his arm is much less than Minshew's.

My point being- I don't see a scenario where Sam doesn't probably compete for the backup spot next year.  Having said that, he are spending pennies on the position and given AR's rookie campaign, we probably need a much better insurance policy than Sam in case of the worst.  Ballard surely doesn't want to travel down that road again. 

 

Sam intrigues me in this system but unfortunately I doubt we will ever get the chance to actually see it happen- and if we do- we are probably screwed to some extreme anyway. 

 

 

 

 

I don't see Sam as a backup. He's going to be our third option until his contract runs out. To me, its going to be Minshew unless he's just too expensive. I think they'll try to keep Minshew for another season, and then let Sam go in favor for a cheaper draft pick when he hits free agency. Sam could be a decent backup, and is probably the "backup option" at qb2 for if Minshew isn't able to be retained, which they would look to the draft for a replacement. There's really no way of knowing at this point. We'll hopefully not need to see Sam at qb this season, so our sample size is small and under different leadership. 

[DougDew]

2 hours ago, Nevbot said:

If I am being honest, I wish I could see Sam E run this O with Steichen calling the plays and Sam running around on some half field read options plays. 

We could go after a mobile young signal caller, but I figure that it would take him at least a year or two in our system to provide quality backup value, unless he is a vet that has played in Shane's system elsewhere ala Minshew- and those guys are limited. 
So we come back to Sam.  He will be two years in Shane's system next year, almost past his rookie deal with some starting experience.  He is plenty mobile, and you can't tell me that his arm is much less than Minshew's.

My point being- I don't see a scenario where Sam doesn't probably compete for the backup spot next year.  Having said that, he are spending pennies on the position and given AR's rookie campaign, we probably need a much better insurance policy than Sam in case of the worst.  Ballard surely doesn't want to travel down that road again. 

 

Sam intrigues me in this system but unfortunately I doubt we will ever get the chance to actually see it happen- and if we do- we are probably screwed to some extreme anyway. 

 

 

 

I don't understand the constant Sam hate the prevails on this board.  He's had two games during an awful season where every player....including are "All-Pros" collapsed.  He actually did pretty well against a good Commanders defense, but poorly against a Belicheck coached defense.

 

It seems like folks are looking for reasons to hate, and I can't understand what drives it. 

[Jason_]

8 minutes ago, DougDew said:

player....including are "All-Pros" collapsed. 

 

Oh Doug....noooooo

[DougDew]

On 12/6/2023 at 6:07 PM, Jared Cisneros said:

He also managed to find a sucker to trade Deshaun Watson to and replenish the team with draft picks.

 

20 hours ago, OLD FAN MAN said:

nick caserio is by far the best, a gm who can turn a bottom team into a force in the afc south in only 2 seasons is far ahead of the rest

Caserio took the job having to deal with the DW mess.....but Ballard wouldn't take the job unless he had a franchise QB in place already (Luck).  

 

Why would that disparity be a plus for Ballard?

 

23 hours ago, ColtStrong2013 said:

My consistent belief has been that Ballard wasn't given much a chance to draft qb with Frank Reich on staff. Irsay was the one that recommended interviewing Frank after the fiasco with McDaniels. 

 

I don't think Andrew Luck was very honest about his intentions or else Ballard likely doesn't take this job. It was well known that McDaniels thought there was a possibility of his retirement happening. No way he doesn't take this job with a healthy and committed Andrew Luck. No way. 

 

So McDaniels supposedly saw the Luck was a question mark, but Ballard didn't?  Why is this a plus for Ballard?

 

And Ballard only comes to IND because he thought it already had a franchise QB in place and wouldn't have taken the job otherwise?  Somebody would have been hired as GM without a franchise QB in place....because that's typically what happens to new GMs taking over for a fired GM.   Why is Ballard requiring Luck to be healthy a plus for Ballard compared to most GMs?

[RollerColt]

11 minutes ago, DougDew said:

I don't understand the constant Sam hate the prevails on this board.  He's had two games during an awful season where every player....including are "All-Pros" collapsed.  He actually did pretty well against a good Commanders defense, but poorly against a Belicheck coached defense.

 

It seems like folks are looking for reasons to hate, and I can't understand what drives it. 

People will always need a villain to rail against. It's human nature and helps justify (however right or wrong) our actions. 

[DougDew]

6 minutes ago, RollerColt said:

People will always need a villain to rail against. It's human nature and helps justify (however right or wrong) our actions. 

Yes.  This situation seems a little weirder.  Sam hasn't even gotten a chance to be a villain....outside of two games last year where he could not be the savior.  The villain in the Commanders game was Gilmore blowing coverage on a hail mary-ish TD throw, and Pittman missing an easy catch of a perfectly thrown NFL pass. 

 

But, after pointing out this Obvious, I'll be forever labeled a "Sam Lover"

[RollerColt]

3 minutes ago, DougDew said:

and Pittman missing an easy catch of a perfectly thrown NFL pass. 

One of the worst drops of his career.

 

I'm not sure what to think of Sam. I'm actually a little surprised he was able to stay here in the off-season. He must be that good to convince Steichen to keep him. He's obviously not better than Richardson, but he is better than Eason. 

[hoosierhawk]

12 minutes ago, DougDew said:

Yes.  This situation seems a little weirder.  Sam hasn't even gotten a chance to be a villain....outside of two games last year where he could not be the savior.  The villain in the Commanders game was Gilmore blowing coverage on a hail mary-ish TD throw, and Pittman missing an easy catch of a perfectly thrown NFL pass. 

 

But, after pointing out this Obvious, I'll be forever labeled a "Sam Lover"

Sam lover!😠

[Restinpeacesweetchloe]

2 hours ago, Nevbot said:

If I am being honest, I wish I could see Sam E run this O with Steichen calling the plays and Sam running around on some half field read options plays. 

We could go after a mobile young signal caller, but I figure that it would take him at least a year or two in our system to provide quality backup value, unless he is a vet that has played in Shane's system elsewhere ala Minshew- and those guys are limited. 
So we come back to Sam.  He will be two years in Shane's system next year, almost past his rookie deal with some starting experience.  He is plenty mobile, and you can't tell me that his arm is much less than Minshew's.

My point being- I don't see a scenario where Sam doesn't probably compete for the backup spot next year.  Having said that, he are spending pennies on the position and given AR's rookie campaign, we probably need a much better insurance policy than Sam in case of the worst.  Ballard surely doesn't want to travel down that road again. 

 

Sam intrigues me in this system but unfortunately I doubt we will ever get the chance to actually see it happen- and if we do- we are probably screwed to some extreme anyway. 

 

 

 

It would be interesting seeing Sam with Steichen. Maybe he will get a chance if that Texans game doesn’t have much meaning. 

[DougDew]

5 minutes ago, RollerColt said:

One of the worst drops of his career.

 

I'm not sure what to think of Sam. I'm actually a little surprised he was able to stay here in the off-season. He must be that good to convince Steichen to keep him. He's obviously not better than Richardson, but he is better than Eason. 

Jalen Hurts does not have the best arm talent amongst NFL QBs.  He simply doesn't.  He has other things, and I'm not comparing Sam to Hurts (since I've hardly even seen Sam play for one reason), but if Sam is a runner who can't make all of the NFL throws consistently (not a wrong description of Hurts BTW), then what prevents him from being a good back up Qb on a SS team? 

[RollerColt]

3 minutes ago, DougDew said:

Jalen Hurts does not have the best arm talent amongst NFL QBs.  He simply doesn't.  He has other things, and I'm not comparing Sam to Hurts (since I've hardly even seen Sam play for one reason), but if Sam is a runner who can't make all of the NFL throws consistently (not a wrong description of Hurts BTW), then what prevents him from being a good back up Qb on a SS team? 

 

I think you're selling Jalen way too short here. But I'll play: 

 

1. Minshew was outdueling Sam consistently during training camp. I saw it in person. At times Gardner was also beating Anthony. 

2. Gardner simply has more experience than Sam, specifically on being a starter. 

3. Once Minshew became the backup QB, he stepped in several times and was winning games early on this season. 

4. You don't make a drastic change like benching Minshew for Sam when the team is in the playoff hunt and is winning. 

[NewColtsFan]

35 minutes ago, DougDew said:

 

Caserio took the job having to deal with the DW mess.....but Ballard wouldn't take the job unless he had a franchise QB in place already (Luck).  

 

Why would that disparity be a plus for Ballard?

 

 

So McDaniels supposedly saw the Luck was a question mark, but Ballard didn't?  Why is this a plus for Ballard?

 

And Ballard only comes to IND because he thought it already had a franchise QB in place and wouldn't have taken the job otherwise?  Somebody would have been hired as GM without a franchise QB in place....because that's typically what happens to new GMs taking over for a fired GM.   Why is Ballard requiring Luck to be healthy a plus for Ballard compared to most GMs?

Doug….    Of course, you’re entitled to any opinion you want.   But let’s be clear, all that you’ve written here is your opinion.   There are no proven verified facts here.  But you’re writing as if this is all fact.   It’s not, not even a little. 

[DougDew]

1 minute ago, RollerColt said:

 

I think you're selling Jalen way too short here. But I'll play: 

 

1. Minshew was outdueling Sam consistently during training camp. I saw it in person. At times Gardner was also beating Anthony. 

2. Gardner simply has more experience than Sam, specifically on being a starter. 

3. Once Minshew became the backup QB, he stepped in several times and was winning games early on this season. 

4. You don't make a drastic change like benching Minshew for Sam when the team is in the playoff hunt and is winning. 

The question that I was commenting on was that why Sam still here?  My answer was that I think because Sam is a smart kid who picked up the offense quickly, can run, and is compact/stoutly built.  It seems like SS would be comfortable thinking he can coach a QB like that to some decent level of NFL success. 

 

I think the plan was to sign Minshew to be the emergency starter should AR really struggle, and for Sam to be rostered as future backup.  Then as AR and Sam developed, Minshew would be the QB to leave.  But I think ARs injury may have put that plan off by a year.

[DougDew]

7 minutes ago, NewColtsFan said:

Doug….    Of course, you’re entitled to any opinion you want.   But let’s be clear, all that you’ve written here is your opinion.   There are no proven verified facts here.  But you’re writing as if this is all fact.   It’s not, not even a little. 

Not my opinions as to why Josh left or why Ballard came here.  I've never had any opinion about that.  I'm commenting on other's opinions and how they don't really shed positive light on Ballard.. 

 

 

[NewColtsFan]

14 minutes ago, DougDew said:

Jalen Hurts does not have the best arm talent amongst NFL QBs.  He simply doesn't.  He has other things, and I'm not comparing Sam to Hurts (since I've hardly even seen Sam play for one reason), but if Sam is a runner who can't make all of the NFL throws consistently (not a wrong description of Hurts BTW), then what prevents him from being a good back up Qb on a SS team? 

While you’re commenting on Jalen Hurts here, perhaps this is the best opportunity to drop in this fact.   Earlier this year you called Hurts a game manager and NOT a franchise quarterback. 
 

I think the Eagles, who signed Hurts to a contract of 5/255 (51m per) which was the highest in the NFL at the time would strongly disagree.   I think the Eagles clearly believe Hurts is a franchise level QB.  
 

The Giants signed Daniels Jones to a contract of 4/140 (35m per) and the Seahawks signed Geno Smith to 3/75 (25m per).  Those are contracts for a game manager. 

[RollerColt]

12 minutes ago, DougDew said:

The question that I was commenting on was that why Sam still here?  My answer was that I think because Sam is a smart kid who picked up the offense quickly, can run, and is compact/stoutly built.  It seems like SS would be comfortable thinking he can coach a QB like that to some decent level of NFL success. 

You're changing your question. The question I answered was: 

 

Quote

what prevents him from being a good back up Qb on a SS team? 

 

And I provided answers as to why he originally was not the backup QB. 

[csmopar]

15 minutes ago, NewColtsFan said:

Doug….    Of course, you’re entitled to any opinion you want.   But let’s be clear, all that you’ve written here is your opinion.   There are no proven verified facts here.  But you’re writing as if this is all fact.   It’s not, not even a little. 

You beat me to it but well said

12 minutes ago, DougDew said:

Not my opinions as to why Josh left or why Ballard came here.  I've never had any opinion about that.  I'm commenting on other's opinions and how they don't really shed positive light on Ballard.. 

 

 

Then quote some sources there bud, cause a Google search turns up nada…zilch, nothing 

[NewColtsFan]

8 minutes ago, DougDew said:

Not my opinions.  I'm commenting on other's opinions. 

 

Opinions that place Ballard in a positive light for coming here because he thought the Colts already had a franchise Qb...compared to Caserio who came to a team with a malcontent franchise Qb (but one who could get drat picks from). 

 

And, the prevailing opinion of others that McDaniels backed out because he questioned Luck's return.  If true, that only means that McDaniels correctly assessed the Luck situation and Ballard whiffed on it when he decided to take the job based upon Luck being here (which is an opinion others have made)  

 

I don't have any opinion as to why Josh left or why Ballard came here.  But these are the opinions I have read being made by others, and are currently being spun to put Ballard in a positive light.

The opinions, whose ever they are, are only opinions.   There are no facts there.   Yet you work to advance them.   Look at your own language.  “Being spun to put Ballard in a positive light.”   It’s revealing Doug. 

[DougDew]

19 minutes ago, NewColtsFan said:

Earlier this year you called Hurts a game manager and NOT a franchise quarterback. 

That's exactly correct.  I can't be responsible for every other observer or media pundit getting it wrong.  But right/wrong does not rest in the tally of opinions.

 

He has the skills of a game manager.  He does not have great arm talent...like a typical franchise QB.  He's fairly short too. As a runner, he is not particularly elusive like a Lamar Jackson.  He is not particularly fast like a Kaepernick.  As since he's a QB, he doesn't really have a lot of pancake type of power. 

 

But, he's a winner, because he is intelligent and he makes great decisions in specific situations.  When he runs, he as great vision in being able to cut at the correct angle to maximize yardage.

 

Great mental acuity with good accuracy...but non eltie/limited raw physical talent.  That's the precise definition of a game manager.

 

The problem is...is that ALL media pundits and similar folks use the term "game manager" as a pejorative....a nice way to backhandedly criticize a QB who is the typical weakling shrimp but cutely manages to win ball games.

 

So those pundits are a victim of their own wrong minded stereotyping, because their favorite QB is not much different skill wise than Brock Purdy, except a little stronger in the legs to do the tush push.

[DougDew]

17 minutes ago, RollerColt said:

You're changing your question. The question I answered was: 

 

 

And I provided answers as to why he originally was not the backup QB. 

We're talking past each other.  My question was actually an assertion that Sam is probably thought of as the future backup QB when AR becomes the safe starter and they don't need a vet to carry the load "just in case".  That's why he's still here and probably will be.

[NewColtsFan]

1 minute ago, DougDew said:

That's exactly correct.  I can't be responsible for every other observer or media pundit getting it wrong.  But right/wrong does not rest in the tally of opinions.

 

He has the skills of a game manager.  He does not have great arm talent...like a typical franchise QB.  He's fairly short too. As a runner, he is not particularly elusive like a Lamar Jackson.  He is not particularly fast like a Kaepernick.  As since he's a QB, he doesn't really have a lot of pancake type of power. 

 

But, he's a winner, because he is intelligent and he makes great decisions in specific situations.  When he runs, he as great vision in being able to cut at the correct angle to maximize yardage.

 

Great mental acuity with good accuracy...but non eltie/limited raw physical talent.  That's the precise definition of a game manager.

 

The problem is...is that ALL media pundits and similar folks use the term "game manager" as a pejorative....a nice way to backhandedly criticize a QB who is the typical weakling shrimp but cutely manages to win ball games.

 

So those pundits are a victim of their own wrong minded stereotyping, because their favorite QB is not much different skill wise than Brock Purdy, accept a little stronger in the legs to do the tush push.

Ok….   I’ll just go on the record as saying I don’t think I agree with a word of this.   I demonstrated that the Eagles clearly view Hurts as a franchise QB by how they’re paying him and contrasted with how other teams pay their game manager QB.   And all you can say is “and I’m right”.  
 

I think you’re too hung up on the size of a franchise quarterback.  You don’t have to be 6’4”+ to be a franchise quarterback.   Drew Brees says hello.  So does Tua.   Tom Brady may have had the height, but he didn’t have a great body or a great arm.  What he had was a great brain to process information.   It’s the most important quality for a QB. 
 

[DougDew]

10 minutes ago, NewColtsFan said:

Ok….   I’ll just go on the record as saying I don’t think I agree with a word of this.   I demonstrated that the Eagles clearly view Hurts as a franchise QB by how they’re paying him and contrasted with how other teams pay their game manager QB.   And all you can say is “and I’m right”.  
 

I think you’re too hung up on the size of a franchise quarterback.  You don’t have to be 6’4”+ to be a franchise quarterback.   Drew Brees says hello.  So does Tua.   Tom Brady may have had the height, but he didn’t have a great body or a great arm.  What he had was a great brain to process information.   It’s the most important quality for a QB. 
 

You're criticizing my use of language when I think Hurts is a fine starting QB for a team that is built around/coached to what he can do. 

 

The term game manager QB is typically used to describe the QB who has limited physical skills (size, arm, speed, etc), but still wins ball games because of how he fits into the team he has around him.  Franchise QB is the kind of QB that makes other players around him better, in that he doesn't need them to be at a specific talent level.  PM can make Jacob Tamme a pro-bowl TE.  No...Hurts is not that kind of QB, IMO.  His physical talent was not great in college, and it has not proven to be on the franchise level in the NFL.  But he wins.

 

Contract is a matter of circumstance and the judgement to hold a team together as long as its all working together great and it has a broad window.  Its hard to see that another team would buy Hurts to come over and plug into their existing roster, just like I think Purdy is probably worth more to SF than to many other NFL teams.

[RollerColt]

2 minutes ago, DougDew said:

The term game manager QB is typically used to describe the QB who has limited physical skills, but still wins ball games because of how he fits into the team he has around him.  Franchise QB is the kind of QB that makes other players around him better, in that he doesn't need them to be at a specific talent level.  PM can make Jacob Tamme a pro-bowl TE.  No...Hurts is not that kind of QB, IMO.  His physical talent was not great in college, and it has not proven to be on the franchise level in the NFL.  But he wins.

I disagree. 

 

A game manager QB is someone who stays out of the way and rarely influence's the game's outcome. Jalen Hurts can often win games almost by himself, much like Andrew Luck did. That's a franchise level QB. 

 

And AJ Brown was doing horribly in Tennessee. And then suddenly he exploded once brought in to work with Hurts. You ask any Eagles player if Hurts makes them a better team, and I guarantee you they will all say the same thing. 

[DougDew]

1 minute ago, RollerColt said:

I disagree. 

 

A game manager QB is someone who stays out of the way and rarely influence's the game's outcome. Jalen Hurts can often win games almost by himself, much like Andrew Luck did. That's a franchise level QB. 

 

And AJ Brown was doing horribly in Tennessee. And then suddenly he exploded once brought in to work with Hurts. You ask any Eagles player if Hurts makes them a better team, and I guarantee you they will all say the same thing. 

I have never seen Hurts win a game by himself.  What I see is Donta Smith making great catches of questionably thrown balls, a guy who shoves a pile two yards with the help of a great oline and two guys pushing him.  And the ability to judge the open spot to gain 8 yards and a first down.  He's smart and makes good decisions, and gets the ball to the right player at the right time, just like most...successful.... game manager type of skill set QBs

[RollerColt]

1 minute ago, DougDew said:

I have never seen Hurts win a game by himself.  What I see is Donta Smith making great catches of questionably thrown balls, a guy who shoves a pile two yards with the help of a great oline and two guys pushing him.  And the ability to judge the open spot to gain 8 yards and a first down.  He's smart and makes good decisions, and gets the ball to the right player at the right time, just like most...successful.... game manager type of skill set QBs

 

Last year against us he blew past the entire defense and scored... He won the game. 

 

This year against the Bills he blew past the entire defense and scored.... He won the game. 

 

He has more of those kinds of moments each season. 

[BlackTiger]

Hurts is a franchise QB.

 

Doug has a lot of biased opinions and thinks hes the smartest guy in the room and that no one can see through him when he walks back comments that hes made before.

 

Not even worth talking to him tbh.

 

[DougDew]

15 minutes ago, RollerColt said:

 

Last year against us he blew past the entire defense and scored... He won the game. 

 

This year against the Bills he blew past the entire defense and scored.... He won the game. 

 

He has more of those kinds of moments each season. 

That's fine.  But he probably doesn't time out as a particularly fast guy that would be able to make those runs if the circumstances aren't just right.  He made the right decision at the right time based upon how he saw the field.  I think he's very good at that, and its what makes him successful.  Physical talent isn't the reason he wins, IMO.

 

OTOH, Russel Wilson, IMO, is a franchise QB because he has the arm talent to make many plays despite the circumstances not being good.  He probably makes overall fewer good decisions that Hurts but makes more...better....plays with his arm.  I think Wilson doesn't need to have the team around him like Hurts does.

 

JMO.

[RollerColt]

1 minute ago, DougDew said:

That's fine.  But he probably doesn't time out as a particularly fast guy that would be able to make those runs if the circumstances aren't just right.  He made the right decision at the right time based upon how he saw the field.  I think he's very good at that, and its what makes him successful.  Physical talent isn't the reason he wins, IMO.

 

OTOH, Russel Wilson, IMO, is a franchise QB because he has the arm talent to make many plays despite the circumstances being good.  He probably makes overall fewer good decisions that Hurts but makes more...better..plays with his arm.  I think Wilson doesn't need to have the team around him like Hurts does.

 

JMO.

 

Of all your opinions, that's... certainly one of them. 

[Superman]

52 minutes ago, DougDew said:

That's exactly correct.  I can't be responsible for every other observer or media pundit getting it wrong.  But right/wrong does not rest in the tally of opinions.

 

He has the skills of a game manager.  He does not have great arm talent...like a typical franchise QB.  He's fairly short too. As a runner, he is not particularly elusive like a Lamar Jackson.  He is not particularly fast like a Kaepernick.  As since he's a QB, he doesn't really have a lot of pancake type of power. 

 

But, he's a winner, because he is intelligent and he makes great decisions in specific situations.  When he runs, he as great vision in being able to cut at the correct angle to maximize yardage.

 

Great mental acuity with good accuracy...but non eltie/limited raw physical talent.  That's the precise definition of a game manager.

 

The problem is...is that ALL media pundits and similar folks use the term "game manager" as a pejorative....a nice way to backhandedly criticize a QB who is the typical weakling shrimp but cutely manages to win ball games.

 

So those pundits are a victim of their own wrong minded stereotyping, because their favorite QB is not much different skill wise than Brock Purdy, except a little stronger in the legs to do the tush push.

 

You'd probably be better off saying that Hurts doesn't fit your specific prototype of a franchise QB, than arguing that everyone else is set in wrong minded stereotyping.

[DougDew]

2 minutes ago, RollerColt said:

 

Of all your opinions, that's... certainly one of them. 

I would simply say that the difference in the terms game manager and franchise Qb is precisely about the level of physical talent.  The mental stuff is needed for any QB to be successful, but the game manager doesn't have the physical talent to carry a team, and the franchise guy does.  Hurts doesn't.  Check the combine, check the analysis.  Talent wise (including arm talent), he's more in the Brock Purdy bucket, but squats a lot, for whatever that's worth.

[ColtStrong2013]

2 hours ago, DougDew said:

 

Caserio took the job having to deal with the DW mess.....but Ballard wouldn't take the job unless he had a franchise QB in place already (Luck).  

 

Why would that disparity be a plus for Ballard?

 

 

So McDaniels supposedly saw the Luck was a question mark, but Ballard didn't?  Why is this a plus for Ballard?

 

And Ballard only comes to IND because he thought it already had a franchise QB in place and wouldn't have taken the job otherwise?  Somebody would have been hired as GM without a franchise QB in place....because that's typically what happens to new GMs taking over for a fired GM.   Why is Ballard requiring Luck to be healthy a plus for Ballard compared to most GMs?

number 1, i wasn’t comparing the two. I think it is laughable to compare Caserio winning in his 3rd season with CJ Stroud compared to Ballard having the same record in his 7th with Gardner Minshew. Ballard did the same in year 2 and hasn’t had a franchise qb since. 
 

i didn’t say it was a plus nor compare their situation with that. I just simply said he doesn’t take this job, which is likely true. Irsay has repeatedly said that he was fortunate to land Ballard. Your post is confusing because it’s a rambling mess of nothing I was talking about.
 

Number 2, McDaniels was hired a year later. When Ballard was hired, there weren’t the same injury concerns with Luck. So it was a totally different thing. And yes, Ballard only took the Indianapolis Colts job because he thought he had Andrew Luck, which he did. No one would have guessed in 2017 he would retired two seasons later.  In Feb. 2018, the talk was different. If Luck was questionable like he was when Ballard took this job, he’s likely looking to land in a larger market with the ability to draft a qb soon. Instead he got one year of Andrew Luck and an owner and new coach that tied his hands for 3 more seasons at the qb position. 

[DougDew]

1 minute ago, Superman said:

 

You'd probably be better off saying that Hurts doesn't fit your specific prototype of a franchise QB, than arguing that everyone else is set in wrong minded stereotyping.

I understand perfectly that language has different meanings to different people.

 

NCF was trying to tell me I was wrong, by using his idea of what game managers vs franchise QBs were, defining right vs wrong opinions based upon the number of people who hold them or their stature. 

 

Basically, he lifted up something I said months ago as being wrong, by deeming others' opinions as the definitions of the terms.

[Superman]

Just now, DougDew said:

I understand perfectly that language has different meanings to different people.

 

NCF was trying to tell me I was wrong, by using his idea of what game managers vs franchise QBs were, defining right vs wrong opinions based upon the number of people who hold them or their stature. 

 

Basically, he lifted up something I said months ago as being wrong, by deeming others' opinions as the definitions of the terms.

 

Do you not see a difference between disagreeing with a popular opinion, and accusing people who hold that popular opinion of wrong minded stereotyping?

 

It's one thing to say 'I don't think Hurts is a franchise QB because of this.' It's very different to say 'I'm right, everyone else is wrong, and they're wrong because they're stereotyping.' 

[DougDew]

6 minutes ago, ColtStrong2013 said:

number 1, i wasn’t comparing the two. I said it was laughable to compare Caserio winning in his 3rd season compared to Ballard having the same record in his 7th. Ballard did the same in year 2 and hasn’t had a franchise qb since. 
 

i didn’t say it was a plus nor compare their situation with that. I just simply said he doesn’t take this job, which is likely true. Irsay has repeatedly said that he was fortunate to land Ballard. Your post is confusing because it’s a rambling mess of nothing I was talking about.
 

Number 2, McDaniels was hired a year later. When Ballard was hired, there weren’t the same injury concerns with Luck. So it was a totally different thing. And yes, Ballard only took the Indianapolis Colts job because he thought he had Andrew Luck, which he did. No one would have guessed in 2017 he would retired two seasons later.  In Feb. 2018, the talk was different. If Luck was questionable like he was when Ballard took this job, he’s likely looking to land in a larger market with the ability to draft a qb soon. Instead he got one year of Andrew Luck and an owner and new coach that tied his hands for 3 more seasons at the qb position. 

Maybe not directly you, but elements of the ideas were part of your comments, IMO.

 

It seems inconsistent to criticize Josh for backing out of the Colts job over uncertainty about Luck, and not acknowledging he was actually correct about it.

 

And yes. there is this notion that Ballard took the job because of the luxury of having a franchise QB in place.  Which compares poorly to Caserio, where he went into a dumpster fire situation at QB.  

[NewColtsFan]

1 minute ago, DougDew said:

Maybe not directly you, but elements of the ideas were part of your comments, IMO.

 

It seems inconsistent to criticize Josh for backing out of the Colts job over uncertainty about Luck, and not acknowledging he was actually correct about it.

 

And yes. there is this notion that Ballard took the job because of the luxury of having a franchise QB in place.  Which compares poorly to Caserio, where he went into a dumpster fire situation at QB.  

How do we know Josh backed out over worries about Luck?    The views back then were that (A) Kraft convinced him Irsay was crazy, and (B) Kraft gave him a new huge deal to return as the OC.  

[Superman]

13 minutes ago, ColtStrong2013 said:

And yes, Ballard only took the Indianapolis Colts job because he thought he had Andrew Luck, which he did.

 

This is a conclusion not based on any reported facts. Ballard was asked about this at his intro presser, and he all but refuted it.

 

The conclusion about McDaniels backing out because of uncertainty with Luck is also not based on any reported facts. And frankly, it attempts to provide cover for one of the most cowardly actions I can remember seeing from a HC candidate, so I'm personally inclined to reject it with prejudice.

[ColtStrong2013]

2 minutes ago, DougDew said:

Maybe not directly you, but elements of the ideas were part of your comments, IMO.

 

It seems inconsistent to criticize Josh for backing out of the Colts job over uncertainty about Luck, and not acknowledging he was actually correct about it.

 

And yes. there is this notion that Ballard took the job because of the luxury of having a franchise QB in place.  Which compares poorly to Caserio, where he went into a dumpster fire situation at QB.  

 

At least you put that it was your opinion after that first line... 

 

When did I criticize McDaniels for backing out? I've never criticized him one time for doing so. Matter of fact, I called into a radio show in Boston the day after it broke out and was on air for severl minutes with the hosts telling them I think it was the smartest thing that the Patriots did. They locked him in a room and made sure he was satisfied with staying as they were set to lose their Defensive coordinator, special teams coordinator and offensive coordinator in one week. They loved the input they were getting from a Colts season ticket holder. Maybe practice your reading comprehension. I simply said that McDaniels backed out and it was likely due to uncertainty with Luck's health/commitment and then produced an article that discussed the rumors that were floating at the time. I only brought McDaniels situation up to highlight the difference in one year with Ballard's situation. Had those rumors been floating in 2017, Ballard never takes this job in my opinion. 
 

Yes he did, because he's smart. He knows the odds of a GM without a franchise qb, and he's damn near experienced it after Luck's departure. Again, comparing the two is laughable so well done in that regard... I'm laughing. Caserio might have gone into a dumpster fire, but he went into one that he dang well knew he would get to stack high draft picks for a few years while he focused in other areas until the right time came to bring a franchise qb in. He landed an mvp candidate in his rookie year at number 2. They took a chance at not getting Stroud, either because they weren't sold that he was better than Young or for whatever reason, by sitting at number 2 while the Panthers traded up past them. As Ballard has repeatedly said regarding drafting qbs, it's not an exact science. Caserio lucked into CJ Stroud, in my opinon and @OLD FAN MAN thinks he's better than Howie Roseman now... LOL

 

[ColtStrong2013]

8 minutes ago, NewColtsFan said:

How do we know Josh backed out over worries about Luck?    The views back then were that (A) Kraft convinced him Irsay was crazy, and (B) Kraft gave him a new huge deal to return as the OC.  

 

We don't. Unlike Dougdew, I'll admit it's just my opinion and provide the links to the rumors going on at the time. There were question marks with Luck's health as well as his commitment to Indianapolis. 

 

See my above response to Doug regarding my call into Boston radio. I'm well aware of what happened. I just don't buy that there was anything the Patriots were going to offer as an OC to compare to HC for a team with Andrew Luck on roster... unless he was very uncertain on Luck's future. Just my two cents.

[DougDew]

1 minute ago, Superman said:

 

Do you not see a difference between disagreeing with a popular opinion, and accusing people who hold that popular opinion of wrong minded stereotyping?

 

It's one thing to say 'I don't think Hurts is a franchise QB because of this.' It's very different to say 'I'm right, everyone else is wrong, and they're wrong because they're stereotyping.' 

I'm 100% correct.  They do stereotype.  Stereotyping (in a pejorative way) is precisely why they use the term game manager.

 

Like I said, the pundits use the term game manager as a backhanded way of saying that the QB is limited to basically dinking and dunking, etc. because of physical limitations.  They use it as a pejorative, but stop short of applying it to other QBs that have the exact same skill set....like Hurts, or Bryce Young for that matter....because of the pejorative way they typically use the term.

 

I use it as an objective description of physical skills.  Purdy, Hurts, Young, and Bennett all being game managers, with Bennett probably having the best set of physical QBing skills.  Skills that would not limit him to being a dink and dunker, etc.