Colts offseason discussion / Ballard Grievances (merge)

[jvan1973]

1 minute ago, Restinpeacesweetchloe said:

What have the last 8 years got him. Don’t you think  when your approach isn’t working you should at least tweet your approach. Ballard has not and he has a losing record. He would of been fired 2 or 3 years ago if he was a GM on any other team.

Yes. gms should tweet out things like that.   

[ColtStrong2013]

Just now, jvan1973 said:

Yes. gms should tweet out things like that.   

[Restinpeacesweetchloe]

3 minutes ago, jvan1973 said:

What proof is there that the other teams in the division have been great in the last 8 years?   Ballard built a team that missed the playoffs by one game with a backup qb.   

They haven’t which makes Ballards record even worse knowing how bad the division was.

[Defjamz26]

24 minutes ago, adubb84 said:

Yeah - I couldn’t have put it any better than that. I just think folks were expecting him to break out of his regiment seeing that Richardson showed promise, so ergo “why not” be more aggressive if you feel you have that dude?  I’ll wait until we get the actual season, but we are putting an expectational amount stress on our developing players to perform next year. 

I didn’t expect him to buck his usual trend, but I did expect him to maybe do what he did last year and take a shot on a middle of pack vet or two. He did with Davis but I expected that type of move at safety and corner.

[jvan1973]

Just now, Restinpeacesweetchloe said:

They haven’t which makes Ballards record even worse knowing how bad the division was.

Yeah,   ok.   I can't follow your arguments.  They change every day.  Maybe,  just maybe,  see how the season plays out before losing your mind.   That's my suggestion.   Otherwise,  carry on

[1959Colts]

29 minutes ago, DougDew said:

No I get it.  I was just saying that TEN could be more of a threat now that they are liberating their offense.

Yeah. They hired Callahan, who was in the finals for Colts HC. and Levis is like AR. Big, strong, fast, rocket arm. Ballard and Steichen have their work cut out for them to get in playoffs

[NewColtsFan]

13 minutes ago, Restinpeacesweetchloe said:

What have the last 8 years got him. Don’t you think  when your approach isn’t working you should at least tweet your approach. Ballard has not and he has a losing record. He would of been fired 2 or 3 years ago if he was a GM on any other team.

The reason he hasn’t been fired is that Irsay, himself a former GM, knows how hard the job is.  Decisions were made each year that Irsay signed off on.   Maybe it’s a good thing that Irsay has been patient, and not a bad thing as you implied.  

[DougDew]

30 minutes ago, Superman said:

Just seems like the same discussion from two weeks ago, and now the Texans trade for a player that most people didn't want to begin with, and it starts all over again.

 

25 minutes ago, Superman said:

Sure, some people would reconsider trading for Diggs for a 2025 second rounder vs a 2024 first rounder. If you had simply said that, I would not have pushed back.

Do you think that perhaps the discussion from two weeks ago that is being triggered by a player "most people didn't want", is because they didn't really think too deeply about their previous opinion about Diggs. knowing that the price was really expensive to even be worth the effort to think about it much?  And now that its revealed as being low,  people are now upset-ish.

 

25 minutes ago, Superman said:

As for Chloe being cornered by wolves, I think that's an interesting and overly sensational way to describe what happened. But if any poster is getting called out for their way of posting, they should either be prepared to defend themselves, or think about adjusting their style and substance. If you want to armor up and defend that poster against the "wolves," that's your call.

I think its obvious that some posters are not as eloquent at expressing their thoughts as others. 

 

And yes, I think the wolves are just picking on her for what she expresses knowing full well that she doesn't always exactly mean what she expresses.  I see it as not much different than a group of nags continuously hounding someone for not spelling correctly. 

[pkbrux]

1 hour ago, Jason_ said:

 

If you do block her let me know what the forum looks like after.  I've always imagined that like half the threads would disappear

 

I have and not as much disappeared as I had hoped. When you block a super high volume poster, you still see them constantly when everyone quotes them in their posts.

[John Waylon]

13 minutes ago, Superman said:

 

 

Unless there are significant injuries, I think he would be. In fact, even if there are significant injuries...

I’d like to think so but I do believe he’s safe for at least one more.

[GoColts8818]

38 minutes ago, Superman said:

 

Not a lot to disagree with here. Just seems like the same discussion from two weeks ago, and now the Texans trade for a player that most people didn't want to begin with, and it starts all over again. Like John Waylon said, it's salt in the wound, but maybe everyone should try a bandaid so that wound isn't so exposed. 

 

By the way, I'm not giving Ballard credit for trying. But it does rub me the wrong way when people say stuff like they don't care about improving the team. They have a different vision than you prefer, that doesn't mean they don't care. To me, that's nonsense. So I think when people bring up the 'trying,' it's in response to these very bold claims that ignore the trying. It's still a bottom line business, either you build a good roster or you don't. 

I think this is fair.  As the old saying goes close only counts in horse shoes and hand gurnards.  I think people bring up him trying to get other players for the exact reason you mentioned.  It disputes he did what he always does as claimed and the claims he’s not doing anything.  I took it more of a statement of fact to disprove an incorrect statement than wanting to give him credit for it.  I think some that are frustrated with Ballard and want him gone are spinning a statement of fact as people supporting Ballard  by trying to give him credit for trying when they really aren’t.  

[Restinpeacesweetchloe]

4 minutes ago, John Waylon said:

I’d like to think so but I do believe he’s safe for at least one more.

He has one more excuse and that is Bradley.

[jvan1973]

3 minutes ago, DougDew said:

 

Do you think that perhaps the discussion from two weeks ago that is being triggered by a player "most people didn't want", is because they didn't really think too deeply about their previous opinion about Diggs. knowing that the price was really expensive to even be worth the effort to think about it much?  And now that its revealed as being low,  people are now upset-ish.

 

I think its obvious that some posters are not as eloquent at expressing their thoughts as others. 

 

And yes, I think the wolves are just picking on her for what she expresses knowing full well that she doesn't always exactly mean what she expresses.  I see it as not much different than a group of nags continuously hounding someone for not spelling correctly. 

My goodness.   If a person posts several different ideas that contradict each other daily,  sometimes hourly.  There will be some pushback.  It's not "picking on".   If you can't take criticism of your thoughts you shouldn't be online 

[GoColts8818]

25 minutes ago, jvan1973 said:

What proof is there that the other teams in the division have been great in the last 8 years?   Ballard built a team that missed the playoffs by one game with a backup qb.   

The whole division combined has what one or two trips to the AFCCG as the furthest they’ve gone.  It’s not like the rest of the division has been winning Super Bowls hand over fist over the past 8 years.

[NewColtsFan]

23 minutes ago, Restinpeacesweetchloe said:

What have the last 8 years got him. Don’t you think  when your approach isn’t working you should at least tweet your approach. Ballard has not and he has a losing record. He would of been fired 2 or 3 years ago if he was a GM on any other team.

Ballard doesn’t tweet his approach.  He has a year end press conference.   He has a presser at the combine.   He has a presser after the first few weeks of free agency.   He’ll have one before the draft and another after each night of the draft and one about a week or so after the draft.  
 

And he does interviews with various national media throughout the year….  Like Rich Eisen, and Dan Patrick, etc.   

 

There’s plenty of opportunity to learn what Ballard is thinking throughout the course of the year if you’re interested.  
 

 

[jvan1973]

3 minutes ago, Restinpeacesweetchloe said:

He has one more excuse and that is Bradley.

I'm guessing the owner of the team disagrees with you

[Jason_]

9 minutes ago, pkbrux said:

 

I have and not as much disappeared as I had hoped. When you block a super high volume poster, you still see them constantly when everyone quotes them in their posts.

 

do you still see the threads that were created?

[ColtStrong2013]

29 minutes ago, Restinpeacesweetchloe said:

What have the last 8 years got him. Don’t you think  when your approach isn’t working you should at least tweet your approach. Ballard has not and he has a losing record. He would of been fired 2 or 3 years ago if he was a GM on any other team.

what is fascinating is that you will say this in one breath, and then once you’ve settled into the lack of oxygen you had to recover from and calmed your nerves, you will say something like, “the roster isn’t bad… just need one more playmaker.” Or something regarding getting the draft right etc. 

 

my point is, it’s exhausting… 

[ColtStrong2013]

12 minutes ago, DougDew said:

yes, I think the wolves are just picking on her

[pkbrux]

2 minutes ago, Jason_ said:

 

do you still see the threads that were created?

 

Yes, this one we are currently in, for example 🤣

[Superman]

6 minutes ago, DougDew said:

Do you think that perhaps the discussion from two weeks ago that is being triggered by a player "most people didn't want", is because they didn't really think too deeply about their previous opinion about Diggs. knowing that the price was really expensive to even be worth the effort to think about it much?  And now that its revealed as being low,  people are now upset-ish.

 

Not really, no. I think several people who are upset today have admitted that they still didn't want Diggs, despite the reduced cost. I asked Solid84 if he even wanted Diggs at the actual cost, and he said no. 'It's not about Diggs!' has been the common refrain. It's annoyance that the Colts didn't do something, while the Texans in particular have been more active.

 

But again, from the beginning, I think you misread the situation on the Diggs trade, and the appetite for it.

 

Quote

 

I think its obvious that some posters are not as eloquent at expressing their thoughts as others. 

 

And yes, I think the wolves are just picking on her for what she expresses knowing full well that she doesn't always exactly mean what she expresses.  I see it as not much different than a group of nags continuously hounding someone for not spelling correctly. 

 

 

It's probably not right for me to continue discussing another poster in public. I'll just say I think the pushback is about something other than a lack of eloquence and some spelling errors.

[DougDew]

6 minutes ago, jvan1973 said:

My goodness.   If a person posts several different ideas that contradict each other daily,  sometimes hourly.  There will be some pushback.  It's not "picking on".   If you can't take criticism of your thoughts you shouldn't be online 

If you consistently see a flaw, and come to expect it, and then choose to constantly point out the flaw, I think its close to being the Webster's definition of picking on somebody. 

 

Do you happen to have any warts or moles anywhere?  Just asking.

[Restinpeacesweetchloe]

2 minutes ago, ColtStrong2013 said:

what is fascinating is that you will say this in one breath, and then once you’ve settled into the lack of oxygen you had to recover from and calmed your nerves, you will say something like, “the roster isn’t bad… just need one more playmaker.” Or something regarding getting the draft right etc. 

 

my point is, it’s exhausting… 

What so hard to understand. The team isn’t bad but the secondary is trash and could totally cause this team to lose games. There is nothing hard to understand. Wanting to keep the young QB healthy and not asking him to be Superman is not asking to much.

[ColtStrong2013]

Just now, DougDew said:

Do you happen to have any warts or moles anywhere?  Just asking.

I have been characterized as one giant hemorrhoid since 7th grade physical education class. 

[jvan1973]

1 minute ago, DougDew said:

If you consistently see a flaw, and come to expect it, and then choose to constantly point out the flaw, I think its close to being the Webster's definition of picking on somebody. 

 

Do you happen to have any warts or moles anywhere?  Just asking.

I do.   How is that relevant?

[Superman]

15 minutes ago, John Waylon said:

I’d like to think so but I do believe he’s safe for at least one more.

 

Realistically, 2024 would have to be a disaster for Ballard to be fired. And while some are really upset with the way the offseason has gone so far, I don't think the common belief is that 2024 will be a disaster.

 

I do think the stakes have changed, but 2025 is more likely to be the decision point, if things aren't looking better by then.

[GoColts8818]

9 minutes ago, Jason_ said:

 

do you still see the threads that were created?

Yes

 

it just doesn’t show you the post and it says you’ve chosen to ignore content by (insert name here)

[Superman]

1 minute ago, jvan1973 said:

I do.   How is that relevant?

 

I think it's about tolerance? Immunity, maybe??

[jvan1973]

Just now, Superman said:

 

I think it's about tolerance? Immunity, maybe??

I guess.   Doug has some interesting takes.  Not all of which I disagree with,  but he thinks I bully him somehow.  I'm not sure how 

[ColtStrong2013]

Just now, jvan1973 said:

I guess.   Doug has some interesting takes.  Not all of which I disagree with,  but he thinks I bully him somehow.  I'm not sure how 

 

you aren’t a bully, you’re just part of the wolf pack now. 
 

Insert “howl and growling noises”
 

[GoColts8818]

Just now, ColtStrong2013 said:

 

you aren’t a bully, you’re just part of the wolf pack now. 
 

Insert “howl and growling noises”
 

 

couldn’t find the Wolfpack group so this will do

[DougDew]

13 minutes ago, jvan1973 said:

I do.   How is that relevant?

I was always taught that if I persistently point out something that I think is a flaw with someone, where they may not want to change, it was considered picking on that person.  

 

Its funny that you know enough about Chloe to recognize that she changes her mind, but then focus your comments on how much she changes her mind rather than simply asking her what she means.  

 

BTW, your interactions with Chloe are not that bad.   Just a point of dicsussion.

 

 

 

 

[Jason_]

19 minutes ago, pkbrux said:

 

Yes, this one we are currently in, for example 🤣

 

How familiar are you with Afroman? lol

[jvan1973]

Just now, DougDew said:

I was always taught that if I persistently point out something that I think is a flaw with someone, where they may not want to change, it was considered picking on that person.  

 

Its funny that you know enough about Chloe to recognize that she changes her mind, but then focus your comments on how much she changes her mind rather than simply asking her what she means.  

 

 

 

 

I think more about my warts and moles than I think about Chloes perspective.   I don't even have any warts.   I do have a few moles.  My role here isn't to diagnose a a fellow members mental illness.  I don't know them.   I post in response. 

[Restinpeacesweetchloe]

4 minutes ago, DougDew said:

I was always taught that if I persistently point out something that I think is a flaw with someone, where they may not want to change, it was considered picking on that person.  

 

Its funny that you know enough about Chloe to recognize that she changes her mind, but then focus your comments on how much she changes her mind rather than simply asking her what she means.  

 

BTW, your interactions with Chloe are not that bad.   Just a point of dicsussion.

 

 

 

 

Or how about asking what changed my mind. Sometimes things change or maybe a point isn’t made clear enough. There is a lot of bullying that goes on here. 

[Solid84]

50 minutes ago, GoColts8818 said:

I think this is fair.  As the old saying goes close only counts in horse shoes and hand gurnards.  I think people bring up him trying to get other players for the exact reason you mentioned.  It disputes he did what he always does as claimed and the claims he’s not doing anything.  I took it more of a statement of fact to disprove an incorrect statement than wanting to give him credit for it.  I think some that are frustrated with Ballard and want him gone are spinning a statement of fact as people supporting Ballard  by trying to give him credit for trying when they really aren’t.  

I get what you're saying, but we've heard Ballard say multiple times before they've been in on FAs, but jumped for whatever reason (player wanted to go elsewhere, money, who knows). There's nothing new about his approach this year. That's why the "he tried" gets old, to me at least.

[DougDew]

2 minutes ago, jvan1973 said:

I think more about my warts and moles than I think about Chloes perspective.   I don't even have any warts.   I do have a few moles.  My role here isn't to diagnose a a fellow members mental illness.  I don't know them.   I post in response. 

I think a little tolerance for others' styles works best.   Some folks think out loud, so to speak, so one sentence might conflict with another.  It can be confusing on a written text internet forum, but its not a very serious thing is it?  

[Jason_]

1 minute ago, DougDew said:

I think a little tolerance for others' styles works best.   Some folks think out loud, so to speak, so one sentence might conflict with another.  It can be confusing on a written text internet forum, but its not a very serious thing is it?  

 

if a little tolerance was all that was required, then this wouldn't be a discussion.  

[Solid84]

1 hour ago, ColtStrong2013 said:

Red- it is the whole basis, and like I said in the aspect of free agency, it’s because I don’t see the Colts being that active in free agency. Regardless of who is gm. It was tried under Grigson, and did not work.  It’s clearly been a struggle to attract bigger names under Ballard. (Ie- Hunter this year) 

 

Green-  Yes I think it’s changed in hiring Steichen, drafting a qb top 5 for the first time in Ballard’s career and having success with players like Raimann and Downs. He was willing to take some lumps at left tackle to develop Raimann. Of course the concept is still in the trenches. I don’t think people realize how many successful teams has that same mentality, the difference has been more hits at key positions and especially qb. Chiefs, eagles certainly come to mind on the focus on trenches. 

 

Blue- I’m not sure we’ll ever “build around” free agents. That goes under the same sentiment that I expressed above. Free agency will be used to complement the roster and fill needs. He hasn’t done poorly at that- (Houston, Gilmore, Autry, Ebukam). His mentality of not knowing players in free agency, versus the guys that grow from within resonates with me. The Texans don’t know what kind of worker/teammate they are getting in Diggs. They just know his production and are willing to ignore the noise in hopes it elevates them to a championship contender. Not to say it cannot… But it’s just not what Ballard believes in, and especially to build around. He’s made it clear who he building around the past 12 months…

Red- I'm not just talking about big names though. It's basically anything more than back-up level players. I don't believe Irsay is hanging on Ballard's shoulder going "Nope, I don't think we should spend $5m year for a FA" - just an example.

 

Green- Is it a change in philosophy or a required pick at that point? I believe Irsay (or Ballard?) said Ballard and Reich wanted to give their guys a chance to make a run which is why they went with vet QBs while Irsay wanted to get a rookie. The only real deviation I see is Downs because of his size. He still fits the RAS though.

 

Blue- Again, when I say "build around FAs" it's not the $15m, $20m, $25m+ guys. It's just the solid young mid-20s guys who go for mid-level money. Guys that can still be molded. And to the bolded - he doesn't know guys he drafts either and most of the guys coming on the market in FA for the first time are guys they've scouted in college anyway.

 

[ShuteAt168]

47 minutes ago, NewColtsFan said:

Ballard doesn’t tweet his approach.  He has a year end press conference.   He has a presser at the combine.   He has a presser after the first few weeks of free agency.   He’ll have one before the draft and another after each night of the draft and one about a week or so after the draft.  
 

And he does interviews with various national media throughout the year….  Like Rich Eisen, and Dan Patrick, etc.   

 

There’s plenty of opportunity to learn what Ballard is thinking throughout the course of the year if you’re interested.  
 

 

Pretty sure “tweak” was the word Chloe meant.