Colts offseason discussion / Ballard Grievances (merge)

[throwing BBZ]

12 hours ago, Jason_ said:

 

So here are the couple of reasons why I can't completely rule it out.  

 

First, you don't really need all that many people involved.  It could have been done with only 3 people and a mandate to a 4th (more on that in a sec).  The 3 people would be Irsay, Caldwell and Christiansen.  

 

I do think they all thought they could be competitive with Kerry Collins, but that crashed and burned pretty quickly and it became pretty apparent that the roster wasn't quite as good as a lot of people had previously believed.  At this point, Irsay realizes it's time to move on from Polian and do a pretty hefty overhaul of the roster, but he does believe in Caldwell and Christiansen so he plans to keep them.  He tells them to just make sure the offense doesn't get on any kind of a roll.  He also tells Caldwell to make sure Coyer doesn't get creative or blitz. 

 

Also, Caldwell was still the HC when Irsay hired Grigson.  Once Grigson was hired, both Caldwell and Christiansen were still the HC and OC.  In fact, both Grigson and Caldwell interviewed Steve Spagnuolo to be the new DC.  Rumors were that Spags perhaps showed interest in the job but he would in no way work under Caldwell.  It wasn't long after that interview took place that Caldwell was also fired.  As for Christiansen, he was the one member of the coaching staff that was retained for 2012, though he was moved from OC to QB coach.

 

Remember, after Coyer was fired, he gave an interview where he said his playcalling was handcuffed and that he was told he wasn't allowed to blitz.  Said something about it being an organizational mandate or something like that.  

 

I remember the defensive playcalling that season very vividly.  It was only a few games into the season when it was starting to infuriate me how often I saw them running Tampa 2 coverage.  Every team runs Tampa 2 coverage sometimes, not just teams that are designated as a tampa 2 defense.  I started keeping an excel spreadsheet tracking every defensive playcall in every colts game.  The amount of time they were in tampa 2 coverage was ridiculous and we had discussions about it here.  Towards the end of the season, during one of the games, the announcers even started talking about it and a graphic was put on screen showing the top 5 teams than ran tamp 2 coverage the most.  The team that ran tampa 2 coverage the 2nd most frequently ran it on around 20-22% of the time.  Numbers 3, 4 and 5 were also in the low 20%.  The Colts were number 1 at something well over 55-60% of the time.  

 

So, was Coyer's playcalling handcuffed to ensure the defense would be as bland and predictable (and therefore ineffective) as possible?  Or had he just become an incompetent DC by that point?  

 

Not saying it did happen, but I also can't say that it didn't and I don't think it's as far fetched an idea as some would think.  Take that for what it's worth.  

 

 We certainly tanked. They kept playing Painter. The end.

[DougDew]

10 hours ago, ColtStrong2013 said:

damn. It’s almost like Chris Ballard did that in year 2 with Andrew Luck too… and then he retired. Wonder how things would go in Houston if CJ Stroud retired next season. 

Are you asking where would HOU be 6 years later?  Where ever they would be then, would have nothing to do with Stroud retiring next year.

[DougDew]

8 hours ago, ColtStrong2013 said:

I think he has plenty of influence. I think Frank did too… which is why I’m quick to defend Ballard. 
 

Will you give Steichen credit for the turn around?  What I don't understand about the Frank blamers, is that you'll now have to turn it around and become Steichen praisers, or else it looks a bit hypocritical.  Why defend a GM who you must think is pretty irrelevant?

 

And BTW, Irsay has a hand in who the HC is...so its not like Ballard hired the good HC but Irsay hired the bad HC.

 

[throwing BBZ]

11 hours ago, AwesomeAustin said:

Correct about the QB. Drew Brees had 8 seasons on teams with a .500 or worse record were he played in majority of the games. That’s almost a decade of losing in his career.  I do think the Colts have a really good roster. If AR is everything the Colts planned for him to be, they should have some success the next three years. This is an AFC championship appearance roster with great QB play. 

Interesting.

We lack pass rush.

Our LB's are weak in coverage, with No depth.

The secondary looks to be bottom 5.

Nobody believes in Pierce as a quality 2.

Our QB is still a ?

 We look like a bottom 10 now.

  There was high Quality play from both sides of the ball from the final 8 teams in the playoffs. 

 With Irsay/Ballard, .500 seems to be the business model.

[ColtStrong2013]

11 minutes ago, DougDew said:

Are you asking where would HOU be 6 years later?  Where ever they would be then, would have nothing to do with Stroud retiring next year.

of course it would. Because there is a very high probability they don’t replace him with even close to the same level of talent. They could easily be in the same qb shuffle we experienced. 

[ColtStrong2013]

5 minutes ago, DougDew said:

Will you give Steichen credit for the turn around?  What I don't understand about the Frank blamers, is that you'll now have to turn it around and become Steichen praisers, or else it looks a bit hypocritical.  Why defend a GM who you must think is pretty irrelevant?

 

And BTW, Irsay has a hand in who the HC is...so its not like Ballard hired the good HC but Irsay hired the bad HC.

 

I will absolutely give a lot of credit to Steichen. 
 

and btw- Irsay wasn’t involved really at all in Steichen’s hire. His daughters were. But they let Chris drive it. Frank was a last minute makeshift that worked out initially better than anyone expected. He was recommended by Irsay, Polian, etc. 

 

I’m not an exclusive Frank blamer. I admit that Ballard was a major part of the equation to not solve the qb issue. I don’t think Frank was a good development coach and that he lost the locker room with Wentz and accountability. The pendulum swung hard the other way when we hired Steichen. I think Steichen is a better coach. I think coaches can grow, just like I think players and executives can grow. This organization is banking on that, which is why Frank needed to be gone at the end of 2022. He was clearly not growing nor leading the team in the right direction. 

[DougDew]

18 minutes ago, ColtStrong2013 said:

I will absolutely give a lot of credit to Steichen. 
 

and btw- Irsay wasn’t involved really at all in Steichen’s hire. His daughters were. But they let Chris drive it. Frank was a last minute makeshift that worked out initially better than anyone expected. He was recommended by Irsay, Polian, etc. 

 

I’m not an exclusive Frank blamer. I admit that Ballard was a major part of the equation to not solve the qb issue. I don’t think Frank was a good development coach and that he lost the locker room with Wentz and accountability. The pendulum swung hard the other way when we hired Steichen. I think Steichen is a better coach. I think coaches can grow, just like I think players and executives can grow. This organization is banking on that, which is why Frank needed to be gone at the end of 2022. He was clearly not growing nor leading the team in the right direction. 

Okay, just making sure that when you start praising SS for the turn around, that you're not going to say that Chris hired the good coach, but Irsay hired the bad one...especially when it seems that Chris didn't want to fire Frank.  

 

I just don't see the logic in commenting about Ballard at all if you think the HC is heavily responsible for the specific players who are drafted, signed, or retained.  The GM would seem fairly irrelevant to the "Frank-blamers", JMO.

[CoachLite]

21 minutes ago, throwing BBZ said:

Interesting.

We lack pass rush.

Our LB's are weak in coverage, with No depth.

The secondary looks to be bottom 5.

Nobody believes in Pierce as a quality 2.

Our QB is still a ?

 We look like a bottom 10 now.

  There was high Quality play from both sides of the ball from the final 8 teams in the playoffs. 

 With Irsay/Ballard, .500 seems to be the business model.

Sounds like you think the Colts are what the Washington Generals are to Harlem Globetrotters in basketball - a bunch of JAGs.

[DougDew]

38 minutes ago, ColtStrong2013 said:

of course it would. Because there is a very high probability they don’t replace him with even close to the same level of talent. They could easily be in the same qb shuffle we experienced. 

Since they are so hard to find, do you think they might successfully build a roster to support a QB that wasn't elite, like SF, Philly, Dallas, DET, etc?

[BProland85]

How do the Titans still have like 20 million more in cap space then the Colts after all the acquisitions they’ve made and the money committed to guys like Sneed, Ridley, and Cushenberry? Colts I believe only started with maybe 10 mil less than the TN before FA started. 

[Yoshinator]

My main problem with Ballard this offseason is mostly just Sneed at this point. If his offseason involved re-signing our own to build around Richardson where we didn't lose key players, then that's one thing. However, the CBs needed a veteran that was elite. I still am not over not trading for Sneed. It wouldn't have cost Ballard any real draft capital this year. He said that we were too young at the secondary, and he then does the same thing again. Yes, we can draft a CB and/or a Safety. They will be young coming out of college in the draft though. That doesn't solve the age issue and inexperience. 

 

This is why I feel Ballard talks out of both sides of his mouth. He'll take blame and say what sounds good at the time as a plan, but when he is met with any adversity for signing or trading for a player (competition from another team, any injury risk, high cost, draft capital) he backs out and doesn't want to do it. That's why Buckner is the only notable non-QB trade from Ballard since he's been the GM, and he doesn't go after FAs where there's any real competition from other teams. He relies on his own liking the culture here where he can get them to return, and he adds in the draft. 

 

 

[ColtStrong2013]

1 hour ago, DougDew said:

Okay, just making sure that when you start praising SS for the turn around, that you're not going to say that Chris hired the good coach, but Irsay hired the bad one...especially when it seems that Chris didn't want to fire Frank.  

 

I just don't see the logic in commenting about Ballard at all if you think the HC is heavily responsible for the specific players who are drafted, signed, or retained.  The GM would seem fairly irrelevant to the "Frank-blamers", JMO.

This seems like a strawman argument. They both can be responsible for the success of the team. Steichen’s not the GM, so while he can have influence, he isn’t responsible for personnel. Ballard’s not the head coach, so while he can influence game planning and decision making, he doesn’t make the calls on the field… I don’t see the logic in what you are trying to get out of this. You are trying to predict what I might say in the future? Is that it? 
 

I’m pretty clear. I think Steichen has already turned things around from a coaching standpoint. And Chris hired Steichen based on their alignment of how the organization needed to be operated moving forward. Both things can be true. They can both receive credit if things go well moving forward. I guess that’s what you don’t want, right? 

[ColtStrong2013]

21 minutes ago, Yoshinator said:

Yes, we can draft a CB and/or a Safety. They will be young coming out of college in the draft though. That doesn't solve the age issue and inexperience. 

The offseason isn’t over brother… 

[ColtStrong2013]

1 hour ago, DougDew said:

Since they are so hard to find, do you think they might successfully build a roster to support a QB that wasn't elite, like SF, Philly, Dallas, DET, etc?

Have we had a qb as good as any of those teams? 
 

I think not…

[shasta519]

14 hours ago, Jason_ said:

 

So here are the couple of reasons why I can't completely rule it out.  

 

First, you don't really need all that many people involved.  It could have been done with only 3 people and a mandate to a 4th (more on that in a sec).  The 3 people would be Irsay, Caldwell and Christiansen.  

 

I do think they all thought they could be competitive with Kerry Collins, but that crashed and burned pretty quickly and it became pretty apparent that the roster wasn't quite as good as a lot of people had previously believed.  At this point, Irsay realizes it's time to move on from Polian and do a pretty hefty overhaul of the roster, but he does believe in Caldwell and Christiansen so he plans to keep them.  He tells them to just make sure the offense doesn't get on any kind of a roll.  He also tells Caldwell to make sure Coyer doesn't get creative or blitz. 

 

Also, Caldwell was still the HC when Irsay hired Grigson.  Once Grigson was hired, both Caldwell and Christiansen were still the HC and OC.  In fact, both Grigson and Caldwell interviewed Steve Spagnuolo to be the new DC.  Rumors were that Spags perhaps showed interest in the job but he would in no way work under Caldwell.  It wasn't long after that interview took place that Caldwell was also fired.  As for Christiansen, he was the one member of the coaching staff that was retained for 2012, though he was moved from OC to QB coach.

 

Remember, after Coyer was fired, he gave an interview where he said his playcalling was handcuffed and that he was told he wasn't allowed to blitz.  Said something about it being an organizational mandate or something like that.  

 

I remember the defensive playcalling that season very vividly.  It was only a few games into the season when it was starting to infuriate me how often I saw them running Tampa 2 coverage.  Every team runs Tampa 2 coverage sometimes, not just teams that are designated as a tampa 2 defense.  I started keeping an excel spreadsheet tracking every defensive playcall in every colts game.  The amount of time they were in tampa 2 coverage was ridiculous and we had discussions about it here.  Towards the end of the season, during one of the games, the announcers even started talking about it and a graphic was put on screen showing the top 5 teams than ran tamp 2 coverage the most.  The team that ran tampa 2 coverage the 2nd most frequently ran it on around 20-22% of the time.  Numbers 3, 4 and 5 were also in the low 20%.  The Colts were number 1 at something well over 55-60% of the time.  

 

So, was Coyer's playcalling handcuffed to ensure the defense would be as bland and predictable (and therefore ineffective) as possible?  Or had he just become an incompetent DC by that point?  

 

Not saying it did happen, but I also can't say that it didn't and I don't think it's as far fetched an idea as some would think.  Take that for what it's worth.  

 

Did not know that about Coyer. I know this is a controversial topic for most Colts fans, but that season was clearly strange.

 

It was always weird to me how they lost the first two games and Kerry Collins just sort of vanished. I know he had a concussion, but he was on the active roster for more than a month after that...and then went on IR. That move seemed like nothing more than a PR move cause they knew Peyton was getting that surgery. But Collins was also atrocious in the couple games he played.

 

It was also weird how Painter got the QB2 out of preseason, despite Dan O. playing so much better. And then when Collins got hurt, Painter got to take over and would start NINE games, despite being horrendous.

 

Back then, Polian had his weekly radio show where he would take calls...and for some inexplicable reason continued doing it during 2011. It was must-listen. They would always ask him about why is Painter still playing and he would just get combative.

 

They didn't pull the plug on Painter until after Week 12. At that point, the Colts were 0-11 (Painter was 0-9) and every other team had at least two wins. Plus, the Colts held tiebreakers too. So it basically meant they just had to go 2-3 or worse the rest of the way to secure it, assuming another team lost out. And with BAL and NE coming up, they really just needed to not win all 3 against the AFCS teams. Seemed like a safe time to make the move.

 

And Dan O. did lead them to two wins, which means there's at least a decent chance he changes a couple of those previous 11 losses into Ws as well, which would have cost them Luck. 

 

 

[Flash7]

There seems to be two sides on the Ballard issue.

 

1. The side that thinks Ballard is doing a great job given the situation he was left with after Luck's departure.

 

And

 

2. The side that thinks Ballard is doing a poor job because he will not utilize all of the tools (FA) to improve the team.

 

I think a true assessment involves both. Ballard has done a very good job given all of the circumstances. He also has shied away from utilizing Free Agency to find difference makers. He seems to always be looking for good backups and role players.

 

Overall, has fielded good teams. He will continue to field good teams, including this year. But, so far it appears that he will NEVER take the leap that it takes to go from good to great. He's too risk averse.

[RollerColt]

2 minutes ago, shasta519 said:

 

Did not know that about Coyer. I know this is a controversial topic for most Colts fans, but that season was clearly strange.

 

It was always weird to me how they lost the first two games and Kerry Collins just sort of vanished. I know he had a concussion, but he was on the active roster for more than a month after that...and then went on IR. That move seemed like nothing more than a PR move cause they knew Peyton was getting that surgery. But Collins was also atrocious in the couple games he played.

 

It was also weird how Painter got the QB2 out of preseason, despite Dan O. playing so much better. And then when Collins got hurt, Painter got to take over and would start NINE games, despite being horrendous.

 

Back then, Polian had his weekly radio show where he would take calls...and for some inexplicable reason continued doing it during 2011. It was must-listen. They would always ask him about why is Painter still playing and he would just get combative.

 

They didn't pull the plug on Painter until after Week 12. At that point, the Colts were 0-11 (Painter was 0-9) and every other team had at least two wins. Plus, the Colts held tiebreakers too. So it basically meant they just had to go 2-3 or worse the rest of the way to secure it, assuming another team lost out. And with BAL and NE coming up, they really just needed to not win all 3 against the AFCS teams. Seemed like a safe time to make the move.

 

And Dan O. did lead them to two wins, which means there's at least a decent chance he changes a couple of those previous 11 losses into Ws as well, which would have cost them Luck. 

 

 

If we really want to go crazy, how about the thought that Jeff Saturday’s 2022 win over the Raiders ended up screwing us out of getting Stroud? We probably would’ve been drafting ahead of Houston. 

[RollerColt]

1 minute ago, Flash7 said:

There seems to be two sides on the Ballard issue.

 

1. The side that thinks Ballard is doing a great job given the situation he was left with after Luck's departure.

 

And

 

2. The side that thinks Ballard is doing a poor job because he will not utilize all of the tools (FA) to improve the team.

 

I think a true assessment involves both. Ballard has done a very good job given all of the circumstances. He also has shied away from utilizing Free Agency to find difference makers. He seems to always be looking for good backups and role players.

 

Overall, has fielded good teams. He will continue to field good teams, including this year. But, so far it appears that he will NEVER take the leap that it takes to go from good to great. He's too risk averse.

I know it doesn’t seem like it, but a vast majority of us are critical of Ballard and are just as frustrated. We absolutely know he could be and needs to be better. This year’s draft is going to be very critical for a lot of teams, us included.

[shasta519]

40 minutes ago, BProland85 said:

How do the Titans still have like 20 million more in cap space then the Colts after all the acquisitions they’ve made and the money committed to guys like Sneed, Ridley, and Cushenberry? Colts I believe only started with maybe 10 mil less than the TN before FA started. 

 

Likely because they got a bit creative with the contract structures. But the Colts also backloaded every deal they signed a bit, so I really don't know where all that cap went. 

[ColtStrong2013]

5 minutes ago, Flash7 said:

There seems to be two sides on the Ballard issue.

 

1. The side that thinks Ballard is doing a great job given the situation he was left with after Luck's departure.

 

And

 

2. The side that thinks Ballard is doing a poor job because he will not utilize all of the tools (FA) to improve the team.

 

I think a true assessment involves both. Ballard has done a very good job given all of the circumstances. He also has shied away from utilizing Free Agency to find difference makers. He seems to always be looking for good backups and role players.

 

Overall, has fielded good teams. He will continue to field good teams, including this year. But, so far it appears that he will NEVER take the leap that it takes to go from good to great. He's too risk averse.

 

I only see one part that I dispute. Some here don't think he's doing a poor job because he is not utilizing FA. Some just think he hasn't hit like he should have on certain positions. I can understand that, and don't dispute it. But those that are angry and think he's a lousy GM because he won't utilize FA, have to understand he was hired with that principle and that it's not going to happen. He sparsely uses free agency. What leap does it take to go from good to great? Do all great teams make dramatic leaps in free agency? Is that what I'm understand you are saying?

[shasta519]

5 minutes ago, RollerColt said:

If we really want to go crazy, how about the thought that Jeff Saturday’s 2022 win over the Raiders ended up screwing us out of getting Stroud? We probably would’ve been drafting ahead of Houston. 

 

True. But I think the choke job in MIN and letting Davis Mills complete a hail mary to beat them in W18 made up for that.

[GoColts8818]

14 minutes ago, Flash7 said:

There seems to be two sides on the Ballard issue.

 

1. The side that thinks Ballard is doing a great job given the situation he was left with after Luck's departure.

 

And

 

2. The side that thinks Ballard is doing a poor job because he will not utilize all of the tools (FA) to improve the team.

 

I think a true assessment involves both. Ballard has done a very good job given all of the circumstances. He also has shied away from utilizing Free Agency to find difference makers. He seems to always be looking for good backups and role players.

 

Overall, has fielded good teams. He will continue to field good teams, including this year. But, so far it appears that he will NEVER take the leap that it takes to go from good to great. He's too risk averse.

I am not sure anyone is saying he has done a great job.  I think that even those that are “defending” him will admit there is room for improvement.  I think that’s the problem with debate some are having.  Some are trying to push things into extreme positions either Ballard is the worst GM of all time or he’s the greatest GM of all time and there is no room for a middle ground which is where I think the majority of people are.

[Flash7]

4 minutes ago, ColtStrong2013 said:

 

I only see one part that I dispute. Some here don't think he's doing a poor job because he is not utilizing FA. Some just think he hasn't hit like he should have on certain positions. I can understand that, and don't dispute it. But those that are angry and think he's a lousy GM because he won't utilize FA, have to understand he was hired with that principle and that it's not going to happen. He sparsely uses free agency. What leap does it take to go from good to great? Do all great teams make dramatic leaps in free agency? Is that what I'm understand you are saying?

I agree that there are numerous reasons why people are critical of Chris Ballard, including his lack of focus on specific critical positions. More recently in this thread, with FA ongoing, the focus has been a bit more on Ballard's lack of activity in FA. That's what I was addressing in my comment, but you're right. There are other camps as well.

 

Here are the tools that GMs have at their disposal:

 

1. Draft

2. Free Agency

3. Trades

4. GM's can also get creative with their financing to make more moves. 

 

IMO, to go from good to great, Ballard should continue to focus on the draft, but look to make shrewd moves using the other tools at his disposal. When he traded for D. Buckner, the team improved. I don't think the fan base would be opposed if he made other such moves.

[Flash7]

8 minutes ago, GoColts8818 said:

I am not sure anyone is saying he has done a great job.  I think that even those that are “defending” him will admit there is room for improvement.

Yup, I can see that, but it's up for interpretation. Some claim Ballard is among the top GMs in the league. I would interpret that to mean that he's doing a great job, but good is fine.

[ColtStrong2013]

13 minutes ago, Flash7 said:

I agree that there are numerous reasons why people are critical of Chris Ballard, including his lack of focus on specific critical positions. More recently in this thread, with FA ongoing, the focus has been a bit more on Ballard's lack of activity in FA. That's what I was addressing in my comment, but you're right. There are other camps as well.

 

Here are the tools that GMs have at their disposal:

 

1. Draft

2. Free Agency

3. Trades

4. GM's can also get creative with their financing to make more moves. 

 

IMO, to go from good to great, Ballard should continue to focus on the draft, but look to make shrewd moves using the other tools at his disposal. When he traded for D. Buckner, the team improved. I don't think the fan base would be opposed if he made other such moves.

I wouldn’t categorize it as a lack of focus. He just didn’t hit. He focused on Qb, LT, receiver, corner, defensive end. He invested in multiple free agent edge rushers, a 1st round pick and what, four 2nd round picks? We just haven’t had a long term one stick, although Ebukam looked pretty good. We need Dayo or Paye to elevate and get a long term deal here. 
 

Buckner was a good trade, especially at the time when the defense was considered driven by the 3 tech. I think a lot of teams are putting a high value on the position. 
 

I think it’s obvious some are angry about Sneed. We don’t exactly have all the details on that and if we ever truly entertained it for sure. Who is to say there isn’t another negotiation going on currently? Perhaps after the draft, good players will become available. We didn’t get Gilmore until just before the draft. 

[shasta519]

16 minutes ago, Flash7 said:

There seems to be two sides on the Ballard issue.

 

1. The side that thinks Ballard is doing a great job given the situation he was left with after Luck's departure.

 

And

 

2. The side that thinks Ballard is doing a poor job because he will not utilize all of the tools (FA) to improve the team.

 

I think a true assessment involves both. Ballard has done a very good job given all of the circumstances. He also has shied away from utilizing Free Agency to find difference makers. He seems to always be looking for good backups and role players.

 

Overall, has fielded good teams. He will continue to field good teams, including this year. But, so far it appears that he will NEVER take the leap that it takes to go from good to great. He's too risk averse.

 

But on the flip side, Luck initially being here allowed him to build up the team in the first place. It was a pretty big advantage, especially when the Colts got the #3 pick in the draft in 2018. They didn't have to use draft capital on QB or address it like nearly all FOs do.

 

So Ballard losing that sort of just leveled the playing field in a way. It shouldn't really be an excuse or a curve that we evaluate him on. If anything, it has allowed us to better evaluate the roster he's built. 

 

Since Luck left, we have seen several types of QB play.

 

In the years where they had average QB play (2019, 2021, 2023), the team overall was pretty average. winning 7-9 games. In the year where he had really good QB play (2020), they were a good team, but not great, winning 11 games but losing in the WC round. In the year where they had really bad QB play (2022), they were really bad, winning only 4 games.

 

This is why I disagree that he builds great rosters. This team has never played above the level of QB they have or been able to overcome it. That's probably true of most NFL teams, but it also just means Ballard is ordinary. Yet, he's revered by many.

 

And I think many fans are tired of ordinary. And tired of hearing about the process. It's been evangelized and defended so much that one might think it's more important than results.

 

We will see what happens with AR this year. But to your point, even if AR plays well, I don't know if Ballard has the ability to get this team from good to great. 

[richard pallo]

22 minutes ago, Flash7 said:

I agree that there are numerous reasons why people are critical of Chris Ballard, including his lack of focus on specific critical positions. More recently in this thread, with FA ongoing, the focus has been a bit more on Ballard's lack of activity in FA. That's what I was addressing in my comment, but you're right. There are other camps as well.

 

Here are the tools that GMs have at their disposal:

 

1. Draft

2. Free Agency

3. Trades

4. GM's can also get creative with their financing to make more moves. 

 

IMO, to go from good to great, Ballard should continue to focus on the draft, but look to make shrewd moves using the other tools at his disposal. When he traded for D. Buckner, the team improved. I don't think the fan base would be opposed if he made other such moves.

I couldn’t agree more.  You don’t go from good to great by relying on FA.  You do it through the draft.  You supplement through FA.  The teams in our division that went crazy in FA also lost starting players.  The Colts did not.  They are also falling prey to the popular theory that your only chance of winning a SB is during the rookie year of your franchise quarterback’s career.  That short window argument.  I don’t believe that either.  If you are successful at drafting you are building a long term core for your team and subsequent drafts build behind them.  For me the big three positions you have to hit on are quarterback, LT, and ER.  Ballard has done that with the exception of ER.  He tried to fill that one and only major hole by trying to sign Hunter.  Unfortunately he lost him.  ER is our only major hole imo. I think he likes the players we have and the progress and upside still being there especially with AR returning on offense.  I believe you use FA and trades to supplement your team not revamp it.  Our division foes are taking a different approach the popular approach.  I think Ballard is taking the long view.  He thinks he has his quarterback.  Now if he can find that premier ER we will be in great shape.  So he still might be making calls for all we know and look for a Buckner opportunity.  Or he might think he has a chance at one in the draft I don’t know.  But unlike our competitors we don’t have major holes any longer.  Just a very young team still growing.  I think he’s the turtle in the race.  And I think he’s closer to the finish line while most people think otherwise.  I think I’m right.  This year should tell us a lot.

[shasta519]

28 minutes ago, ColtStrong2013 said:

I wouldn’t categorize it as a lack of focus. He just didn’t hit. He focused on Qb, LT, receiver, corner, defensive end. He invested in multiple free agent edge rushers, a 1st round pick and what, four 2nd round picks? We just haven’t had a long term one stick, although Ebukam looked pretty good. We need Dayo or Paye to elevate and get a long term deal here. 
 

Buckner was a good trade, especially at the time when the defense was considered driven by the 3 tech. I think a lot of teams are putting a high value on the position. 
 

I think it’s obvious some are angry about Sneed. We don’t exactly have all the details on that and if we ever truly entertained it for sure. Who is to say there isn’t another negotiation going on currently? Perhaps after the draft, good players will become available. We didn’t get Gilmore until just before the draft. 

 

I think a big reason people are angry about Sneed because some people on Colts Twitter gassed them up with what now seem like nonsense reports.

 

The way Ballard tells it is that it wasn't really ever close. They explored it early on, but moved on. So either those reports were made up or somebody was trying to inflate the cost to get TEN to give up more. 

[GoColts8818]

1 hour ago, Flash7 said:

Yup, I can see that, but it's up for interpretation. Some claim Ballard is among the top GMs in the league. I would interpret that to mean that he's doing a great job, but good is fine.

No one has claimed that in a long time.

[shasta519]

6 minutes ago, richard pallo said:

I couldn’t agree more.  You don’t go from good to great by relying on FA.  You do it through the draft.  You supplement through FA.  The teams in our division that went crazy in FA also lost starting players.  The Colts did not.  They are also falling prey to the popular theory that your only chance of winning a SB is during the rookie year of your franchise quarterback’s career.  That short window argument.  I don’t believe that either.  If you are successful at drafting you are building a long term core for your team and subsequent drafts build behind them.  For me the big three positions you have to hit on are quarterback, LT, and ER.  Ballard has done that with the exception of ER.  He tried to fill that one and only major hole by trying to sign Hunter.  Unfortunately he lost him.  ER is our only major hole imo. I think he likes the players we have and the progress and upside still being there especially with AR returning on offense.  I believe you use FA and trades to supplement your team not revamp it.  Our division foes are taking a different approach the popular approach.  I think Ballard is taking the long view.  He thinks he has his quarterback.  Now if he can find that premier ER we will be in great shape.  So he still might be making calls for all we know and look for a Buckner opportunity.  Or he might think he has a chance at one in the draft I don’t know.  But unlike our competitors we don’t have major holes any longer.  Just a very young team still growing.  I think he’s the turtle in the race.  And I think he’s closer to the finish line while most people think otherwise.  I think I’m right.  This year should tell us a lot.

 

This teams has several of them IMO. They don't currently have a proven FS, which is important to run Gus' scheme. We can hope that maybe Cross can play there, but it's still a hole until then.

 

They maybe have a CB1 in Brents, but he's still unproven and only play half of the season. 

 

I would add a proven TE as well. The room is full of rotational guys. And we have seen the importance of legit TE1.

 

But mostly, the core is now aging. Many of them won't be here after AR's rookie deal is up. I didn't agree with running it back. But if they are going to do it, then they should absolutely try to take advantage of the QB rookie deal window and supplement through FA. Hunter wasn't the only FA out there either.

[DougDew]

1 hour ago, ColtStrong2013 said:

This seems like a strawman argument. They both can be responsible for the success of the team. Steichen’s not the GM, so while he can have influence, he isn’t responsible for personnel. Ballard’s not the head coach, so while he can influence game planning and decision making, he doesn’t make the calls on the field… I don’t see the logic in what you are trying to get out of this. You are trying to predict what I might say in the future? Is that it? 
 

I’m pretty clear. I think Steichen has already turned things around from a coaching standpoint. And Chris hired Steichen based on their alignment of how the organization needed to be operated moving forward. Both things can be true. They can both receive credit if things go well moving forward. I guess that’s what you don’t want, right? 

Its a simple concept:  What percentage influence of the total personnel acquisition process...specific players acquired....do you think Frank had?  70%, 50%, 30%...something else?  And what do you think SS has in the same process.  70%, 50%, 30% something else?  

 

 

1 hour ago, ColtStrong2013 said:

Have we had a qb as good as any of those teams? 
 

I think not…

Garrapolo, 2nd round, Purdy, 7th round, Hurts, 2nd round, Dak, 3rd round, Goff (well, whatever you think he was worth when LAR was trying to move him).  ETC.

 

We were talking about what would happen to HOU in the next 6 years if Stroud retired.  It seems like they could build a roster to support a nonelite QB who was found by giving non-top 15 picks.   That was your question.

[GoColts8818]

14 minutes ago, shasta519 said:

 

I think a big reason people are angry about Sneed because some people on Colts Twitter gassed them up with what now seem like nonsense reports.

 

The way Ballard tells it is that it wasn't really ever close. They explored it early on, but moved on. So either those reports were made up or somebody was trying to inflate the cost to get TEN to give up more. 

Define “Colts twitter” the regular media threw cold water on it and were mocked for doing so some going as far to suggest that Holder might need to delete his twitter because it wasn’t what people wanted to hear.  
 

if you mean wannabe insiders and Destin I’d again say buyer beware when it comes to trusting information from those sources.  

[Superman]

3 hours ago, throwing BBZ said:

They kept playing Painter.

 

[GoColts8818]

1 hour ago, shasta519 said:

 

True. But I think the choke job in MIN and letting Davis Mills complete a hail mary to beat them in W18 made up for that.

Yeah that’s how most seasons go, you win a game or two you shouldn’t have won and then you lose a game or two you shouldn’t have lost.  It normally evens out by the end of the year, yet most people just focus on the games you shouldn’t have lost which is understandable.

 

From this past season the Colts shouldn’t have won the game in Baltimore, Justin Tucker doesn’t miss many game winning kicks and then shouldn’t have lost the Browns game they won the game and the officials took it away on a very questionable penalty.  

[Superman]

2 hours ago, BProland85 said:

How do the Titans still have like 20 million more in cap space then the Colts after all the acquisitions they’ve made and the money committed to guys like Sneed, Ridley, and Cushenberry? Colts I believe only started with maybe 10 mil less than the TN before FA started. 

 

Backloaded contracts.

[shasta519]

Just now, GoColts8818 said:

No one has claimed that in a long time.

 

Not here, but there are still those on Colts Twitter in the sub reddit that do. Not that they represent all Colts fans, but there are some that still hold him in a very high regard.

 

I would argue that the media (not all but some) has a tendency to portray him in a very positive light too. Not sure where they would rank him, but my guess is it would be higher than many Colts fans.

[shasta519]

11 minutes ago, GoColts8818 said:

Yeah that’s how most seasons go, you win a game or two you shouldn’t have won and then you lose a game or two you shouldn’t have lost.  It normally evens out by the end of the year, yet most people just focus on the games you shouldn’t have lost which is understandable.

 

From this past season the Colts shouldn’t have won the game in Baltimore, Justin Tucker doesn’t miss many game winning kicks and then shouldn’t have lost the Browns game they won the game and the officials took it away on a very questionable penalty.  

 

Yep. Prob should have lost to BAL and should have beaten CLE.

 

This is my issue with the "one play away" narrative I keep hearing. It was a mis-execution. They happen throughout games. If the Colts were "one play away" from beating HOU, they were also "one play away" from losing to NE, when Jones threw a duck with Gesicki open in the EZ late 4Q. It was a truly terrible pass that most QBs don't make. Colts couldn't score that game, so even if they only needed a FG to tie after, they probably don't get it.

 

It just tends to balance out by the end of the season. 

[Jason_]

3 hours ago, DougDew said:

one...especially when it seems that Chris didn't want to fire Frank.  

 

Wait where did that come from? 

[ColtStrong2013]

30 minutes ago, DougDew said:

Its a simple concept:  What percentage influence of the total personnel acquisition process...specific players acquired....do you think Frank had?  70%, 50%, 30%...something else?  And what do you think SS has in the same process.  70%, 50%, 30% something else?  

 

 

Garrapolo, 2nd round, Purdy, 7th round, Hurts, 2nd round, Dak, 3rd round, Goff (well, whatever you think he was worth when LAR was trying to move him).  ETC.

 

We were talking about what would happen to HOU in the next 6 years if Stroud retired.  It seems like they could build a roster to support a nonelite QB who was found by giving non-top 15 picks.   That was your question.

 

Offensively, probably on every player that was drafted. That doesn't mean they are telling who they want and Ballard and co. are just going along with it. That means they are working together, and telling the HC who they are targeting and the strategy behind the board stacking, and asking for input on those players... Hence, the offensive minded/playcalling head coach likely influences the way the board is ultimately stacked. It's just another data input to factor. 

Regarding qb's, you've identified a few teams out of many that have had success. Purdy is an anomaly, and if it were that easy, then we wouldn't be starting at 3 top qbs each year in the draft.  We wouldn't be watching teams shuffle qb's the same way. I saw enough with CJ Stroud last season to know that that team doesn't win half the games they did without him, including the last one with the division on the line. Garapolo? the guy that was groomed behind Tom Brady? Yeah, he had success on a good roster. Hurts? The guy that plays for a team that won a superbowl with a backup qb... Yeah, he's had success. Dak? The guy that throws for mvp numbers? How convenient to throw a few successful qbs out of many to imply that Houston would do the same. Sure, they could... Would they? Very unlikely

[csmopar]

Reading these posts proves this conversation is about as productive as trying to wipe your butt with a bicycle tire, it never ends and just gets messier… 

 

seen this once in a third world crap hole, literally.