Colts offseason discussion / Ballard Grievances (merge)

[DougDew]

43 minutes ago, ColtStrong2013 said:

obviously he had pressure from Irsay… given he failed in 4 years. He spent big in free agency. I think the lessons from Grigson is largely why Ballard is still here driving a great deal of this forum crazy with his process…

Why did he have pressure from Irsay to win right away with a long term franchise Qb at the time?

 

The spending on high priced FA has been a Red Herring argument for 7 years.  Despite the spending, it was well managed, evidenced by the cap being in good shape when Ballard took over.  If you want to talk about the talent, fine, but the spending itself strategy was not an issue.

 

Also, if you want to excuse Ballard's first 3 or 4 years due to Luck's retirement, then you should probably also acknowledge that Polian's horrendous cap situation that Grigsy inherited hindered his team building for probably 2 of his 4 years...or half his tenure.  Which I'm sure Irsay took into consideration when he put "pressure" on Grigsy to win right away.

 

A sincere comment from Grigson's son. LOL.

[2006Coltsbestever]

Just now, BeanDiasucci said:

I don't hate or even dislike Ballard, and agree he has many great qualities. But I think we may need a GM with a higher RAS—quicker, better wingspan, more explosive, and with a higher ceiling. 

- I like this laughing emoji instead. Your last sentence was great. He is on the hot seat IMO, Irsay hasn't said it but eventually you have to win something that is important.

[Jason_]

Just now, DougDew said:

Why did he have pressure from Irsay to win right away with a long term franchise Qb at the time?

 

If there was pressure, I'd assume it was to try to maximize Luck's rookie contract.

[Superman]

2 minutes ago, stitches said:

On the AC thing, agreed... team OL play is actually influence much more by the weakest links than by the best links. Meaning - even though AC was great pretty much for entirety of his career, he couldn't do anything for the rest of the line being horrible. 

 

I REALLY REALLY don't want to seem like I'm defending Grigson. But Grigson's Colts teams have played a few games without Luck. They are 6-4 without Luck. Ballard's Colts without Luck are 44-54... Sample is small for the Grigson team, but it didn't crumble when Luck got injured and didn't play. Now I would absolutely agree with you that Grigson would probably do a much worse job without a Luck in the long-term starting from a blank slate. But in this case... with these inherited players(Mathis-AC) and with those hits (TY and Vontae), he did give his team some undeniable strengths outside of the QB and those were at important positions. 

 

 

You and I feel mostly the same about Grigson. I know where you're coming from. I just think anything good that happened when he was here was because we had Andrew Luck, not because he also inherited a LT and drafted a really good WR in the third round.

 

To the record without Luck, it's very different to ask a backup QB to win a couple games here and there, vs going entire seasons without your starter. Going 7-9 with Jacoby Brissett and Brian Hoyer isn't crumbling, it's about as good as you can expect. And they popped right back up to 11 wins when they got a good QB again. I've said it before, I think the 2019-2021 Colts are making some noise if Luck doesn't retire.

[DougDew]

8 minutes ago, Jason_ said:

 

If there was pressure, I'd assume it was to try to maximize Luck's rookie contract.

If that's the case, would Irsay back off the pressure once he's paying a QB $125M?  I'd think there would be more pressure to win once the QB is getting paid for what he's supposed to do, but that's my take.

 

With Polian and PM's early days, and now Ballard, Irsay doesn't strike me as a win now kind of owner like some others.

[Superman]

12 minutes ago, 2006Coltsbestever said:

I don't think the intention was to tank from game 1, no team has that in them. Players have pride (want to win) and playing for contracts, coaches want to win too. They all want to win but I also think once we got to 0-8, things could have changed knowing Peyton wasn't coming back either in 2011. Players and coaches realized the season was over at that point, the organization knew Andrew Luck was there at #1 as well. Just a thought you may consider knowing that the best QB prospect since Peyton was there and your team is 0-8 that certain things could have changed drastically. I honestly can't remember if we played a lot of backups from week 9 to 16 but I know with the QBs we had = Painter and Orlovsky our chances of winning were small.

 

This has been done to death, I don't want to do it again. But I think some folks need to revisit the weekly happenings before, during, and after the 2011 season. Maybe even go back to 2010 to understand what was already happening.

[stitches]

1 minute ago, Superman said:

 

You and I feel mostly the same about Grigson. I know where you're coming from. I just think anything good that happened when he was here was because we had Andrew Luck, not because he also inherited a LT and drafted a really good WR in the third round.

I think it's both. I think Luck was a huge reason for the success of those teams, but I also think Grigson hitting on a few very important positions helped mask the slew of problems those rosters had. 

1 minute ago, Superman said:

To the record without Luck, it's very different to ask a backup QB to win a couple games here and there, vs going entire seasons without your starter. Going 7-9 with Jacoby Brissett and Brian Hoyer isn't crumbling, it's about as good as you can expect. And they popped right back up to 11 wins when they got a good QB again. I've said it before, I think the 2019-2021 Colts are making some noise if Luck doesn't retire.

The 2015 seson the team went 6-3 without Luck to finish the season. This is not a couple of games here and there. 

 

Agreed on the 2019-2021 Colts. IMO we were primed for real legit contention had Luck stayed healthy and not retired.  

[Jason_]

2 minutes ago, DougDew said:

If that's the case, would Irsay back off the pressure once he's paying a QB $125M?  I'd think there would be more pressure to win once the QB is getting paid for what he's supposed to do, but that's my take.

 

With Polian and PM's early days, and now Ballard, Irsay doesn't strike me as a win now kind of owner like some others.

 

[stitches]

27 minutes ago, Superman said:

 

I don't think there's a real connection between the stuff you mention in the first paragraph to anything that happened in 2023, or the way the season ended. 

 

To the bolded, most of them were injured in 2022. And I think the real problem was with the HC, who was fired in the middle of the season.

 

I don't think there's a direct link from that stuff to 2023, and I definitely don't think any of that is relevant to Franklin's attitude or his tweet, which was my initial point.

I just... agree to disagree I guess. I don't think it was just Reich... or just Wentz and I think the problems seem to have persisted over this last season too. It's not one particular thing... 

[Superman]

1 minute ago, stitches said:

I think it's both. I think Luck was a huge reason for the success of those teams, but I also think Grigson hitting on a few very important positions helped mask the slew of problems those rosters had. 

 

Yeah, that's further than I'm willing to go. I get your point, you get mine.

 

Quote

The 2015 seson the team went 6-3 without Luck to finish the season. This is not a couple of games here and there. 

 

It was 4-3 at the end of the season. Luck missed Weeks 4 and 5, then missed the final seven games. And those final seven went about the way you would expect with a backup QB, especially considering the opponents. I will say, that team performed better than anyone expected without Luck, but that season was ugly from the opening kickoff, mostly because the roster was lacking. Bad OL, struggling defense, poor coaching, and Luck was pressing even before he got hurt.

 

Quote

Agreed on the 2019-2021 Colts. IMO we were primed for real legit contention had Luck stayed healthy and not retired.  

 

Free pass!

[DougDew]

1 hour ago, 2006Coltsbestever said:

Since 1992 when Troy Aikman won his 1st SB, every team that has won a SB has had or will have had a Hall of Fame QB on it except:

 

2000 - Trent Dilfer (Ravens) best defense ever!

2002 - Brad Johnson (Bucs) top 5 defense ever!

2012 - Joe Flacco (Ravens) top 5 defense ever!

2017 - Nick Foles (Philly) great defense + all-around team!

 

Eli, Ben, Stafford, and Wilson will all make the Hall because they were great at times. They got the Stats and overall wins is why as well. So, I factored them in. 4 teams in 32 seasons we have had an average QB to win a SB as starter = 1992-2023. 4! Even the year Flacco won it, he had 11 TD's and no INT's during that run so Flacco wasn't even a fluke/lucky QB to win it. 

 

By my calculations 4 in 32 years means, if you don't have an Elite/Hall of Fame QB 87.5% of the time, you aren't winning the SB.

 

Brady - 7

Aikman -3 

Mahomes - 3

Peyton -2

Elway - 2

Ben - 2

Eli - 2

Young - 1

Favre - 1

Warner - 1

Brees - 1

Rodgers - 1

Stafford - 1

Wilson - 1

 

The only way to have an average QB and win a SB, is have an all-time great defense and all-time great coach. Rare, it happens 12.5% of the time over 3 decades as I pointed out with facts. 

 

Nearly all of them top 10 picks.  Do you realize that you are putting almost the entire key to winning a SB on the concept of having a near top 10 pick during the time a great college QB prospect is declaring for the draft?  Two things almost totally out of the GMs control.  (Unless the GM recognizes the key and trades up).  And too bad for Pittsburgh when Kenny Picket was the best prospect.

 

Its rendering the job of GM to administrator of the cap, because the key is such a simple formula a "caveman" could do it...if he gets lucky with the timing of the top 15 pick aligning with the timing of the college graduate pool.

[BlackTiger]

  He wont last if Richardson doesn't work out.  The team needs to make the playoffs sometime soon too.

 

They were close last year but a lot of teams say that every year.  The last spot is always a close race now

[ColtStrong2013]

12 minutes ago, DougDew said:

Why did he have pressure from Irsay to win right away with a long term franchise Qb at the time?

 

The spending on high priced FA has been a Red Herring argument for 7 years.  Despite the spending, it was well managed, evidenced by the cap being in good shape when Ballard took over.  If you want to talk about the talent, fine, but the spending itself strategy was not an issue

…because we are spoiled. 😂 Same reason Houston is trying to win with their rookie I suppose.  

 

I never said he left a mess. Mike Bluem’s pretty dang good his job and has been here for a while. The lessons I speak of are more of a mindset than anything. Irsay watched Grigson spend some big dollars on free agents that didn’t pan out. That doesn’t mean they left us in a mess (unless of course you view it as the amount put towards the o-line that assisted our franchise qb to early retirement). I think Irsay bought into Ballard’s concept on building internally instead of trying to buy a roster, especially in the trenches. Grigson spent a lot of money up front on both sides of the ball. 

[stitches]

2 minutes ago, Superman said:

 

Yeah, that's further than I'm willing to go. I get your point, you get mine.

 

I was tempted to leave it be, but I think this is an interesting question... 2018 Colts vs any(best?) of 2012-2014 Colts? Which one was better?

[Superman]

11 minutes ago, DougDew said:

If that's the case, would Irsay back off the pressure once he's paying a QB $125M?  I'd think there would be more pressure to win once the QB is getting paid for what he's supposed to do, but that's my take.

 

With Polian and PM's early days, and now Ballard, Irsay doesn't strike me as a win now kind of owner like some others.

 

I don't know if the pressure necessarily came from Irsay. But I think Grigson felt compelled to maximize Luck's potential after 2012, and he said so himself. 

[ColtStrong2013]

1 minute ago, stitches said:

I was tempted to leave it be, but I think this is an interesting question... 2018 Colts vs any(best?) of 2012-2014 Colts? Which one was better?

2014 compared to 2018 would be interesting to break down. 
 

Cold playoff games on the road against really good teams. I’d say there is an argument for comparing 2014 Denver to 2018 Houston and 2014 New England to 2018 Kansas City. I give the edge to New England, but that playoff game in 2018 was tough. There was a big difference between 2014 Andrew Luck and 2018… 

[DougDew]

11 minutes ago, ColtStrong2013 said:

…because we are spoiled. 😂 Same reason Houston is trying to win with their rookie I suppose.  

 

I never said he left a mess. Mike Bluem’s pretty dang good his job and has been here for a while. The lessons I speak of are more of a mindset than anything. Irsay watched Grigson spend some big dollars on free agents that didn’t pan out. That doesn’t mean they left us in a mess (unless of course you view it as the amount put towards the o-line that assisted our franchise qb to early retirement). I think Irsay bought into Ballard’s concept on building internally instead of trying to buy a roster, especially in the trenches. Grigson spent a lot of money up front on both sides of the ball. 

I think the NFL as a whole has more of a win now mindset than back in 2013.  

 

I also think that the idea of winning while the QB is under the rookie contract is overstated.  GB, NE, and other teams built contending teams after paying veteran QBs.  KC now too.

 

IMO, a team has to have elite Position Players under rookie contracts to win SBs...not the QB.  And draft them frequently, and churn them, while you pay the vet to be your franchise face for 12 years. 

[Superman]

1 minute ago, stitches said:

I was tempted to leave it be, but I think this is an interesting question... 2018 Colts vs any(best?) of 2012-2014 Colts? Which one was better?

 

I think the 2014 Colts were a matured version of what Grigson was trying to build -- Davis, Hilton, Bradshaw, Freeman, etc., all on the roster multiple seasons by then, and had some playoff experience. I think the 2018 Colts were a very young version of what Ballard was trying to build, with greater potential -- Nelson, Leonard, Ebron, all new, Hooker was hurt most of 2017, the OL didn't get going until 6-7 weeks into the season. 

 

Good question. For one year, I might take the 2014 team.

[stitches]

7 minutes ago, Superman said:

 

I don't know if the pressure necessarily came from Irsay. But I think Grigson felt compelled to maximize Luck's potential after 2012, and he said so himself. 

This is so weird to say because I think Grigson was terrible GM... but he had the right idea for so many things. I love that he tried to maximize Luck's rookie contract. I love that he tried to stack up weapons for him... he was just SO BAD at evaluating those... even though he had the right idea, the execution was appalling! 

[Mikemccoy84]

NFL has changed quite a bit you are seeing proven players traded for picks that aren’t even in this years draft. Texans said they will let Diggs be free agent after 24 so he may not even be there when buffalo makes the pick they got.

[ColtStrong2013]

4 minutes ago, DougDew said:

I think the NFL as a whole has more of a win now mindset than back in 2013.  

 

I also think that the idea of winning while the QB is under the rookie contract is overstated.  GB, NE, and other teams built contending teams after paying veteran QBs.  KC now too.

 

IMO, a team has to have elite Position Players under rookie contracts to win SBs...not the QB.  And draft them frequently, and churn them, while you pay the vet to be your franchise face for 12 years.  The Colts have had neither in 7 years, IMO.

I think you need qb and left tackle set, but otherwise agree on keeping them rolling in the pipeline. 

[DougDew]

6 minutes ago, ColtStrong2013 said:

I think you need qb and left tackle set, but otherwise agree on keeping them rolling in the pipeline. 

Oh yes, I'd add the EDGE and the #1WR.  Keep them when you find them.  Some positions can be churned easier with no detrimental drop off in talent or impact, IMO.

[stitches]

10 minutes ago, ColtStrong2013 said:

2014 compared to 2018 would be interesting to break down. 
 

Cold playoff games on the road against really good teams. I’d say there is an argument for comparing 2014 Denver to 2018 Houston and 2014 New England to 2018 Kansas City. I give the edge to New England, but that playoff game in 2018 was tough. There was a big difference between 2014 Andrew Luck and 2018… 

 

5 minutes ago, Superman said:

 

I think the 2014 Colts were a matured version of what Grigson was trying to build -- Davis, Hilton, Bradshaw, Freeman, etc., all on the roster multiple seasons by then, and had some playoff experience. I think the 2018 Colts were a very young version of what Ballard was trying to build, with greater potential -- Nelson, Leonard, Ebron, all new, Hooker was hurt most of 2017, the OL didn't get going until 6-7 weeks into the season. 

 

Good question. For one year, I might take the 2014 team.

I think by the end of the year the 2018 team was in such a great groove and the OL was possibly the best it's been under Ballard. And Luck was just dealing and being so consistent. I think I would pick the 2018 Luck but the 2014 offense felt more explosive. 

I think if I had to choose I'd pick the 2018 Colts. I think they were closer to the form I wanted them to be in. If there was a Ballard team that was "close" it was that one... I was so hyped for the 2019 season.. until... 

[ColtStrong2013]

6 minutes ago, DougDew said:

Oh yes, I'd add the EDGE and the #1WR.  Keep them when you find them.  Some positions can be churned easier with no detrimental drop off in talent or impact, IMO.

if you can… We’ve seen KC and NE win with shuffled pieces at receiver. They both benefited from a discounted pass catcher at tight end. KC has their defensive line anchored at tackle with Jones. But a continuous pipeline of pass rushers otherwise. 

[Superman]

1 hour ago, Solid84 said:

So, hypothetically, let's say AR doesn't work out. For a new GM would that get him fired or would he get another chance? I don't think everything is forgotten because Ballard drafted a QB. I think there's pressure on him to win, pressure that wouldn't be on a new GM to the same extent. I do agree it depends on AR, but I don't think he has 5 years which is a typical GM tenure.

 

No, he's not on the typical new GM timeline, IMO. This is still his roster. I just think he has some rope related to the QB.

 

Quote

Are we still waiting on Paye and Dayo or can we start judging their play as the final product? If not how much more can we expect, because we're pretty far behind when it comes to pass rush?

 

This is a fair question, but I think the biggest problem with the defense is the coaching. Even if Paye and Dayo are what they are, I think the coaching holds the defense back in general. 

[RollerColt]

39 minutes ago, Superman said:

 

This has been done to death, I don't want to do it again. But I think some folks need to revisit the weekly happenings before, during, and after the 2011 season. Maybe even go back to 2010 to understand what was already happening.

For the record. I vehemently disagree with the idea we tanked on purpose. That would mean Caldwell, Polian and everyone involved was fine with being fired.

[Solid84]

1 minute ago, Superman said:

 

No, he's not on the typical new GM timeline, IMO. This is still his roster. I just think he has some rope related to the QB.

 

 

This is a fair question, but I think the biggest problem with the defense is the coaching. Even if Paye and Dayo are what they are, I think the coaching holds the defense back in general. 

I agree.

 

I think we could get a decent amount of extra pressure simply from blitzing more. I don't think this team will be contending as long as Bradley is here.

[LJpalmbeacher2]

Not much coverage on colts for out of market fans like me......so I mosey along YouTube for news. Some guys on there that belong more on amateur hour, lol, so Kent Sterling seems the better of the bunch. 

Anyway, if you view his content and click on the comments Ballard really gets bashed by the vast majority of colt fans leaving comments. Maybe his supporters don't view or comment as much BUT most rhat do seem want him fired and expect that this will most likely be his last season. 

[stitches]

Just now, LJpalmbeacher2 said:

Not much coverage on colts for out of market fans like me......so I mosey along YouTube for news. Some guys on there that belong more on amateur hour, lol, so Kent Sterling seems the better of the bunch. 

Anyway, if you view his content and click on the comments Ballard really gets bashed by the vast majority of colt fans leaving comments. Maybe his supporters don't view or comment as much BUT most rhat do seem want him fired and expect that this will most likely be his last season. 

I think it's probably a bit of selection bias - the people most likely to want to comment are the one with the strongest feelings about the direction of the team. 

[NewColtsFan]

5 minutes ago, LJpalmbeacher2 said:

Not much coverage on colts for out of market fans like me......so I mosey along YouTube for news. Some guys on there that belong more on amateur hour, lol, so Kent Sterling seems the better of the bunch. 

Anyway, if you view his content and click on the comments Ballard really gets bashed by the vast majority of colt fans leaving comments. Maybe his supporters don't view or comment as much BUT most rhat do seem want him fired and expect that this will most likely be his last season. 

You really want to form an opinion about anything based on the comment section?!?    The comment section?!?!?   
 

I sure hope not.    

[Stephen]

On 4/3/2024 at 3:26 PM, Mikemccoy84 said:

All the Texans moves just puts more pressure them and shows they feel like they needed to do quite a bit to be better. We did beat them at home last year and was pretty much one play from sweeping them with our backup qb.

Yea but they didn't  have tank dell. It would have been a blow out if they did

[Defjamz26]

1 hour ago, Superman said:

 

Mostly agree. I don't think we need to trade up this year to get a difference maker, though. That's just the way I see the draft going. 

 

My point though is that I think it's legitimate to think that good QB play enhances the quality of other position groups. And I think some are too quick to dismiss the potential of some of the young players.

 

I still think the roster building needs a shot in the arm, aside from whatever boost we hope to see from having good QB play. 

Well when I say trade up, I meant back into the 1st round. You have holes at CB, pass catcher, and edge. Instead of trying to hit on all 3 of those in the same draft, or trying to solve that over 3 drafts, get 2 in one go. Take your receiver at 15 and then go back and get your corner or vice versa.

 

While good QB play can upgrade position groups, we need to be looking at ceiling players. Can Pierce be better with AR? Yes. But does he have a better ceiling than Brian Thomas Jr? No. Can Jaylon Jones be better when the offense can sustain drives and stay on the field? Yes. Would you pass on Quinyon Mitchell because of that fact? Probably not. Can Jelani Woods be a game changer at TE if he stays healthy and has AR? Yes. Should that stop you from drafting Brock Bowers? Absolutely not.

 

Another way to give the team a boost is not settling for complacency. The young talent can be better, but you should always push to try and acquire better players or have an overload of talent. As someone mentioned in an earlier post, outside of maybe Nelson, Buckner, and JT, none of our players are talked about as the best in the NFL. The Texans had what I thought was a great receiving core with Collins, Schultz, and Dell. They decided to add Diggs on top of that.

 

Dont let AR elevating the team stop you from stacking up talented players at key positions. 

[ColtStrong2013]

6 minutes ago, stitches said:

I think it's probably a bit of selection bias - the people most likely to want to comment are the one with the strongest feelings about the direction of the team. 

 

If the overall fanbase was upset in unison to the comment section of youtube, there would either be a) less fans at games or b) more fans with pitchforks at games. There is neither. That Houston game was electric. I think you are correct. I've noticed it on here plenty. 

[Superman]

10 minutes ago, stitches said:

 

I think by the end of the year the 2018 team was in such a great groove and the OL was possibly the best it's been under Ballard. And Luck was just dealing and being so consistent. I think I would pick the 2018 Luck but the 2014 offense felt more explosive. 

I think if I had to choose I'd pick the 2018 Colts. I think they were closer to the form I wanted them to be in. If there was a Ballard team that was "close" it was that one... I was so hyped for the 2019 season.. until... 

 

Yeah, I'm rethinking that. The 2014 defense was a little better, but it still wasn't very good. The more efficient version of Luck in 2018 and the much better OL play is probably more valuable.

 

In 2019, with Ebron coming back, adding Houston, maybe Funchess doesn't get hurt in the opener, and assume Luck is locked in the whole way? 

 

[LJpalmbeacher2]

28 minutes ago, NewColtsFan said:

You really want to form an opinion about anything based on the comment section?!?    The comment section?!?!?   
 

I sure hope not.    

 

So you don't think people's comments who are fans of a certain team matter??? The ones who watch every Sunday for years and years??? 

....but my opinion on Ballard isn't based on other fans comments, it based on his lack of success going on 8 seasons and him still operating same as before. And I will say that the fans leaving the negative comments are basing their opinion of him with the same criteria as me. 

 

What I'd like to know is the fans that have a favorable opinion of Ballard is "what are they basing their favorable opinion on???? .....certainly not a sub .500 record with only one playoff win and zero division titles in what has been a weak division. 

 

[BeanDiasucci]

18 minutes ago, LJpalmbeacher2 said:

My opinion on Ballard isn't based on other fans comments, it based on his lack of success going on 8 seasons and him still operating same as before. And I will say that the fans leaving the negative comments are basing their opinion of him with the same criteria as me. 

This brings to mind that worn out quote: 'Insanity is doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results. '

 

But Ballard has done different things in bringing in a new coach and drafting a new quarterback. I still want to see if he can realize he might need to do different things at positions that are more important than they used to be in an increasingly passing-dominated league: WR, DE, CB. He talks now about needing more explosive players. Let's see it. And let's see a more aggressive defense against the passing game, which probably requires a new DC. 

[BeanDiasucci]

2 minutes ago, BeanDiasucci said:

This brings to mind that worn out quote: 'Insanity is doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results. '

 

But Ballard has done different things in bringing in a new coach and drafting a new quarterback. I still want to see if he can realize he might need to do different things at positions that are more important than they used to be in an increasingly passing-dominated league: WR, DE, CB. He talks now about needing more explosive players. Let's see it.  And let's see a more aggressive defense against the passing game, which probably requires a new DC. 

Weird double post. Sorry! 

[DougDew]

46 minutes ago, ColtStrong2013 said:

if you can… We’ve seen KC and NE win with shuffled pieces at receiver. They both benefited from a discounted pass catcher at tight end. KC has their defensive line anchored at tackle with Jones. But a continuous pipeline of pass rushers otherwise. 

Yeah, I think the pieces shuffle around a bit and aren't set in stone everywhere.  NE had Gronk for a long time...dominant........and KC has Kelce.  You mentioned Jones as a dominant force, and I think BB always found a way to have a pass rush at critical moments.   I think having elite performance from passing game assets is critical, and it can be dispersed differently from team to team.

[ColtStrong2013]

33 minutes ago, LJpalmbeacher2 said:

What I'd like to know is the fans that have a favorable opinion of Ballard is "what are they basing their favorable opinion on???? .....certainly not a sub .500 record with only one playoff win and zero division titles in what has been a weak division. 

the prior general manager wrecking a generational qb. The success rate of the majority of GM’s. The wins this franchise has had with mediocre qb play, and a different qb for every single season opener of Ballard’s career. I just want to see what his teams look like with above average, and most important stable, qb play. I want to see 2 seasons of what his qb can do. I’m betting we get it too.

[jvan1973]

7 minutes ago, ColtStrong2013 said:

the prior general manager wrecking a generational qb. The success rate of the majority of GM’s. The wins this franchise has had with mediocre qb play, and a different qb for every single season opener of Ballard’s career. I just want to see what his teams look like with above average, and most important stable, qb play. I want to see 2 seasons of what his qb can do. I’m betting we get it too.

Unless AR completely bombs, Ballard isn't going anywhere before the end of the 2025 season