Colts offseason discussion / Ballard Grievances (merge)

[NewColtsFan]

30 minutes ago, Superman said:

 

I think a lot of fans would would cut Mo a long time ago if it were up to them, so no doubt the team likes him more than the fans do. 

 

But I still wonder just how much the team actually values him. He played 38% of offensive snaps last year. His highest usage games by percentage were Raiders (61%), Pats (60%), and Texans 2nd (53%), all games in which Ogletree was unavailable. He was targeted 22 times last year -- Granson had 50, Mallory had 26, Ogletree had 21. 

 

So he's not a huge part of anything the offense is doing. Even if he's the best blocking TE we have -- and I don't think he's a great blocker, but that's JMO -- is he five times better than Ogletree or Mallory? Because he's making five times more money than either of them. 

 

I think if Ogletree comes back, Mo is on the bubble. And maybe would have been released already if not for the Ogletree uncertainty. Again, JMO.

If the Colts cut Mo, they’d only have to replace him.   And this is the wrong draft to do that.   Now maybe there’s a cheaper version of Mo still out there in FA.   I think that’s possible.   I’m just not sure it’s likely.  
 

And Mo doesn’t have to be better than Mallory.  He’s an F.   I don’t see any overlap there.   The Colts would still have Woods, who played zero snaps last year,  or close to zero,  and Igletree, and he might still get suspended by the league, or possibly cut by the team, though I personally doubt that.   So I still believe Mo has a decent chance to stick.   

 

(Now watch him get cut soon!).  

[Superman]

5 minutes ago, NewColtsFan said:

If the Colts cut Mo, they’d only have to replace him.   And this is the wrong draft to do that.   Now maybe there’s a cheaper version of Mo still out there in FA.   I think that’s possible.   I’m just not sure it’s likely.  
 

And Mo doesn’t have to be better than Mallory.  He’s an F.   I don’t see any overlap there.   The Colts would still have Woods, who played zero snaps last year,  or close to zero,  and Igletree, and he might still get suspended by the league, or possibly cut by the team, though I personally doubt that.   So I still believe Mo has a decent chance to stick.   

 

(Now watch him get cut soon!).  

 

I meant Woods, not Mallory, you're right. But the math is basically the same.

 

And another consideration is that Woods and Ogletree both have concerns right now, so it makes sense to not rush any decision on Mo. If both of those guys are available and look good by the end of camp, we'll see what happens with Mo. 

 

There are some draft prospects, it's not super exciting, but I'm not worried about finding Mo's replacement. I think we have capable replacements already on the roster. Ogletree in particular seemed to be on his way to replacing Mo in the second half last year, and if you look at Woods' snaps in 2022 there's a similar usage.

[throwing BBZ]

13 minutes ago, Superman said:

 

I meant Woods, not Mallory, you're right. But the math is basically the same.

 

And another consideration is that Woods and Ogletree both have concerns right now, so it makes sense to not rush any decision on Mo. If both of those guys are available and look good by the end of camp, we'll see what happens with Mo. 

 

There are some draft prospects, it's not super exciting, but I'm not worried about finding Mo's replacement. I think we have capable replacements already on the roster. Ogletree in particular seemed to be on his way to replacing Mo in the second half last year, and if you look at Woods' snaps in 2022 there's a similar usage.

 

 I'll guesstimate that Mo probably wouldn't get $3M on the open market.

At final cut, a paycut with modest incentives makes sense if we need the body. 

[Superman]

2 hours ago, throwing BBZ said:

 

 I'll guesstimate that Mo probably wouldn't get $3M on the open market.

At final cut, a paycut with modest incentives makes sense if we need the body. 

 

I don't see why we need the body. But again, I have a muted opinion of Mo, at least compared to the staff apparently. 

[NewColtsFan]

3 hours ago, Superman said:

 

I meant Woods, not Mallory, you're right. But the math is basically the same.

 

And another consideration is that Woods and Ogletree both have concerns right now, so it makes sense to not rush any decision on Mo. If both of those guys are available and look good by the end of camp, we'll see what happens with Mo. 

 

There are some draft prospects, it's not super exciting, but I'm not worried about finding Mo's replacement. I think we have capable replacements already on the roster. Ogletree in particular seemed to be on his way to replacing Mo in the second half last year, and if you look at Woods' snaps in 2022 there's a similar usage.

So…. To extend this discussion….

 There was talk here this morning about when to restructure.   So if Ballard/Steichen like Mo but perhaps not so much the contract,  is this the time (April/May) to try to restructure with a lower base and more in incentives? 
 

[w87r]

2 minutes ago, Superman said:

The other likely move to free up cap space, is Mo, but now that the off-season program is starting, they're running the risk of him getting hurt on the job, and then you can't do anything with his contract. That's if they're even considering moving on from him in the first place.

Yeah, I've been pretty firm on them moving on from Mo, and I still think they will, but as you said. Getting close to time to worry about a potential injury and being on the hook.

 

I legit can't wrap my head around why he is still on the team(I'm with you on what he actually brings to the team, not much), but there wasn't too much of a hurry, but it's starting to trend that way.

 

Maybe we can find a taker during the draft(late pick swap)? Or maybe Mo will take a pay cut to stay afterwards.

 

Numbers game and we aren't keeping 5, so something will have to give. This isn't even taking the possible consideration of Bowers.

 

Of course some injuries could pop up, but I don't think I would let Mo get to training camp. Not as worried about our other off-season programs, but would be concerned come camp.

 

Mo almost makes more than the other 4 combined:($5.9m)

 

Granson - $3.3m(big salary escalator this year)

Woods -  $1.5m

Ogletree - $960k

Mallory - $990k

$6.7m total

 

 

Can't see Mallory going anyway, as Coach was in on that draft pick. Can't see Woods going anywhere Videos show he is healthy and looking like a beast

 

As we know there is questions on Ogletree, but I expect him to be back as well.

 

 

Down to Granson (contract year) and Mo(contract year). I guess either way, we save a good chunk of money, $3.1-$5.9m.

[Superman]

18 minutes ago, NewColtsFan said:

So…. To extend this discussion….

 There was talk here this morning about when to restructure.   So if Ballard/Steichen like Mo but perhaps not so much the contract,  is this the time (April/May) to try to restructure with a lower base and more in incentives? 
 

 

I don't know. If you want the most leverage, I guess you'd wait until the dead of summer, when rosters are pretty much settled and everyone has spent all their free agency money. 

 

If you see it as black and white -- we'd like to keep the player at this amount, otherwise we'd rather move on -- then I guess it doesn't matter when you do it.

 

In this specific situation, I think it would be best to do it before the off-season program starts, but if the Colts are wondering about Woods and Ogletree, then it makes sense to wait. What would have been best for the player would have been moving on at the start of the league year. 

[NewColtsFan]

51 minutes ago, Superman said:

 

I don't see why we need the body. But again, I have a muted opinion of Mo, at least compared to the staff apparently. 

I think we need and want the body because otherwise you’re down to two Y’s.  And those two Y’s, Woods and Ogletree, both have question marks around them.   
 

Didn't the Colts have five tight ends on the final 53 roster last Sept?   
 

MAC

Woods

Ogletree

Granson

Mallory

Also I think we put a Y, Pharough Brown (?) on the PS.   So I think the Colts value a Y. 
 

Can’t we have these tight ends in the 53 again this year? 

 

[Superman]

23 minutes ago, w87r said:

Down to Granson (contract year) and Mo(contract year). I guess either way, we save a good chunk of money, $3.1-$5.9m.

 

Granson is the one with more than double everyone else's production, so I'm fine with his $3.3m. Mo hardly catches passes and makes double. And Mo, Woods, and Ogletree are the Y guys, while Granson and Mallory are the Fs, so Mo's position is where the bloat would be. Whether it's value, roster mechanics, cap strategy, player potential, whatever, all signs point to Mo. 

 

I don't dislike him, I'm not hoping he's gone, he isn't holding the team back, it's not preventing us from adding anyone else, and it's not my money. I just think it's obvious who the odd man out would be.

[Superman]

6 minutes ago, NewColtsFan said:

I think we need and want the body because otherwise you’re down to two Y’s.  And those two Y’s, Woods and Ogletree, both have question marks around them.   
 

Didn't the Colts have five tight ends on the final 53 roster last Sept?   
 

MAC

Woods

Ogletree

Granson

Mallory

Also I think we put a Y, Pharough Brown (?) on the PS.   So I think the Colts value a Y. 
 

Can’t we have these tight ends in the 53 again this year? 

 

 

They technically kept five, but Woods was already hurt, and they put him on IR right after final cuts. The rule was just changed for the 2024 season, but prior to this year, if you wanted a chance to bring a player off of IR, they had to be on the active roster after roster cuts. So they kept Woods, then put him on IR in hopes he could return, which didn't happen.

 

So in practice, we had 4 TEs at the start of the regular season. Two Fs, two Ys.

 

Edit: By the way, when I said I don't know if we need the body, I was talking specifically about final roster composition, not off-season. There's plenty of room for extra TEs during camp. But if Woods and Ogletree look good, it's a different story.

[w87r]

23 minutes ago, Superman said:

 

Granson is the one with more than double everyone else's production, so I'm fine with his $3.3m. Mo hardly catches passes and makes double. And Mo, Woods, and Ogletree are the Y guys, while Granson and Mallory are the Fs, so Mo's position is where the bloat would be. Whether it's value, roster mechanics, cap strategy, player potential, whatever, all signs point to Mo. 

 

I don't dislike him, I'm not hoping he's gone, he isn't holding the team back, it's not preventing us from adding anyone else, and it's not my money. I just think it's obvious who the odd man out would be.

Yeah, I don't have anything against Mo either, I actually like him, just a numbers game like most other things.(Roster spots + $$)

 

Agree on Granson as well, although he did grade out as our worst TE last year despite the production.

 

 

I think I'm going to move most of this last Mo talk over to a different thread though, just to get the thread back to Buckner.

 

Edit: NVM, that would take the thread back like 6 hours or so. 

 

As long as no one has an issue we'll keep it here.

[Yoshinator]

2 hours ago, csmopar said:

It is and it sets the field for a potentially more active FA next year IF AR15 pans out

I honestly believe Ballard could have $100 million in salary cap more than every other team, and he still wouldn't spend in FA. He'd find a way to pay his own more or make a big trade or two and pay a guy he'd like on another team like Buckner. It'll just never happen. He thought AR was the best player in the draft last year, we drafted him at 4, and the following year in FA, Ballard just re-signed his own besides two FAs that were mid card guys and decided to run a mulligan. 

 

Ballard will never be a spender in FA. 

 

 

[shasta519]

I think MAC's value is that he can block. Ballard mentioned something about how hard it is to find TEs that can block. So perhaps he doesn't feel they really have anybody else that they trust at this point.

[GoColts8818]

Ryan Kelly update:

 

 

[csmopar]

8 hours ago, Yoshinator said:

I honestly believe Ballard could have $100 million in salary cap more than every other team, and he still wouldn't spend in FA. He'd find a way to pay his own more or make a big trade or two and pay a guy he'd like on another team like Buckner. It'll just never happen. He thought AR was the best player in the draft last year, we drafted him at 4, and the following year in FA, Ballard just re-signed his own besides two FAs that were mid card guys and decided to run a mulligan. 

 

Ballard will never be a spender in FA. 

 

 

I don’t think he’s fairly being judged here. There’s been reports every single year that we were the high bidder and yet lost out. I truly think most of that comes down to the fact we really don’t have much to offer in terms of things not counting as salary. No franchise QB proven yet, no bikini clad babes or beaches, income tax etc. 

[Yoshinator]

2 hours ago, csmopar said:

I don’t think he’s fairly being judged here. There’s been reports every single year that we were the high bidder and yet lost out. I truly think most of that comes down to the fact we really don’t have much to offer in terms of things not counting as salary. No franchise QB proven yet, no bikini clad babes or beaches, income tax etc. 

If you want to argue that we didn't have a realistic shot on Danielle Hunter, I agree. However, we could have easily gotten Sneed if we wanted (we just didn't want to pay the guaranteed money because of the injury concerns). When it's just members of the forum saying "we could have gotten X guy for Y amount", then there's not that much credibility to it. However, when it's an 8 year sample size in FA, and Ballard admits that's how he goes about things, it's a pattern. There's a lot of guys he goes after that he misses on, but there's even more that he could get for a realistic price that he has no interest in. 

 

In the end, he's not aggressive as a GM, and it's not necessarily a good thing. He never wants to overpay, but sometimes you have too. If he's building the team through the draft, you think he would allow himself to overpay a time or two in FA because he'd have the cheap rookie contracts he's hitting on to supplement the team and the cap.

 

Just my two cents.

[Two_pound]

And the fact of the matter remains that NO ONE ever wins the super bowl by spending boatloads of money in March.

[csmopar]

1 hour ago, Yoshinator said:

If you want to argue that we didn't have a realistic shot on Danielle Hunter, I agree. However, we could have easily gotten Sneed if we wanted (we just didn't want to pay the guaranteed money because of the injury concerns). When it's just members of the forum saying "we could have gotten X guy for Y amount", then there's not that much credibility to it. However, when it's an 8 year sample size in FA, and Ballard admits that's how he goes about things, it's a pattern. There's a lot of guys he goes after that he misses on, but there's even more that he could get for a realistic price that he has no interest in. 

 

In the end, he's not aggressive as a GM, and it's not necessarily a good thing. He never wants to overpay, but sometimes you have too. If he's building the team through the draft, you think he would allow himself to overpay a time or two in FA because he'd have the cheap rookie contracts he's hitting on to supplement the team and the cap.

 

Just my two cents.

Fair enough and I can see how you have arrived at that thought process. And I’m not saying you’re wrong either. I’m just saying I’m gonna withhold my judgement on it all until next off season. For me, this is the make it or break it year for Ballard. Assuming AR is as good as hyped and can stay healthy, going into next FA is when I expect to see some more aggression, not expecting the Texans level of course, but more aggression I think would be warranted. Until then, I think the guarded approach is okay until we know what we have or don’t have with AR.

 

i keep saying this, but people need to understand where Ballard came from. The Chiefs, this is the very same MO they used prior to the Mahomes era. Once they got Mahomes, they became far more aggressive but not stupidly aggressive either. And they became more attractive as a team for FA.  In fact, the chiefs were drafting roughly where we have have been, last year not with standing,  when they finally traded up for Mahomes. 
 

we are literally the chiefs before Mahomes. A solid roster that is on the cusp of playoffs but yet not consistently getting there. We have a solid core roster but not a star roster. Mahomes elevated that roster and I think they are expecting AR to elevate it some as well. But we still need weapons. We don’t have many

[richard pallo]

47 minutes ago, Yoshinator said:

If you want to argue that we didn't have a realistic shot on Danielle Hunter, I agree. However, we could have easily gotten Sneed if we wanted (we just didn't want to pay the guaranteed money because of the injury concerns). When it's just members of the forum saying "we could have gotten X guy for Y amount", then there's not that much credibility to it. However, when it's an 8 year sample size in FA, and Ballard admits that's how he goes about things, it's a pattern. There's a lot of guys he goes after that he misses on, but there's even more that he could get for a realistic price that he has no interest in. 

 

In the end, he's not aggressive as a GM, and it's not necessarily a good thing. He never wants to overpay, but sometimes you have too. If he's building the team through the draft, you think he would allow himself to overpay a time or two in FA because he'd have the cheap rookie contracts he's hitting on to supplement the team and the cap.

 

Just my two cents.

You could make that argument that he has been aggressive and overpaid when it came to acquiring Wentz and Ryan.  Draft picks and money.  Two quarterbacks no less.  The most important position on the team.  So I don’t think you can say he’s not aggressive.  He took big swings on those two and missed.  But he also traded a 1st rd pick for Buckner paid him and hit a home run with that swing.  I think you could say he has taken aggressive swings.  I do think having a franchise quarterback leading your team makes it easier to justify taking one.  I think he thinks he has that guy now.  So I’m expecting a few more aggressive moves going forward.  I think they will be calculated and well thought out.  And he and Shane will be in lock step when they happen.

[Yoshinator]

1 hour ago, richard pallo said:

You could make that argument that he has been aggressive and overpaid when it came to acquiring Wentz and Ryan.  Draft picks and money.  Two quarterbacks no less.  The most important position on the team.  So I don’t think you can say he’s not aggressive.  He took big swings on those two and missed.  But he also traded a 1st rd pick for Buckner paid him and hit a home run with that swing.  I think you could say he has taken aggressive swings.  I do think having a franchise quarterback leading your team makes it easier to justify taking one.  I think he thinks he has that guy now.  So I’m expecting a few more aggressive moves going forward.  I think they will be calculated and well thought out.  And he and Shane will be in lock step when they happen.

He was aggressive on this front with Wentz and Ryan. Those were trades and not FAs though. Ballard generally will get his guy in a trade if he wants him (Sneed not withstanding). Free Agency is where I have the issue (where Ballard is competing with other teams with money). The funny thing is that I'm actually perfectly fine with what Ballard did in FA besides not getting Sneed. That was the only major error IMO. Everything else can be fixed in the draft immediately. 

 

I'm just not of the mindset that AR needs to prove himself first before splurging in FA. I think that's a mistake personally. Though this year, a lot of the best FAs were also guys that we re-signed anyway. 

[Yoshinator]

1 hour ago, csmopar said:

Fair enough and I can see how you have arrived at that thought process. And I’m not saying you’re wrong either. I’m just saying I’m gonna withhold my judgement on it all until next off season. For me, this is the make it or break it year for Ballard. Assuming AR is as good as hyped and can stay healthy, going into next FA is when I expect to see some more aggression, not expecting the Texans level of course, but more aggression I think would be warranted. Until then, I think the guarded approach is okay until we know what we have or don’t have with AR.

 

i keep saying this, but people need to understand where Ballard came from. The Chiefs, this is the very same MO they used prior to the Mahomes era. Once they got Mahomes, they became far more aggressive but not stupidly aggressive either. And they became more attractive as a team for FA.  In fact, the chiefs were drafting roughly where we have have been, last year not with standing,  when they finally traded up for Mahomes. 
 

we are literally the chiefs before Mahomes. A solid roster that is on the cusp of playoffs but yet not consistently getting there. We have a solid core roster but not a star roster. Mahomes elevated that roster and I think they are expecting AR to elevate it some as well. But we still need weapons. We don’t have many

The difference with Mahomes and AR to me is the timeline of the GMs on both teams. Brett Veach was only on the Chiefs for a year at this point before he started building around Mahomes. Ballard is the GM of the Colts for 8 years now and he isn't doing it. With Veach, you can argue it's because he was waiting for Mahomes to get better and he was relatively new as a GM. With Ballard, it's just how he is. 

 

The rosters are similar from that time, yes. I agree. I just think we are fooling ourselves by saying he's going to spend over and over and it never happens. We just come up with a new reason. I'm guilty of it too. I'm actually fine with the offseason besides Sneed. That was inexcusable not getting him IMO, but everything else is ok. We just have to do well in the draft. I think we will take a WR on day 2 or in a trade down (Xavier Worthy maybe). The draft is Ballards bread and butter, so I always know he'll do his best there to help the team.

[Chrisaaron1023]

 

It's been 2 months since a football has been tossed.

 

Free Agency is a shock to the heart for about 4 days..

 

They string us ALLLLL the way around for the draft nowadays..

 

Then tease us for 2 weeks with the new schedule..

 

Off season is rough.😪

[Dobbinblitz]

I don't think Red Zone Mo will be with the team once the young TE's are competent in the offense and blocking schemes on a full-time basis, and the team sees what it really has in a healthy Woods. I think Mallory will continue to surprise - I thought he was a great pick.

[shasta519]

On 4/16/2024 at 8:15 PM, richard pallo said:

You could make that argument that he has been aggressive and overpaid when it came to acquiring Wentz and Ryan.  Draft picks and money.  Two quarterbacks no less.  The most important position on the team.  So I don’t think you can say he’s not aggressive.  He took big swings on those two and missed.  But he also traded a 1st rd pick for Buckner paid him and hit a home run with that swing.  I think you could say he has taken aggressive swings.  I do think having a franchise quarterback leading your team makes it easier to justify taking one.  I think he thinks he has that guy now.  So I’m expecting a few more aggressive moves going forward.  I think they will be calculated and well thought out.  And he and Shane will be in lock step when they happen.

DeFo was an aggressive move.

 

But I wouldn’t classify Wentz or Ryan as aggressive moves. Getting Stafford would have been an aggressive move at QB. Wentz was cheaper and PHI was looking to dump him. They didn’t even budge from their initial offer to PHI 

And Ryan sort of fell in their laps after they dumped Wentz. 

[shasta519]

On 4/16/2024 at 9:32 PM, Yoshinator said:

The difference with Mahomes and AR to me is the timeline of the GMs on both teams. Brett Veach was only on the Chiefs for a year at this point before he started building around Mahomes. Ballard is the GM of the Colts for 8 years now and he isn't doing it. With Veach, you can argue it's because he was waiting for Mahomes to get better and he was relatively new as a GM. With Ballard, it's just how he is. 

 

The rosters are similar from that time, yes. I agree. I just think we are fooling ourselves by saying he's going to spend over and over and it never happens. We just come up with a new reason. I'm guilty of it too. I'm actually fine with the offseason besides Sneed. That was inexcusable not getting him IMO, but everything else is ok. We just have to do well in the draft. I think we will take a WR on day 2 or in a trade down (Xavier Worthy maybe). The draft is Ballards bread and butter, so I always know he'll do his best there to help the team.

Right. KC was also a perennial playoff team prior to Mahomes taking over. The Colts are a fringe playoff team at best, until we see if AR can lift the roster. 

 

And to your point, Veach took over the summer before Mahomes’ rookie year. Hard to compare how KC’s FO approach with Dorsey at GM (for several years) vs. when Veach took over. It seems like Ballard has been more like Dorsey and Veach might just operate differently from both of them. 
 

If Ballard wanted to follow the Veach KC model, he sure waited a long time to do it once Luck retired. 

[Yoshinator]

1 hour ago, shasta519 said:

Right. KC was also a perennial playoff team prior to Mahomes taking over. The Colts are a fringe playoff team at best, until we see if AR can lift the roster. 

 

And to your point, Veach took over the summer before Mahomes’ rookie year. Hard to compare how KC’s FO approach with Dorsey at GM (for several years) vs. when Veach took over. It seems like Ballard has been more like Dorsey and Veach might just operate differently from both of them. 
 

If Ballard wanted to follow the Veach KC model, he sure waited a long time to do it once Luck retired. 

The only similarities that Ballard and Veach have is that they were both on KC at the time Mahomes was drafted (Veach is the GM now obviously), and they both build well through the draft. Other than that, they are different in every other way as GMs. 

 

You are correct, Ballard is more like Dorsey. Ballard is actually best friends with Dorsey. They had a thing in the draft where Dorsey always prank called Ballard during the draft. Was kinda funny. 

 

If AR hits, then we will have gotten there as a playoff team the slow way. However, with Ballard, it will have taken a lot onger than it ever should have. People can blame Lucks retirement, Reich, or whatever, but GMs generally don't start with a franchise QB when they take over a team. IMO, Ballard was a scout who had no idea how to be a GM when he took over, and when Luck retired, it completely exposed him. He finally figured it out 7 years in his tenure. Might be too little, too late.

[richard pallo]

14 minutes ago, Yoshinator said:

The only similarities that Ballard and Veach have is that they were both on KC at the time Mahomes was drafted (Veach is the GM now obviously), and they both build well through the draft. Other than that, they are different in every other way as GMs. 

 

You are correct, Ballard is more like Dorsey. Ballard is actually best friends with Dorsey. They had a thing in the draft where Dorsey always prank called Ballard during the draft. Was kinda funny. 

 

If AR hits, then we will have gotten there as a playoff team the slow way. However, with Ballard, it will have taken a lot onger than it ever should have. People can blame Lucks retirement, Reich, or whatever, but GMs generally don't start with a franchise QB when they take over a team. IMO, Ballard was a scout who had no idea how to be a GM when he took over, and when Luck retired, it completely exposed him. He finally figured it out 7 years in his tenure. Might be too little, too late.

I think he saves his job this year and Colts fans are happy with the results of the season.  He probably saved it last year but AR’s injury derailed the playoff spot.  I think if he played the entire year we wouldn’t be talking about Ballard’s future with the team right now.  So far so good this year.  And the draft is still in front of us and he’s armed with more cap space so we shall see.

[AwesomeAustin]

6 minutes ago, richard pallo said:

I think he saves his job this year and Colts fans are happy with the results of the season.  He probably saved it last year but AR’s injury derailed the playoff spot.  I think if he played the entire year we wouldn’t be talking about Ballard’s future with the team right now.  So far so good this year.  And the draft is still in front of us and he’s armed with more cap space so we shall see.

Not directed at you but in general. I don’t understand the talk about getting rid of Ballard. If he was going anywhere it would have been before last season. He picked the new coach and together picked the hopeful franchise QB. No way they will make a regime change unless Irsay wants to completely clean house. New GM would want his coach and maybe even a different QB, we would have to start over. Only chance the whole team isn’t blown up is if they would promote from within and that would probably be worked out before we would ever know it’s happening. 
 

Ballard, Steichen and AR are the guys for the next 2-3yrs minimum and they will do whatever they can to win with this group. 

[shasta519]

2 hours ago, Yoshinator said:

The only similarities that Ballard and Veach have is that they were both on KC at the time Mahomes was drafted (Veach is the GM now obviously), and they both build well through the draft. Other than that, they are different in every other way as GMs. 

 

You are correct, Ballard is more like Dorsey. Ballard is actually best friends with Dorsey. They had a thing in the draft where Dorsey always prank called Ballard during the draft. Was kinda funny. 

 

If AR hits, then we will have gotten there as a playoff team the slow way. However, with Ballard, it will have taken a lot onger than it ever should have. People can blame Lucks retirement, Reich, or whatever, but GMs generally don't start with a franchise QB when they take over a team. IMO, Ballard was a scout who had no idea how to be a GM when he took over, and when Luck retired, it completely exposed him. He finally figured it out 7 years in his tenure. Might be too little, too late.

The job Ballard was hired to do changed when Luck retired. The problem was that the philosophy didn’t adjust with it. And I am not even sure it has. The AR pick was opportunitistic more than anything. It can’t after a failed “chips in” season. And they are still mostly just doing the same things…using the draft and building around their own. But if AR is good, maybe we will see other moves. 

[ShuteAt168]

An article in the Athletic has the Colts with the 26th best roster in the NFL.

”QB Anthony Richardson showed promise, but the sample was too small for me to lean one way or the other at this point. The rest of the roster is split: The trenches are great on both sides of the ball, but the skill positions and back seven on defense are not.”

Houston is 11. 

[OLD FAN MAN]

On 4/16/2024 at 9:32 PM, Yoshinator said:

The difference with Mahomes and AR to me is the timeline of the GMs on both teams. Brett Veach was only on the Chiefs for a year at this point before he started building around Mahomes. Ballard is the GM of the Colts for 8 years now and he isn't doing it. With Veach, you can argue it's because he was waiting for Mahomes to get better and he was relatively new as a GM. With Ballard, it's just how he is. 

 

The rosters are similar from that time, yes. I agree. I just think we are fooling ourselves by saying he's going to spend over and over and it never happens. We just come up with a new reason. I'm guilty of it too. I'm actually fine with the offseason besides Sneed. That was inexcusable not getting him IMO, but everything else is ok. We just have to do well in the draft. I think we will take a WR on day 2 or in a trade down (Xavier Worthy maybe). The draft is Ballards bread and butter, so I always know he'll do his best there to help the team.

ballard will do his best in the draft but he has not been good at drafting game changing wrs or pass rushers

[jvan1973]

26 minutes ago, OLD FAN MAN said:

ballard will do his best in the draft but he has not been good at drafting game changing wrs or pass rushers

Pittman  is a damn good wr. I don't care what anyone says.   The dude moves the chains no matter who the qb is.  We don't know about downs yet.   I'm much higher on Pierce than most.   

 

What GM has been great at drafting pass rushers?  When was their pick?

[Yoshinator]

7 minutes ago, jvan1973 said:

Pittman  is a damn good wr. I don't care what anyone says.   The dude moves the chains no matter who the qb is.  We don't know about downs yet.   I'm much higher on Pierce than most.   

 

What GM has been great at drafting pass rushers?  When was their pick?

Pittman is the only definite hit Ballard has had since being the GM. When Downs and Pierce are maybe, and they're the next best thing, that's not a ringing endorsement. IMO, we'll take a WR in the first two days again. Probably round 2.

[Zoltan]

10 hours ago, Yoshinator said:

The only similarities that Ballard and Veach have is that they were both on KC at the time Mahomes was drafted (Veach is the GM now obviously), and they both build well through the draft. Other than that, they are different in every other way as GMs. 

 

You are correct, Ballard is more like Dorsey. Ballard is actually best friends with Dorsey. They had a thing in the draft where Dorsey always prank called Ballard during the draft. Was kinda funny. 

 

If AR hits, then we will have gotten there as a playoff team the slow way. However, with Ballard, it will have taken a lot onger than it ever should have. People can blame Lucks retirement, Reich, or whatever, but GMs generally don't start with a franchise QB when they take over a team. IMO, Ballard was a scout who had no idea how to be a GM when he took over, and when Luck retired, it completely exposed him. He finally figured it out 7 years in his tenure. Might be too little, too late.

I have to say I miss the emojis on these posts because the bolded had me laughing. He was highly sought after and turned down jobs. He has also been fairly consistent and hasn't changed his philosophy, his approach was very similar to the chiefs, build through the draft and find a veteran to bridge until you find a rookie you like unfortunately he couldn't find his version of Alex Smith. 

 

1 hour ago, Yoshinator said:

Pittman is the only definite hit Ballard has had since being the GM. When Downs and Pierce are maybe, and they're the next best thing, that's not a ringing endorsement. IMO, we'll take a WR in the first two days again. Probably round 2.

 

I'm assuming you are just going off WR hits, because there has been alot of draft hits.

[Yoshinator]

3 minutes ago, Zoltan said:

I have to say I miss the emojis on these posts because the bolded had me laughing. He was highly sought after and turned down jobs. He has also been fairly consistent and hasn't changed his philosophy, his approach was very similar to the chiefs, build through the draft and find a veteran to bridge until you find a rookie you like unfortunately he couldn't find his version of Alex Smith. 

 

 

I'm assuming you are just going off WR hits, because there has been alot of draft hits.

Yes, I was responding to a post about WRs. Just WR hits. Ballard has had a lot of hits at other positions.

[AKB]

im back, and still think ballard sucks. so there's that

[OLD FAN MAN]

3 hours ago, 2006Coltsbestever said:

If we trade back, I won't be happy at all. We need an impact playmaker at WR. Pittman is a good #1 (not great), he is a good possession WR which is needed. Having said that, we need someone that can blow the doors off of teams that they fear like a Marvin, Nabors, or Rome. In today's league you have to score a lot of points to win - keep up with teams like the Chiefs, Ravens, and Cincy with Burrow. 

 

We need to trade up, JMO.

ballard seems to like  more lower picks instead of high quality picks

[csmopar]

5 hours ago, 2006Coltsbestever said:

Yeah, this place is either going to happy or implode because nobody in here has any idea what Ballard will do or who he will pick.

If he trades out of the first, I will likely jump on the fire him wagon 

[Defjamz26]

It’s hard to get a read from Ballard's presser. It almost seemed liked he co-signed his young DB room and said they’re just going to roll the dice with what they have but maybe add some competition. I get that he feels they can take a leap, but I’m not sure I can be convinced that Flowers or Jones will ever be better than Quinyon Mitchell or Cooper DeJean.

 

Of all of Ballard’s philosophies regarding team building (specifically related to the draft) the one I have the most issue with is the over confidence and eagerness to bank on low round players and UDFA’s as long term solutions. You have a projected starting secondary consisting a 7th round pick from Yale who did not play well last season, a 7th round corner who well outplayed his draft position, but has clear limitations athletically, a 3rd round safety who is gifted athletically, but we still don’t know if he’s better as FS or SS, and a 2nd round pick who showed great flashes when healthy but is still a question mark. 
 

I get rolling the dice with JuJu, but I don’t see why you wouldn’t look for upgrades for Thomas and Jones/Flowers. I know he said he’d like to add competition there, but drafting a guy 4th round likely isn’t going to give your CB group a boost. I know he said they’re technically not young in his eyes, but they are young. If you’re going to add another “young” corner, add one with high end traits and skills. I’m not dead set on Mitchell or DeJean in round 1 or bust because I also like a couple day 2 corners. I’m just saying I’d much rather take a shot with one of them than just run it back with the same group.

 

Where we really need talent at for sure though is Edge.

[Moosejawcolt]

35 minutes ago, Dunk said:

Hmmmm, back in 1996 the Jets drafted a mega hyped receiver 1st overall Keyshawn Johnson. Pretty good career 13 years over 10,000 yds. 64 TD.  Guess who the Colts drafted at 19 that year? A hint, his son is the guy everybody wants this year.

I think Marv Jr. will be at the least very good. Just pointing out, that sometimes the best in a class, aren't always the most hyped.

Having Ballard as your GM is liking living through the cycke of abuse lol

He can't really move up because we have to many holes to fill because of his lack luster drafting.  So, he prefers to move back to accumulate more pics, hoping he has more of a chance of those pics turning out. Quality over quality. Now that philosophy really isn't worked. So here we are again having holes to fill and unable to move up because we have to move back to correct his erros, which will go on and on lol.