Colts offseason discussion / Ballard Grievances (merge)

[Chucklez]

2 hours ago, Yoshinator said:

I was looking at the Colts depth chart on ourlads, and the team actually looks decent. We have a few needs, but we could probably fill them in the draft and have a solid team. Need a WR, EDGE, CB, S, backup RB, and maybe a TE. However, it's doable if you combine FA and the draft. 

 

We're on track to actually have a solid team if we get aggressive and target a couple of these positions in FA, and fill the rest through the draft.

All so long as AR5 works out!

Which I am more optimistic of than the alternative, but it does all heavily hinge on that!

[ColtStrong2013]

14 minutes ago, MikeCurtis said:

An additional note

 

Richard Sherman was a ZONE CB that was one of the best ever. He was feared in the league.

 

He was a FIFTH round draft pick

 

He was 6' 3" with long arms, and you would expect him to run a 4.3 forty..... right ??????

 

NOPE.....  he logged a 4.56 40 time.

 

ZONE CB play does NOT need to be 4'3 40

 

 

Who knows what the Colts will do......  I dont

 

But I think we keep thinking that we need a 1st round pick on a man to man CB

 

A man to man CB (Unless we are going to start playing hybrid defenses) Is completely wasted in this defense

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Yeah I don’t see any way we go corner early. I thought it was unusual getting Brents as early as we did last year. 
 

pass rusher or receiver round 1. Possibly even round 1/2. 

[MikeCurtis]

Another note......

 

He didnt get as much attention, but that Legend of Boom team had an AMAZING FS 

 

Earl Thomas was the  7 time pro bowl Free Safety that backed up the the CBs

 

He was all over the place....... THATS the sort of guy that this team needs at FS to make a ZONE work

 

 

 

 

[JColts72]

Flaco to be the new Rivers? Will be starting soon enough after Anthony gets injured running. Another ho hum Ballard use of money. Texas loading up on D there.

[BProland85]

8 minutes ago, JColts72 said:

Flaco to be the new Rivers? Will be starting soon enough after Anthony gets injured running. Another ho hum Ballard use of money. Texas loading up on D there.

Come on man be a little optimistic that Richardson will do better about staying healthy this year. 

[1959Colts]

7 minutes ago, richard pallo said:

He’s right.  I think we have all become impatient over time.  All of the media coverage of the big expensive new signing.  It gets the fans all worked up if your team isn’t participating in the first few days.  I’m not worried. I think retaining our best players was a great starting strategy.  I have no doubt we will be adding a new starter at safety and cornerback.  It will happen and the team will become better on that side of the ball.  The new season just started.  Today is officially day two.  Lots of time to improve the team.

 

As for my opinion of the signings so far...

Although Pittman's was huge money, I guess we had to pay him, since he is important for the team to succeed going forward. Loved the Tyquan Lewis signing (as I thought he was one of our best players last year).

I'm ok with Stewart, Moore and Sanchez as well (three quality players) 

Like that we got Raekwon Davis, since the Tevan Bryan experiment failed, we needed to find another big body for up front, and by signing Davis we do not have to use draft choices at DT position

I can understand why Ballard brought back Genard Avery, since he was signed last year as a pass rusher, and then got injured in training camp, missed whole year on IR. So I see giving him another shot this year.

Have to admit, I do not like the Ronnie Harrison (felt we can do better) and Joe Flacco (too old and immobile) signings.

 

Now going forward...

I hope we can sign a FA CB, then we wont have to use our draft choices on CB position.

We really need to find two safeties, either in FA or draft. I do not believe Thomas or Cross are NFL starting material. 

WR and Edge Pass Rusher and LB seem to me to be high priority for early round draft.

I would cut Mo Ally Cox, and think we are ok at TE (with Granson, Ogletree, Mallory and Woods) but if Bowers should drop to 15? Then they would have to give him consideration.

Could use additional depth at RB, OL, and maybe a rookie QB

 

My biggest worry with Ballard, is he does not fill enough of these spots and fails to close the gap within our own division.

Right now, I would think most of the "talking heads" media would predict our division as:

(1) Houston

(2) Jacksonville

(3) Indy

(4) Tennessee (with some maybe putting Tenn ahead of us)

 

The FO has to find  a way for us to win the division, or at least make wild card playoffs, or else I would consider the 2024 season a failure.

 

 

 

[JColts72]

13 minutes ago, BProland85 said:

Come on man be a little optimistic that Richardson will do better about staying healthy this year. 

Trying 

[RollerColt]

I can understand the worry with Anthony. I'm holding out hope that he avoids injury this season. If he does indeed get injured? Well, then Ballard and a lot of other staff and players better get their resumes updated unfortunately... 

[Dobbinblitz]

Ballard: “We have to get more explosive on offense, and we have to be able to eliminate the explosives on defense,” 

Here is to hoping the Colts address this need sooner than later, and the entire solution does not reside in a high RAS draft.

The blueprint of the recent past has yielded mediocrity.

[Goatface Killah]

1 hour ago, VikingsFanInChennai said:

I think they're not saying Colts shouldn't have re-signed Stewart or Franklin for keeping good run defense, they're talking about additional spend on improving pass rush and pass coverage in overall asset allocation, that will make the defense better in pass defense as well while improving the ability to get to the QB consistently.

 

So far, that hasn't happened but if the reports are true and if they're pursuing Sneed, that'd be the addition they're talking about. Overall, more efforts can be taken to resolve the gaps at same time rather than gradually fixing one by one year after year, by which some other position would need to be fixed again.

 

They want such aggression from Ballard now because the Colts have finally got the QB and he's on a rookie deal, so the time is now to spend on other premium positions in order to make the team stronger around him, instead of running back with same roster asking him to raise the level of team's performance. 

I dont know how you change asset allocation without allowing your players to leave.

[ColtStrong2013]

2 minutes ago, RollerColt said:

I can understand the worry with Anthony. I'm holding out hope that he avoids injury this season. If he does indeed get injured? Well, then Ballard and a lot of other staff and players better get their resumes updated unfortunately... 

 

Ballard’s resume is far better than anyone here will give credit to. 
 

he would immediately be a top candidate for the next wave of GM roles- and organizations would be clamoring to bring him in as a top executive if he wasn’t interested in the available opportunities. To say otherwise is hilarious… The only thing people point to is the Colts record under him, and I’m confident that bottom barrel teams would love to have him bring his organization/relationship skills to deploy the same strategies for their failing organizations. 

[RollerColt]

You know? I will say there is a subtle shift in Ballard's free agency this year compared to others. In the past he didn't seem to mind letting players walk and opted to find draft replacements and supplemental cheaper free agents. This season he was determined to keep most of the general player unit in tact. 

[Restinpeacesweetchloe]

 

[Restinpeacesweetchloe]

 

[DougDew]

19 minutes ago, 1959Colts said:

 

As for my opinion of the signings so far...

Although Pittman's was huge money, I guess we had to pay him, since he is important for the team to succeed going forward. Loved the Tyquan Lewis signing (as I thought he was one of our best players last year).

I'm ok with Stewart, Moore and Sanchez as well (three quality players) 

Like that we got Raekwon Davis, since the Tevan Bryan experiment failed, we needed to find another big body for up front, and by signing Davis we do not have to use draft choices at DT position

I can understand why Ballard brought back Genard Avery, since he was signed last year as a pass rusher, and then got injured in training camp, missed whole year on IR. So I see giving him another shot this year.

Have to admit, I do not like the Ronnie Harrison (felt we can do better) and Joe Flacco (too old and immobile) signings.

 

Now going forward...

I hope we can sign a FA CB, then we wont have to use our draft choices on CB position.

We really need to find two safeties, either in FA or draft. I do not believe Thomas or Cross are NFL starting material. 

WR and Edge Pass Rusher and LB seem to me to be high priority for early round draft.

I would cut Mo Ally Cox, and think we are ok at TE (with Granson, Ogletree, Mallory and Woods) but if Bowers should drop to 15? Then they would have to give him consideration.

Could use additional depth at RB, OL, and maybe a rookie QB

 

My biggest worry with Ballard, is he does not fill enough of these spots and fails to close the gap within our own division.

Right now, I would think most of the "talking heads" media would predict our division as:

(1) Houston

(2) Jacksonville

(3) Indy

(4) Tennessee (with some maybe putting Tenn ahead of us)

 

The FO has to find  a way for us to win the division, or at least make wild card playoffs, or else I would consider the 2024 season a failure.

 

 

 

I agree with almost all of this.  I would summarize it by simply saying, thus far, we signed our own to stop any holes from forming and going backwards in the offseason, and added a backup big body DT which we did not really have.  Minshew to Flacco is probably a net loss, but Flacco can chuck it to AP I guess, so there is that new element.

 

We'll probably add a vet secondary piece....CB or FS.  I doubt that we could afford 2.

 

I don't like our TE room as much as others.  Woods is coming back, but he didn't have great hands when he played, IIRC.  I read WalterFootball, and this is what he says about his mock 3rd round pick for us...kinda funny, but kinda true,

 

 82. Indianapolis Colts: Jaheim Bell, TE, Florida State 

The Colts have a million mediocre tight ends, so they might as well add another.

Jaheim Bell is a physical player who runs well after the catch.

 

That leaves pick 15 for the most dynamic player out there.  EDGE, WR, TE, or LB?  Depending upon how the vet secondary search goes.

 

[Superman]

5 hours ago, NewColtsFan said:

Your second paragraph….  About Davis is not a serious pass rush threat.  Why would he be?  

 

I guess you missed the whole point, then. I think the Colts main shortcomings on defense are related to pass rush and pass coverage. And the reason I'm not enthused about adding Davis is because he does not help in either of those areas.

 

I say 'I don't like the signing because he doesn't help the pass rush.' You say 'why would he help the pass rush, he's 325 pounds?' .... That's the point. I think we need to improve the pass rush and pass defense, and we spent $84m on three defensive front players that don't move the needle in those areas.

 

Quote

Ironically, Stewart’s value was clearly established when he was suspended for 6 weeks.   The Colts couldn’t stop the run between the tackles.

 

This argument is overstated, IMO. We went 4-2 in those six weeks without Stewart, and then we 2-3 in the final five after he came back. Yes, he helps the run defense, and yes run defense is important. But I don't think we need to spend $39m on a NT to be good against the run. There are a lot of options between Grover Stewart and Taven Bryan. It's not 'either spend $39m on Stewart, or be stuck with Bryan.' 

 

Quote

First, all Partridge is doing is telling Ballard if he likes the player or not, can he help the Colts or not.  Like Reggie Wayne said I like Josh Downs.   But he’s not telling Ballard how much to pay Davis.   That’s entirely up to Ballard.  Partridge has zero impact on asset allocation. 

 

So if my problem with the Davis signing is resource allocation, and Partridge has no impact on resource allocation, then why did you bring him up in the first place?

Do you think I don't like the Davis signing because I think Davis is a bad player? It feels like you're trying to help me understand that the new DL coach will help get the most out of him, and that makes me think you don't understand my point at all. If I need a shovel and you bring me a rake, it doesn't matter how good the rake is. Shovel = pass defense. Rake = run defense.

 

Quote

And the resource the Colts can use to help the pass rush is Charlie Partridge!   Thats why the Colts hired him.   To make every DL the Colts have even better.

 

Maybe this is the disconnect. I hope Partridge is the best DL coach of all time. I'm more reserved in my optimism than you are. And no matter how good he is, we still need better pass rush talent. No one is turning a middling group of linemen into a fearsome pass rush unit without a serious talent upgrade, not even the Rock Star.

 

Quote

As to the direction of the roster….   I understand the very strong concern.   The Franklin contract was a shock to everyone.  But I have to believe Ballard signed guys like Stewart, Davis and Franklin because those guys were getting offers that the Colts had to meet or exceed.   And the Colts are seriously concerned about stopping the run.

 

And I think our resources should have been focused in a different direction entirely. I think we should have been thinking about upgrading from Franklin, not trying to retain him. That might be an unpopular opinion; I stand by it.

 

Quote

The odd thing to me is this…. For years you’ve been among the leaders telling posters here Ballard will make his moves in the 2nd week.   Now you appear to flip sides and are among those complaining about the moves he’s made the first 3 days, even though he’s done more this year than any another first week of FA that Ballard has had. 

 

Then you've completely missed my point, and I honestly don't understand how, because I think I've been very clear this week, and my entire time on this site. I don't care about when the Colts make FA moves, nor am I placated by moves that don't line up with the direction in which I think the team should be moving. I have not flipped sides, and I think that calling my criticism "complaining" is a gross mischaracterization, and somewhat disingenuous. I should not be lumped in with people whose sole mission on this site is to attack the front office; I deserve more credit than that. And I don't think that people need to freak out when I disagree with what the team has done. My thinking on team decisions -- whether I agree or not -- is always genuine and sincere. 

 

My criticism is simple: I think the Colts have a deficiency at pass rush, and pass coverage, and to improve in those areas, we need to add better pass rushers, and players who are better in coverage. Committing resources to players who are not good pass rushers and not good in coverage is not what I think the Colts should have done this offseason. I would have been just fine if the Colts didn't sign anyone in the first wave of free agency. At least the $84m we committed to players that don't help us defend the pass better would still be available for other areas of the roster.

 

Quote

To be clear….  I think a lot of this is Ballard-fatigue.  Years of making the same arguments over and over again, with not enough to show for it.  I get it.  But I’m on record as saying I think Ballard’s seat is hotter than some think it is.  If things don’t get better soon, I can see Irsay throwing a fit like he did when he fired Frank.  Not saying this season, but sooner than some think.   I hope things will be better for all when we see how FA and the draft plays out.  I’m hopeful there will be better days ahead. 

 

Maybe, but I don't think so. What's changed is that we now have the HC and QB (presumably), and the runway should be clear for us to build a roster that can compete deep into the playoffs. I had a sliver of hope that Ballard and Co. would at least slightly adjust the roster building strategy, stop committing as much to positions/roles that I don't think are high value, and start addressing more directly positions/roles that I think can raise the ceiling for this team.

 

Outside of that difference in viewpoint, I don't think I have Ballard fatigue. I like Ballard. I just disagree with his value on these players/roles as it relates to where the roster is right now. And I fully acknowledge that there are plenty of remaining opportunities to improve the pass rush and pass coverage this offseason. I'm not going crazy, I'm not calling Ballard a fool, I don't think he should be fired (yet). I just don't think paying these particular players was the right decision.

 

Long reply, that shouldn't be a surprise. Hopefully I've clarified my viewpoint. If not, I don't know what else I can say about it.

[Restinpeacesweetchloe]

Almost forgot Flacco has a little history with Steichen.

[Restinpeacesweetchloe]

 

[Restinpeacesweetchloe]

 

[richard pallo]

33 minutes ago, 1959Colts said:

 

As for my opinion of the signings so far...

Although Pittman's was huge money, I guess we had to pay him, since he is important for the team to succeed going forward. Loved the Tyquan Lewis signing (as I thought he was one of our best players last year).

I'm ok with Stewart, Moore and Sanchez as well (three quality players) 

Like that we got Raekwon Davis, since the Tevan Bryan experiment failed, we needed to find another big body for up front, and by signing Davis we do not have to use draft choices at DT position

I can understand why Ballard brought back Genard Avery, since he was signed last year as a pass rusher, and then got injured in training camp, missed whole year on IR. So I see giving him another shot this year.

Have to admit, I do not like the Ronnie Harrison (felt we can do better) and Joe Flacco (too old and immobile) signings.

 

Now going forward...

I hope we can sign a FA CB, then we wont have to use our draft choices on CB position.

We really need to find two safeties, either in FA or draft. I do not believe Thomas or Cross are NFL starting material. 

WR and Edge Pass Rusher and LB seem to me to be high priority for early round draft.

I would cut Mo Ally Cox, and think we are ok at TE (with Granson, Ogletree, Mallory and Woods) but if Bowers should drop to 15? Then they would have to give him consideration.

Could use additional depth at RB, OL, and maybe a rookie QB

 

My biggest worry with Ballard, is he does not fill enough of these spots and fails to close the gap within our own division.

Right now, I would think most of the "talking heads" media would predict our division as:

(1) Houston

(2) Jacksonville

(3) Indy

(4) Tennessee (with some maybe putting Tenn ahead of us)

 

The FO has to find  a way for us to win the division, or at least make wild card playoffs, or else I would consider the 2024 season a failure.

 

 

 

I don’t mind the Harrison signing.  I was actually surprised how well he played last year after the position switch.  So bringing him back on a cheap contract is fine with me.  I’m okay rolling with Cross at SS as long as we have an experienced FS to play alongside and teach him.  Ballard traded up to get him and he’s still very young and has shown he can play.  He makes wrong decisions sometimes and an experienced veteran alongside can help him.   I like the Flacco signing.  An adult accomplished veteran in the room is perfect fo AR.  Minschew served us well last year but he is not your average run of the mill duck if you know what I mean.  I hope he does well with his new team.  Fortunately, as always, Ballard didn’t overpay in the first wave of FA.  There is plenty of time to get a quality corner and safety to get upgrades there.  We also did not lose one significant player to FA like the other teams did in our division.  For me it’s way too early to rank them.  Two days into the new year is too early for me.  So far I’m happy and expecting some significant additions down the road to fortify the roster.

[throwing BBZ]

1 hour ago, MikeCurtis said:

An additional note

 

Richard Sherman was a ZONE CB that was one of the best ever. He was feared in the league.

 

He was a FIFTH round draft pick

 

He was 6' 3" with long arms, and you would expect him to run a 4.3 forty..... right ??????

 

NOPE.....  he logged a 4.56 40 time.

 

ZONE CB play does NOT need to be 4'3 40

 

 

Who knows what the Colts will do......  I dont

 

But I think we keep thinking that we need a 1st round pick on a man to man CB

 

A man to man CB (Unless we are going to start playing hybrid defenses) Is completely wasted in this defense

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 So having a corner you can leave on an island most of the game is a waste.

Nuts! Stephen Gilmore anyone. How awful it would be to consistently have a safety that could roam much of the game.

 And all teams attempt to mix their coverages many times a game. Is that hybrid?

  Sherman did that how many years ago, and when CB's were allowed to be more physical? Sherman had an all-time great free safety that ran in the 4.3s to cover his you know what. Their defense was stacked with superior talent at all three levels. MAnd Sherman was a mental Giant. This is a nearly irrelevant example. 

[ADnum1]

15 hours ago, 1959Colts said:

Well. I was just saying, I would have liked for Sam to have gotten a chance. And if he stunk, then go with the rookie QB, or vice versa. The Flacco signing is the same thing again. Like Minshew was.

I agree and said this as well.

 

Lets go with a rookie sort of like finding our Brock Purdy.

 

Lets take a look at Joe Milton (from Tennessee) in the 5th to play the 3rd string.

 

If AR misses a few games, put Milton in and see what he looks like.

 

In fact move Flacco to 3rd string so he can "mentor" AR.  The advantage of minshew is that he knew Shane's offense.  Flacco doesn't have that advantage.

[RollerColt]

 

It's been a long free agency week. Feels like we've been doing this for 23 days.

[MikeCurtis]

6 minutes ago, throwing BBZ said:

 

 So having a corner you can leave on an island most of the game is a waste.

Nuts! Stephen Gilmore anyone. How awful it would be to consistently have a safety that could roam much of the game.

 And all teams attempt to mix their coverages many times a game. Is that hybrid?

  Sherman did that how many years ago, and when CB's were allowed to be more physical? Sherman had an all-time great free safety that ran in the 4.3s to cover his you know what. Their defense was stacked with superior talent at all three levels. MAnd Sherman was a mental Giant. This is a nearly irrelevant example.      
 

it is in THIS defense

 

because we run zone almost exclusively. 
 

If they do get a man to man CB then I hope we change the defense from vanilla

[Restinpeacesweetchloe]

 

[cbear]

7 hours ago, DoubleE Colt said:

Is the depth we've added better than the depth last year? And young guys having another year doesn't necessarily equate to improving a team. Kind of feel were in the treading water phase

We sign a couple splash players but in order to do so, we weaken other areas by not resigning our good players doesn't improve us imo.  

[Shive]

I'm entertaining the idea of just signing Fuller instead of trading for Sneed. Sneed is 2 years younger, but Fuller has been the better player. Fuller graded out as PFF's #6 CB last season (on a bad defense) and Sneed didn't even make the top 20.

 

With Sneed, I think recency bias is playing a part in that he was ok all season then played great in the postseason. Was that a statistical oddity and you get an average CB at top CB money + draft capital to acquire? Or does he continue to trend upwards?

[dw49]

39 minutes ago, Superman said:

 

I guess you missed the whole point, then. I think the Colts main shortcomings on defense are related to pass rush and pass coverage. And the reason I'm not enthused about adding Davis is because he does not help in either of those areas.

 

I say 'I don't like the signing because he doesn't help the pass rush.' You say 'why would he help the pass rush, he's 325 pounds?' .... That's the point. I think we need to improve the pass rush and pass defense, and we spent $84m on three defensive front players that don't move the needle in those areas.

 

 

This argument is overstated, IMO. We went 4-2 in those six weeks without Stewart, and then we 2-3 in the final five after he came back. Yes, he helps the run defense, and yes run defense is important. But I don't think we need to spend $39m on a NT to be good against the run. There are a lot of options between Grover Stewart and Taven Bryan. It's not 'either spend $39m on Stewart, or be stuck with Bryan.' 

 

 

So if my problem with the Davis signing is resource allocation, and Partridge has no impact on resource allocation, then why did you bring him up in the first place?

Do you think I don't like the Davis signing because I think Davis is a bad player? It feels like you're trying to help me understand that the new DL coach will help get the most out of him, and that makes me think you don't understand my point at all. If I need a shovel and you bring me a rake, it doesn't matter how good the rake is. Shovel = pass defense. Rake = run defense.

 

 

Maybe this is the disconnect. I hope Partridge is the best DL coach of all time. I'm more reserved in my optimism than you are. And no matter how good he is, we still need better pass rush talent. No one is turning a middling group of linemen into a fearsome pass rush unit without a serious talent upgrade, not even the Rock Star.

 

 

And I think our resources should have been focused in a different direction entirely. I think we should have been thinking about upgrading from Franklin, not trying to retain him. That might be an unpopular opinion; I stand by it.

 

 

Then you've completely missed my point, and I honestly don't understand how, because I think I've been very clear this week, and my entire time on this site. I don't care about when the Colts make FA moves, nor am I placated by moves that don't line up with the direction in which I think the team should be moving. I have not flipped sides, and I think that calling my criticism "complaining" is a gross mischaracterization, and somewhat disingenuous. I should not be lumped in with people whose sole mission on this site is to attack the front office; I deserve more credit than that. And I don't think that people need to freak out when I disagree with what the team has done. My thinking on team decisions -- whether I agree or not -- is always genuine and sincere. 

 

My criticism is simple: I think the Colts have a deficiency at pass rush, and pass coverage, and to improve in those areas, we need to add better pass rushers, and players who are better in coverage. Committing resources to players who are not good pass rushers and not good in coverage is not what I think the Colts should have done this offseason. I would have been just fine if the Colts didn't sign anyone in the first wave of free agency. At least the $84m we committed to players that don't help us defend the pass better would still be available for other areas of the roster.

 

 

Maybe, but I don't think so. What's changed is that we now have the HC and QB (presumably), and the runway should be clear for us to build a roster that can compete deep into the playoffs. I had a sliver of hope that Ballard and Co. would at least slightly adjust the roster building strategy, stop committing as much to positions/roles that I don't think are high value, and start addressing more directly positions/roles that I think can raise the ceiling for this team.

 

Outside of that difference in viewpoint, I don't think I have Ballard fatigue. I like Ballard. I just disagree with his value on these players/roles as it relates to where the roster is right now. And I fully acknowledge that there are plenty of remaining opportunities to improve the pass rush and pass coverage this offseason. I'm not going crazy, I'm not calling Ballard a fool, I don't think he should be fired (yet). I just don't think paying these particular players was the right decision.

 

Long reply, that shouldn't be a surprise. Hopefully I've clarified my viewpoint. If not, I don't know what else I can say about it.

 

Davis is basically a 1 year deal for 5.1 mill. It covers a glaring hole in the run defense when and if Grover is not on the field. It's really not 14 mill on a back up interior lineman. I understand your point but I think you are overestimating the cap allocation spent here. He's tried to provide depth with 5th and 6th rounders and really has wiffed badly . This draft is said to be really weak in rounds 4 through 7. So Ballard spent 5 mill to be on the safe side and filled a hole. 

[richard pallo]

3 minutes ago, Restinpeacesweetchloe said:

 

After Zaire’s tweet I think there is a good chance we are pursuing him.

[RollerColt]

1 minute ago, Shive said:

I'm entertaining the idea of just signing Fuller instead of trading for Sneed. Sneed is 2 years younger, but Fuller has been the better player. Fuller graded out as PFF's #6 CB last season (on a bad defense) and Sneed didn't even make the top 20.

 

With Sneed, I think recency bias is playing a part in that he was ok all season then played great in the postseason. Was that a statistical oddity and you get an average CB at top CB money + draft capital to acquire? Or does he continue to trend upwards?

I would be okay with either to be honest. 

[DoubleE Colt]

6 minutes ago, cbear said:

We sign a couple splash players but in order to do so, we weaken other areas by not resigning our good players doesn't improve us imo.  

That's true......but at some point being a GM you surely have to take some risks with players that will push us forward rather than maintaining the status quo......which is middle of the road currently. But I appreciate there are still opportunities to do this as it stands......I'm just not confident we will.

[jvan1973]

3 minutes ago, richard pallo said:

After Zaire’s tweet I think there is a good chance we are pursuing him.

I don't think Ballard is leaking info about potential interest in FAs

[Superman]

4 hours ago, Nevbot said:

I think a lot of people are discounting what the Indianapolis Colts inherently are as a franchise- something that we can't change and it's an inevitable reality- we are a small market franchise who is subject to the exact same salary cap rules and competitive landscape as the other 31 teams.  It might be unfair, but it is the reality that we have to face.  Things to consider:

 

-We don't have a Peyton Manning or Luck anymore.  The QB isn't drawing high value free agents to Indianapolis over more attractive offers. 

 

I don't see how this is relevant, because the criticism is not 'we should be signing top value free agents.' 

 

But I wanted to respond to this part because the Colts have almost never used the QB to draw free agents. Outside of 2015 when Andre Johnson and Frank Gore wanted to come here -- and they weren't high value guys, they were older vets chasing a ring, and we see how that worked out -- what free agents decided to come to the Colts because of the QB? 

 

And in general, the first consideration for any free agent-- especially a top tier guy -- is money. The second consideration can be a variety of things, depending on the player, but it's almost always a very distant second to the money. 

 

Even the state tax thing is overblown, IMO. You would think every big free agent would land in Florida or Texas if that was a major consideration. Robert Hunt had no problem going from the Dolphins to the Panthers, and it's because they offered him $20m/year. Indiana has lower state tax than North Carolina, I think the Colts would have been strongly considered if they made a similar offer. Sheldon Rankins went from Houston (no state tax) to Cincy (higher state tax than Indy), another small market franchise. 

 

I think sometimes these factors are on a list that is important to certain players. But I don't think it's important enough to be a significant part of the conversation. If a small market team in a state with income tax makes a competitive offer, they have a strong chance of landing a good player. And if that player decides he'd rather be in LA or NY or Miami or Vegas or Dallas, then you just move on. But I think in general, the Colts are not entering those discussions to begin with, because they are not and never have been interested in the top tier of free agency. And for the most part, I agree with that approach. It's a tool, but good teams aren't built through free agency.

[chad72]

9 minutes ago, Shive said:

I'm entertaining the idea of just signing Fuller instead of trading for Sneed. Sneed is 2 years younger, but Fuller has been the better player. Fuller graded out as PFF's #6 CB last season (on a bad defense) and Sneed didn't even make the top 20.

 

With Sneed, I think recency bias is playing a part in that he was ok all season then played great in the postseason. Was that a statistical oddity and you get an average CB at top CB money + draft capital to acquire? Or does he continue to trend upwards?

 

No it is not recency bias, it is the quality of opposition Sneed has gone against. PFF probably dings him for penalties but for Spags, it is cost of doing business.

 

While you might be able to ding Sneed for all the penalties (17, per PFF), he is as physical as any corner in the NFL, and the results speak for themselves. The 26-year-old corner silences opponents. He's allowed 5-plus catches and 50-plus yards in a game just twice in the 2023 season, per Next Gen Stats, and he's given up ZERO touchdowns in 462 coverage snaps. His -29.7 target EPA is third-best among all CBs in 2023. His play is not just Pro Bowl-worthy -- it's All-Pro quality.

 

The upside is tremendous, as the fourth-year corner has locked up numerous top wide receivers. Justin Jefferson, Tyreek Hill, Davante Adams, JaMarr Chase and more can all attest to that. Sneed hasn't given up a single touchdown in coverage in the 2023 season and boasts an impressive 56.2 passer rating when targeted.

[Shive]

With Davis, I know he's been primarily a run stuffer with little pass rush production, but Lance Zerlein's comp for him as a prospect was Buckner. Not that that's what we're getting, but there's obviously some tools there. Sometimes a change of scenery and scheme can make all the difference.

 

I'm optimistic, but don't have any expectations beyond DT depth that can rotate in and keep our starters fresh, while giving us less drop-off in talent than we got with Bryant.

 

Our biggest pass rush issue last season seemed to be coverage based, so hopefully we're able to still address it before and possibly in the draft.

[GoColts8818]

4 minutes ago, jvan1973 said:

I don't think Ballard is leaking info about potential interest in FAs

I also don’t think Ballard is taking time out of his day to discuss personal decisions with Franklin.  Franklin is just responding to rumors or what he wants like the rest of us.

[Shive]

8 minutes ago, chad72 said:

 

No it is not recency bias, it is the quality of opposition Sneed has gone against. PFF probably dings him for penalties but for Spags, it is cost of doing business.

 

While you might be able to ding Sneed for all the penalties (17, per PFF), he is as physical as any corner in the NFL, and the results speak for themselves. The 26-year-old corner silences opponents. He's allowed 5-plus catches and 50-plus yards in a game just twice in the 2023 season, per Next Gen Stats, and he's given up ZERO touchdowns in 462 coverage snaps. His -29.7 target EPA is third-best among all CBs in 2023. His play is not just Pro Bowl-worthy -- it's All-Pro quality.

 

The upside is tremendous, as the fourth-year corner has locked up numerous top wide receivers. Justin Jefferson, Tyreek Hill, Davante Adams, JaMarr Chase and more can all attest to that. Sneed hasn't given up a single touchdown in coverage in the 2023 season and boasts an impressive 56.2 passer rating when targeted.

Touche

 

I stand corrected and I appreciate the context. I still wouldn't mind Fuller, but I'm back on the Sneed hype train.

[Hoose]

54 minutes ago, Superman said:

 

I guess you missed the whole point, then. I think the Colts main shortcomings on defense are related to pass rush and pass coverage. And the reason I'm not enthused about adding Davis is because he does not help in either of those areas.

 

I say 'I don't like the signing because he doesn't help the pass rush.' You say 'why would he help the pass rush, he's 325 pounds?' .... That's the point. I think we need to improve the pass rush and pass defense, and we spent $84m on three defensive front players that don't move the needle in those areas.

 

 

This argument is overstated, IMO. We went 4-2 in those six weeks without Stewart, and then we 2-3 in the final five after he came back. Yes, he helps the run defense, and yes run defense is important. But I don't think we need to spend $39m on a NT to be good against the run. There are a lot of options between Grover Stewart and Taven Bryan. It's not 'either spend $39m on Stewart, or be stuck with Bryan.' 

 

 

So if my problem with the Davis signing is resource allocation, and Partridge has no impact on resource allocation, then why did you bring him up in the first place?

Do you think I don't like the Davis signing because I think Davis is a bad player? It feels like you're trying to help me understand that the new DL coach will help get the most out of him, and that makes me think you don't understand my point at all. If I need a shovel and you bring me a rake, it doesn't matter how good the rake is. Shovel = pass defense. Rake = run defense.

 

 

Maybe this is the disconnect. I hope Partridge is the best DL coach of all time. I'm more reserved in my optimism than you are. And no matter how good he is, we still need better pass rush talent. No one is turning a middling group of linemen into a fearsome pass rush unit without a serious talent upgrade, not even the Rock Star.

 

 

And I think our resources should have been focused in a different direction entirely. I think we should have been thinking about upgrading from Franklin, not trying to retain him. That might be an unpopular opinion; I stand by it.

 

 

Then you've completely missed my point, and I honestly don't understand how, because I think I've been very clear this week, and my entire time on this site. I don't care about when the Colts make FA moves, nor am I placated by moves that don't line up with the direction in which I think the team should be moving. I have not flipped sides, and I think that calling my criticism "complaining" is a gross mischaracterization, and somewhat disingenuous. I should not be lumped in with people whose sole mission on this site is to attack the front office; I deserve more credit than that. And I don't think that people need to freak out when I disagree with what the team has done. My thinking on team decisions -- whether I agree or not -- is always genuine and sincere. 

 

My criticism is simple: I think the Colts have a deficiency at pass rush, and pass coverage, and to improve in those areas, we need to add better pass rushers, and players who are better in coverage. Committing resources to players who are not good pass rushers and not good in coverage is not what I think the Colts should have done this offseason. I would have been just fine if the Colts didn't sign anyone in the first wave of free agency. At least the $84m we committed to players that don't help us defend the pass better would still be available for other areas of the roster.

 

 

Maybe, but I don't think so. What's changed is that we now have the HC and QB (presumably), and the runway should be clear for us to build a roster that can compete deep into the playoffs. I had a sliver of hope that Ballard and Co. would at least slightly adjust the roster building strategy, stop committing as much to positions/roles that I don't think are high value, and start addressing more directly positions/roles that I think can raise the ceiling for this team.

 

Outside of that difference in viewpoint, I don't think I have Ballard fatigue. I like Ballard. I just disagree with his value on these players/roles as it relates to where the roster is right now. And I fully acknowledge that there are plenty of remaining opportunities to improve the pass rush and pass coverage this offseason. I'm not going crazy, I'm not calling Ballard a fool, I don't think he should be fired (yet). I just don't think paying these particular players was the right decision.

 

Long reply, that shouldn't be a surprise. Hopefully I've clarified my viewpoint. If not, I don't know what else I can say about it.

Well said. I agree that the pass rush and d-backs have to improve. I still have hope for a difference making FS in free agency. There’s a few out there that can help. I’m discouraged about the failure to improve the pass rush but a better secondary might loosen the reins on the blitz, and that would improve things. 
 

So I’m still hopeful. Appreciate the dialogue between you and NCF. 

[chad72]

3 minutes ago, Shive said:

Touche

 

I stand corrected and I appreciate the context. I still wouldn't mind Fuller, but I'm back on the Sneed hype train.

 

If they are going for him, I am all behind Ballard for doing that. If they go with Fuller, I'd get behind him too. Doing something to improve the secondary will always be appreciated by Colts fans.

 

Maybe a few drinks on St. Patrick's Day might help everyone, including Ballard and folks.  

[Superman]

22 minutes ago, Shive said:

I'm entertaining the idea of just signing Fuller instead of trading for Sneed. Sneed is 2 years younger, but Fuller has been the better player. Fuller graded out as PFF's #6 CB last season (on a bad defense) and Sneed didn't even make the top 20.

 

With Sneed, I think recency bias is playing a part in that he was ok all season then played great in the postseason. Was that a statistical oddity and you get an average CB at top CB money + draft capital to acquire? Or does he continue to trend upwards?

 

Kendall Fuller: 16 games played, 1,020 defensive snaps, 627 coverage snaps, 73 targets, 49 catches allowed (67.1%), 10.0 yards/catch, 6 TDs allowed, 2 INTs, 5 PBUs, passer rating allowed 101.9, 2 penalties, 1 penalty accepted, 5.1% missed tackle rate.

 

L'Jarius Sneed: 17 games played, 989 defensive snaps, 600 coverage snaps, 81 targets, 42 catches allowed (51.9%), 9.7 yards/catch, 0 TDs allowed, 2 INTs, 10 PBUs, passer rating allowed 55.9, 17 penalties, 6 penalties accepted, 13.3% missed tackle rate.

 

I think Sneed had a great year, and then was lights out in the playoffs. I don't think it's just recency bias, and I think he's much better than average. Maybe a little overhyped, but not to a significant degree.