Colts offseason discussion / Ballard Grievances (merge)

[ProblChld32]

52 minutes ago, BlackTiger said:

Blackmon seemed like an obvious re sign to me.  Guess he wanted too much 

I think we know what we get with Julian, my only knock on him is his health. Idk that he’s played an entire season. The kid just gets beat up. With our luck he goes some where else and has his health turned around like Malik Hooker did with the cowboys.

[Solid84]

21 minutes ago, Superman said:

So why do you correlate spending money with winning? The Rams won the SB in the year they spent the least. If you want to say 'being aggressive can be a successful strategy,' I wouldn't necessarily disagree, but I would add that it only works if you have the right QB.

I don’t in a vacuum. But I very much believe you need to use FA to cover your draft misses with good talent. This is especially true for us because Ballard drafts guys who need 2-4 years of development. Ballard essentially uses FA for jags bringing in very few difference makers in FA in his 8 offseasons here. I don’t think any other successful team does that. 
 

Also, whether or not the Rams had their QB they essentially bought their team. I understand there’s a timing thing, but that doesn’t change the fact. But, as I’ve also said a couple of times in this thread alone, I don’t want the Colts to * their cap space away on hyper expensive FAs, but I do want them to supplement their draft hits with good talent from FA. 

[ProblChld32]

I just really wish they go out and get Justin Simmons. This secondary needs a SOLID Vet, that’s exactly what Simmons is. He’s so underrated of s defender. Yes he’s 31 but I’m sure he has enough left in the tank to play atleast 2-3 more seasons. I think under his tutelage Nick Cross could stand to learn a thing or two heck even our entire secondary can. Simmons is that smart of a safety, Ballard please go sign this man.

[richard pallo]

1 hour ago, stitches said:

 

I would rather have Blackmon back actually.  Blackmon is visiting the Bills too. These players are learning what there value is.   Nothing wrong with that.  

[Superman]

8 hours ago, Solid84 said:

Do you think Geno Stone and Frankie Luvu are "bright lights"? I think they are affordable players who would improve this roster in areas of weakness. Same with the other 7 affordable guys I mentioned. The times the McLeod signings work out are so far between it's laughable, but the few who do workout somehow always make people forget the tens of 1 year jags he signs that don't.

 

I think focusing in on specific players misses the point. Stone, Luvu, Huff, whoever... the Colts could have been in play for any of these guys, and got outbid by a million or two, or the player preferred to play in a different city, or has a connection to a position coach, or whatever. Free agency isn't grocery shopping, you can't just put a player in your shopping cart for a fixed price. 

 

For me, the bigger issue is -- and this has been my most used phrase for the last week -- resource allocation. I'm not frustrated because we didn't sign XYZ player in free agency. I think the Colts have doubled down on a roster structure that will struggle against premium competition, specifically by committing more money to defensive players who aren't good pass rushers and aren't good in pass coverage. I would have rather seen the Colts not sign any free agents and hold their cap space in reserve, than continue to pay guys who don't help the pass defense.

 

It's not about whether or not they're spending money. It's about the way they're spending money, and what it indicates about the roster construction this year and moving forward.

[stitches]

6 minutes ago, BlackTiger said:

Keep drafting very young QBs "with potential" and you will never be on the hot seat.

 

Genius plan

IMO this is not a problem whatsoever. In fact... this is what teams should be doing - keep drafting young QB with potential until you hit. 

[Solid84]

24 minutes ago, lester said:

 

Let's play a game. Who said this:

 

“Free agency in and of itself is an overpayment situation. That said, if your own players are quality players and you believe they can help you win then it’s better off to pay them because they’re as good or better as you can find in the market and you know them better than you know a player from another team. You’re paying a premium, but you put it into a player you know and believe in. He has no adjustments coming into your system. It’s pretty seamless. When you have good players, when you’ve drafted well, it follows that the more you can keep the better off you are. That’s the right way to go rather than trying to get someone else’s players.“

Guessing Ballard. Has he had success doing that? If the team has holes and issues in certain areas, how do you improve if all you do is hang on to the guys who are at the center of the issues?

[richard pallo]

1 minute ago, ProblChld32 said:

I just really wish they go out and get Justin Simmons. This secondary needs a SOLID Vet, that’s exactly what Simmons is. He’s so underrated of s defender. Yes he’s 31 but I’m sure he has enough left in the tank to play atleast 2-3 more seasons. I think under his tutelage Nick Cross could stand to learn a thing or two heck even our entire secondary can. Simmons is that smart of a safety, Ballard please go sign this man.

Underrated?  He has been all pro a number of times.  Last year as well.

[Solid84]

1 minute ago, Superman said:

 

I think focusing in on specific players misses the point. Stone, Luvu, Huff, whoever... the Colts could have been in play for any of these guys, and got outbid by a million or two, or the player preferred to play in a different city, or has a connection to a position coach, or whatever. Free agency isn't grocery shopping, you can't just put a player in your shopping cart for a fixed price. 

 

For me, the bigger issue is -- and this has been my most used phrase for the last week -- resource allocation. I'm not frustrated because we didn't sign XYZ player in free agency. I think the Colts have doubled down on a roster structure that will struggle against premium competition, specifically by committing more money to defensive players who aren't good pass rushers and aren't good in pass coverage. I would have rather seen the Colts not sign any free agents and hold their cap space in reserve, than continue to pay guys who don't help the pass defense.

 

It's not about whether or not they're spending money. It's about the way they're spending money, and what it indicates about the roster construction this year and moving forward.

My post was a counter to the “fans want Ballard to bring in super expensive FAs” narrative on here. The point was we pass up good, affordable players every year who could improve this team in areas of need. It wasn’t specifically about those players. 
 

My point was essentially the same - ressource allocation. Instead of re-signing a run-stopper DT, how about getting a guy who could pass rush as well? Instead of extending a run-stopper LB, how about finding a guy who can cover as well? How about plugging the holes at CB and Safety with proper talent instead of the 1 year jags Ballard will likely sign after the draft. These upgrades wouldn’t even have to be super expensive as FA has shown us. 

[John Waylon]

11 minutes ago, #12. said:

 

There's only one way Ballard could survive another Richardson season knockout or a Richardson bust:  they hedge their bets, draft another young QB, and that QB shows quite a bit.  Even a 9-8 or 10-7 repeat of what Minshew did from Flacco probably wouldn't save Ballard.   

 

If Richardson busts, I’ve no interest. None. 0. Less than 0. No matter what pick we end up with and what prospects are available to us at that pick. We could have a 20 year old Peyton Manning available to us and I wouldn’t have any interest in seeing Ballard get a chance to make that pick. 
 

We’ve seen it. We’ve seen every bloody bit of what he’s capable of, and it is not good enough. We've seen that there are multiple facets of his process as a GM that are critically flawed, and that’s just not going to cut it. It hasn’t cut it. I have no interest in this team continuing to swing and miss on him while he swings (or sits by idly,) and misses on improving this team.

 

That is not a recipe for success. 

[Goatface Killah]

51 minutes ago, John Waylon said:

Every year grigson flailed wildly to fix the offensive line his entire tenure. 
 

And still never accomplished that. 
 

Just because you draft a guy ≠ fix. Especially when you have a history of day 1 and 2 whiffs as long as Ballard does. A swing and a miss is a swing and a darn miss no matter how much effort and good intention go into the swing. 
 

Now the misses are starting to pile up, and they’re getting dangerously close to out-weighing the hits. 
 

It’s just more bandaids, now at positions other than QB. There were ways to noticeably improve this defense without breaking the bank in FA, but we’re doubling down and running it back instead. If we sign anyone it’s going to be some mid player on a short, team-friendly deal and our secondary is gonna look like a bunch of jabronis out there this fall. Again. Then we’ll have to sit around in the fall and talk about why the defense hasn’t gotten any better and is the difference keeping us from being a contender. Hell, we still need WRs just two years after “I like the guys we have” and now it’s a problem that’s made its way to the secondary.

If only someone could solve this inescapable mystery of the universe. If only, I say!

 

We've seen the effect, we’ve seen the cause, why people are putting 2 and 2 together and coming up with 5 is beyond explanation at this point. 

 

All Ive heard is that we need to sign all these guys off other bad teams and magically our team will be better. But if they were really difference makers why were, in most cases, their teams worse than ours? 

 

I just think you massively over rate these guys and under rate our own guys. I dont think anything you are suggesting would work. 

[BlackTiger]

13 minutes ago, stitches said:

IMO this is not a problem whatsoever.

That was meant to be joke about Chris Ballard avoiding the hot seat forever by doing that to always buy more time.  Gotta give the new kid a few years, every year

[John Waylon]

Just now, Goatface Killah said:

All Ive heard is that we need to sign all these guys off other bad teams and magically our team will be better. But if they were difference makers why were, in most cases, their teams worse than ours? 

 

I just think you massively over rate these guys and under rate our own guys. I dont think anything you are suggesting would work. 

I saw the work our own guys could do last year. Every awful drive of it. Bend, bend, bend, and then break. 
 

They didn’t cut it. Anyone who didn’t spend last season stuck on the dark side of the moon didn’t need much help to arrive at that conclusion 
 

Putting 0 effort into fixing that doesn’t actually fix it. 

We can’t even bring guys in for a visit and at least pretend to make an effort. 
 

Something about the definition of insanity and doing the same thing over to the same results or something like that…

[Goatface Killah]

4 minutes ago, John Waylon said:

I saw the work our own guys could do last year. Every awful drive of it. Bend, bend, bend, and then break. 
 

They didn’t cut it. Anyone who didn’t spend last season stuck on the dark side of the moon didn’t need much help to arrive at that conclusion 
 

Putting 0 effort into fixing that doesn’t actually fix it. 

We can’t even bring guys in for a visit and at least pretend to make an effort. 
 

Something about the definition of insanity and doing the same thing over to the same results or something like that…

But the team more than doubled its win total last year and didnt do any of the things you suggest to improve the team. So maybe there are better ways to improve the team?

 

So again, I will say that maybe what you are suggesting sounds better than it really is. 

 

You all are so quick to throw in the towel every single year and get frustrated. This is after 1 promising year with a new coaching staff. Good grief man take a pill. 

[BProland85]

25 minutes ago, Dr. T said:

If 2024 is considered year one for Richardson and he continues to improve, Ballard will last another four years at least. But if Richardson is a flop, Ballard will then be a goner much sooner, IMHO.

I think Richardson has to be a franchise QB for him to keep his job if I were the owner. 

[Superman]

2 minutes ago, Solid84 said:

I don’t in a vacuum. But I very much believe you need to use FA to cover your draft misses with good talent. This is especially true for us because Ballard drafts guys who need 2-4 years of development. Ballard essentially uses FA for jags bringing in very few difference makers in FA in his 8 offseasons here. I don’t think any other successful does that. 
 

Also, whether or not the Rams had their QB they essentially bought their team. I understand there’s a timing thing, but that doesn’t change the fact. But, as I’ve also said a couple of times in this thread alone, I don’t want the Colts to * their cap space away on hyper expensive FAs, but I do want them to supplement their draft hits with good talent from FA. 

 

To the bolded, I don't think that's true. They aggressively acquired two or three players, but most of their core was drafted or had been with the team for multiple seasons by 2021 -- Kupp, Donald, Whitworth (2017), Rapp, Higbee, Havenstein. In November 2021, they traded a 2nd and 3rd for Von Miller, paid him $722k for the remainder of the season, let him walk in free agency, and got back a 5th round comp pick. They signed OBJ for $1.25m (prorated) after he was waived by the Browns. 

 

And it didn't matter until they had the QB. For example, they got Ramsey in 2019, but they won the SB two seasons later, after the Stafford trade.

 

I agree that it would be good to supplement the draft in other ways -- trades and free agency. But I think the correlation between winning and spending is overstated, especially after the Rams and Bucs won after being aggressive. And in both cases, they only had major success once they made significant upgrades at QB.

[ProblChld32]

21 minutes ago, richard pallo said:

Underrated?  He has been all pro a number of times.  Last year as well.

He doesn’t receive as much praise as some of the other safeties in the NFL such as a Jamal Adams, a Micah Hyde. 

[Superman]

15 minutes ago, Solid84 said:

My post was a counter to the “fans want Ballard to bring in super expensive FAs” narrative on here. The point was we pass up good, affordable players every year who could improve this team in areas of need. It wasn’t specifically about those players. 
 

My point was essentially the same - ressource allocation. Instead of re-signing a run-stopper DT, how about getting a guy who could pass rush as well? Instead of extending a run-stopper LB, how about finding a guy who can cover as well? How about plugging the holes at CB and Safety with proper talent instead of the 1 year jags Ballard will likely sign after the draft. These upgrades wouldn’t even have to be super expensive as FA has shown us. 

 

Mostly agree. My point was just I think it's a red herring to focus on specific players who signed with other teams. I think the bigger point is that the Colts decided to spend their money to keep their core together, instead of restructuring the roster in a way that IMO better aligns with competing at the highest level.

[BlackTiger]

The Eagles also spent a good bit the year they won the SB.  That team was a wild story, franchise that had never won beat Brady in a SB shootout with Nick foles

[John Waylon]

1 minute ago, Goatface Killah said:

But the team more than doubled its win total last year and didnt do any of the things you suggest to improve the team. So maybe there are better ways to improve the team?

 

So again, I will say that maybe what you are suggesting sounds better than it really is. 

 

You all are so quick to throw in the towel every single year and get frustrated. This is after 1 promising year with a new coaching staff. Good grief man take a pill. 

We won more games last year because we actually had more than a loaf of bread at QB. Matt Ryan showed up with the stink of grizzly death permeating around him, and we finally had a coach who wasn’t a complete and blithering simpleton. 
 

We absolutely did not win any more games because of anything our defense did. 
 

In fact, we probably would have won more games last year if our defense hadn’t sucked on average. Yeah, let’s run that back. 

[ProblChld32]

28 minutes ago, richard pallo said:

I would rather have Blackmon back actually.  Blackmon is visiting the Bills too. These players are learning what there value is.   Nothing wrong with that.  

Your best ability is availability , why bring back someone who can’t stay healthy? I may be in the minority but I actually don’t want to retain Blackmon. He’s a good player when healthy but that’s the thing he isn’t often that. You’re going to shell out 6-8 million a year for a guy you’re possibly going to get MAYBE 10 games out of? 

[GoColts8818]

Just now, ProblChld32 said:

Your best ability is availability , why bring back someone who can’t stay healthy? I may be in the minority but I actually don’t want to retain Blackmon. He’s a good player when healthy but that’s the thing he isn’t often that. You’re going to shell out 6-8 million a year for a guy you’re possibly going to get MAYBE 10 games out of? 

I find it ironic several are complaining Ballard is gambling too much on bringing back his own and needed to get other players while also complaining that Ballard isn’t bringing back Blackmon and Ballard is clearly going to have to get a different player to replace him.  I also know not all the same people are doing both.

[stitches]

10 minutes ago, Superman said:

 

To the bolded, I don't think that's true. They aggressively acquired two or three players, but most of their core was drafted or had been with the team for multiple seasons by 2021 -- Kupp, Donald, Whitworth (2017), Rapp, Higbee, Havenstein. In November 2021, they traded a 2nd and 3rd for Von Miller, paid him $722k for the remainder of the season, let him walk in free agency, and got back a 5th round comp pick. They signed OBJ for $1.25m (prorated) after he was waived by the Browns. 

 

And it didn't matter until they had the QB. For example, they got Ramsey in 2019, but they won the SB two seasons later, after the Stafford trade.

 

I agree that it would be good to supplement the draft in other ways -- trades and free agency. But I think the correlation between winning and spending is overstated, especially after the Rams and Bucs won after being aggressive. And in both cases, they only had major success once they made significant upgrades at QB.

I only have one slight contention here. The SB is the ultimate goal, but arguably becoming a contender in the first place is the more realistic and more achievable end goal. There are a ton of things that need to go your way and becoming a SB champion requires a lot of luck. What doesn't require tons of luck is becoming a legit contending team and the Rams were that even before they got Stafford. They had been hovering around that level for a while before they became champions and even made it to SB LIII with Goff. Of course, not disputing the importance of the QB, but lets not act like getting the QB was what made that team. It was series of moves and acquiring the QB was one of them. 

 

For example, if the Colts were as good as the Rams were in that 3-4 year stretch, I'd be perfectly good with our GM. Now I would still want him to pursue the final piece in a franchise QB if we didn't have it, but that type of a record of legitimate chance to go all the way a few years in a row would buy that GM a lot of leeway from me. 

[Yoshinator]

Just now, BlackTiger said:

The Eagles also spent a good bit the year they won the SB.  That team was a wild story, franchise that had never won beat Brady in a SB shootout with Nick foles

So did the Broncos with Peyton Manning. They spent in FA, and in the four years he was there, they made 2 SBs and won 1. 

 

Spending in FA can pay off big. Teams just generally can't do it when they paid their QB on a 2nd contract. That's why we should spend now and assume AR is that guy, and we can try to win a SB while he's on a rookie contract.

[VikingsFanInChennai]

42 minutes ago, Yoshinator said:

I think a playoff berth saves Ballard for one more year. If we win the division and/or a playoff game or more, it may give him extra rope. If he misses it IMO, he's gone no matter what, even if Richardson gets hurt again (unless Flacco does his magic or something again).

Ballard doesn't seem like his tenure hinges on this year, it definitely looks like as soon as Richardson was drafted, they got few years to prove they're on right track. And, QB injury most of last season has only given him as much time, if not more to get to see Richardson's true potential. I'd not be surprised if Ballard has another 2 or 3 years. 

[Goatface Killah]

Just now, John Waylon said:

We won more games last year because we actually had more than a loaf of bread at QB. Matt Ryan showed up with the stink of grizzly death permeating around him, and we finally had a coach who wasn’t a complete and blithering simpleton. 
 

We absolutely did not win any more games because of anything our defense did. 
 

In fact, we probably would have won more games last year if our defense hadn’t sucked on average. Yeah, let’s run that back. 

Thats not what I said.

 

I said there are other ways to improve the defense other than letting your better players on defense (Moore, Stewart, Franklin) walk, only to replace them with guys who arent any better. Different doesnt mean better. 

[2006Coltsbestever]

- well, you guys ready for the draft. Nothing else is going on  

[GoColts8818]

If Holder is to be believed, and I know some here don’t and that’s fine, he reported Ballard did try to get Hunter and had interest in Sneed dating back to the combine but they lost out on Hunter and decided not to go after Sneed after he was tagged.  After that happened he pivoted to a different plan which was to bring back his own that he wasn’t going to do, particularly Grover and Moore.  So it sounds like Ballard did try to do something different this off-season and it didn’t work out.  Will what he did work?  No idea.  All I can do is watch and see and react based on what I see.  

[GoColts8818]

12 minutes ago, GoColts8818 said:

I find it ironic several are complaining Ballard is gambling too much on bringing back his own and needed to get other players while also complaining that Ballard isn’t bringing back Blackmon and Ballard is clearly going to have to get a different player to replace him.  I also know not all the same people are doing both.

@ProblChld32 that was just building on your point not disagreeing with your post.

[2006Coltsbestever]

Sometimes you get things right and you get things wrong. Nobody is 100% right. Holder may have been right here with the Sneed situation but remember how bad he botched his reporting regarding Taylor. That was a bad look. So, Holder has been wrong many times. He said Taylor didn't want to be here and would never play another game in a Colts uniform. That aged well  .

[Archer]

2 minutes ago, GoColts8818 said:

If Holder is to be believed, and I know some here don’t and that’s fine, he reported Ballard did try to get Hunter and had interest in Sneed dating back to the combine but they lost out on Hunter and decided not to go after Sneed after he was tagged.  After that happened he pivoted to a different plan which was to bring back his own that he wasn’t going to do, particularly Grover and Moore.  So it sounds like Ballard did try to do something different this off-season and it didn’t work out.  Will what he did work?  No idea.  All I can do is watch and see and react based on what I see.  

Who are you referring to when you say "Hunter"?  Is it Refrow, or is there a cb named Hunter that I can't bring to mind?

[Yoshinator]

Just now, Archer said:

Who are you referring to when you say "Hunter"?  Is it Refrow, or is there a cb named Hunter that I can't bring to mind?

Danielle Hunter.

[Archer]

Just now, Yoshinator said:

Danielle Hunter.

Ach!  Of course...thanks.

[GoColts8818]

1 minute ago, Archer said:

Who are you referring to when you say "Hunter"?  Is it Refrow, or is there a cb named Hunter that I can't bring to mind?

Danielle Hunter

[2006Coltsbestever]

Off topic, I don't participate in them but like reading them in here from you guys. How come you guys aren't doing the Gavin Draft? Usually by now you guys have it going (late March or so) and do like 3 or 4 them.

[VikingsFanInChennai]

10 minutes ago, Archer said:

Ach!  Of course...thanks.

You were like a deer Frozen at the sight of a hunter 

[Superman]

4 minutes ago, stitches said:

I only have one slight contention here. The SB is the ultimate goal, but arguably becoming a contender in the first place is the more realistic and more achievable end goal. There are a ton of things that need to go your way and becoming a SB champion requires a lot of luck. What doesn't require tons of luck is becoming a legit contending team and the Rams were that even before they got Stafford. They had been hovering around that level for a while before they became champions and even made it to SB LIII with Goff. Of course, not disputing the importance of the QB, but lets just not act that getting the QB was what made that team. It was series of moves and acquiring the QB was one of them. 

 

I didn't want to distract from the main point, but the other element was getting the HC right. The Rams had Goff as a rookie, he looked awful, they won four games. Then they hire McVay, suddenly Goff looks like an MVP candidate, and they win 11 games. 

 

And then, they got aggressive: traded a 5th for Talib; traded a 1st and 6th for Brandin Cooks and a 4th; signed Suh for one year, $14m. They went to the SB in 2018 and lost.

 

And the following offseason, they got rid of those players. Traded Talib and a 5th to the Dolphins for a 7th; traded Cooks and a 4th to the Texans for a 2nd; and Suh went to the Bucs (after the draft, screwing the Rams out of what could have been a 4th round comp pick). There had been other players along the way -- Dante Fowler, Clay Matthews, etc. This is something that people don't pay attention to with those Rams -- they strategically dipped in and out of some of those bigger contracts, recouping some of their draft capital and freeing up cap space.

 

I'd also push back on the idea that they were a legit contending team prior to 2021. They missed the playoffs in 2019, finished 2nd in the division in 2020 and lost in the divisional round, and then went back to the SB in 2021. They were basically a fringe playoff team those two years before they got Stafford, despite their aggression in other areas. They had laid a foundation as a solid team, but they weren't a legit contender every year.

 

Pushing into that top tier is much harder than becoming a fringe playoff team. And winning the SB is another story. But I don't think that the way a team spends money -- whether free agency, trades, or retaining your own players -- has a meaningful correlation to overall success. What matters is the quality/production of the players on which you spend, which to a certain extent connects to the positions those players play. 

[VikingsFanInChennai]

2 minutes ago, 2006Coltsbestever said:

Off topic, I don't participate in them but like reading them in here from you guys. How come you guys aren't doing the Gavin Draft? Usually by now you guys have it going (late March or so) and do like 3 or 4 them.

Free Agency has just started, let the dust settle so we all get to know Every team's actual major needs, and that would the foundation of every GM's thought process on how they're gonna approach their Mock Draft. I think usually it happens few weeks before the actual draft, so we're right on time, hopefully early April. 

[NewColtsFan]

@Superman

 

 

Question for you.   You explained things very well last night.  But I’d like to ask WHY do the Colts do this?   What benefit do they gain.   I listed all the players that received the standard signing bonus, so why didn’t the Colts do the same with the 4 players I listed who received a 0 SB? 
 

Thanks in advance….

[ProblChld32]

29 minutes ago, GoColts8818 said:

@ProblChld32 that was just building on your point not disagreeing with your post.

Ahhhh ok , makes sense lol thought you were saying I was complaining about Ballard bringing in house guys back haha.