Scouting Dept

[mirobi48]

Out of the 32 teams 

Where does the Colts scouting dept rank?  8 my guess

 

And who is the top 5 scouting dept in the NFL

KC

Houston

Baltimore

Rams

SF

[RollerColt]

No particular order top 10:

 

Baltimore

Kansas City

San Francisco

Philadelphia 

Green Bay

Buffalo 

Miami

Pittsburgh

Los Angeles

Seattle

[Superman]

The Texans have one good season and all of a sudden they're a top five scouting department... 

[indyagent17]

Just because some teams sign new players in the off-season, does it mean they’re gonna have a successful season. Houston looks strong with their additions, but we have to wait and see if they play well together. But I will say Ballard needs to really step up his game. I know because we lost Richardson early. We had a very average season however, nobody knows how good he will be or how durable he will be. as a Colts fan I’m always thinking positive things in the new season.

[LJpalmbeacher2]

Maybe the best individual scout is RAS.......Ballard loves him. 

[Moosejawcolt]

On 3/26/2024 at 6:57 PM, mirobi48 said:

Out of the 32 teams 

Where does the Colts scouting dept rank?  8 my guess

 

And who is the top 5 scouting dept in the NFL

KC

Houston

Baltimore

Rams

SF

Easy. Look at their wins and loss record over the last 8 yeas. Look at how many of their original picks have been signed to 2nd contracts.  How many have become legit play maker ?  Of course you can consider  other factors, but based just on that factors, you are looking at an average scouting department. Take the drafting/scouting on the offensive side of the ball  out of  the equation because many people on this board attribute a offenses success  on the  qb. Now if you look just at the defense and how it has improved over 8 years. I am confident in saying that the scouting and/or drafting on that side of the ball is below average.

[Moosejawcolt]

On 3/27/2024 at 9:56 AM, Superman said:

The Texans have one good season and all of a sudden they're a top five scouting department... 

Do i think they are top 5? No as it is to early, however one can look at their roster of young players and they appear to have some play makers moving forward. QB, DE, Safety, WR and I still think Stingley is going to be good if he can stay heathy. It could all fall apart as expectations will be high this year and they will not be taken lightly by the competition. Now when i look at the Colts roster, I see one  young playmaker and that is our RB. After 8 years of drafting and heading into this season, we are banking on a young  QB to lift the offense up and everyone will finally reach their potential. I am  big Richardson fan but it is about 4 years now that we are banking on young players to improve. It was  the Oline,, WR, TE Dline and last year we banked on the secondary taking some strides.  Every year it has been the same  and after every off season, Ballard comes out and says he got it wrong and should have supported the coaches more.  

[CoachLite]

Like any company, it's hard to evaluate the contributions of one person, or even one department, due to the internal power structures. We don't really know how the scouting department performs in the context of the Colt's winning and losing record. I suspect, however, that there are certain people in the organization like Wally from Dilbert - people that at best don't do anything and at worst hinder the performance of competent people. All you can say is that certain people, like Grigson and Reich IMO,  Luck's untimely retirement, and Jim Irsay's understandable histrionics, damaged the Colts in ways that can't be ignored. A large number of people, perhaps like our scouting department, didn't inform the others in the front office (at least loud enough) to see the effects it was having on the Colts place in the greater football community. It's not just losing a locker room, it is losing faith in the whole organization.

 

I've seen this kind of problem ruin companies.

[NewColtsFan]

1 hour ago, CoachLite said:

Like any company, it's hard to evaluate the contributions of one person, or even one department, due to the internal power structures. We don't really know how the scouting department performs in the context of the Colt's winning and losing record. I suspect, however, that there are certain people in the organization like Wally from Dilbert - people that at best don't do anything and at worst hinder the performance of competent people. All you can say is that certain people, like Grigson and Reich IMO,  Luck's untimely retirement, and Jim Irsay's understandable histrionics, damaged the Colts in ways that can't be ignored. A large number of people, perhaps like our scouting department, didn't inform the others in the front office (at least loud enough) to see the effects it was having on the Colts place in the greater football community. It's not just losing a locker room, it is losing faith in the whole organization.

 

I've seen this kind of problem ruin companies.

If the scouting department had some bad people — and that’s a very BIG IF by the way — wouldn’t you think those people are long, LONG gone?   They shouldn’t be hard to identify.  Any decent GM should be able to spot the weakest link in a department full of people.  

[CoachLite]

32 minutes ago, NewColtsFan said:

If the scouting department had some bad people — and that’s a very BIG IF by the way — wouldn’t you think those people are long, LONG gone?   They shouldn’t be hard to identify.  Any decent GM should be able to spot the weakest link in a department full of people.  

Nope. Some employees are like cockroaches. They are survivors, not performers. People tend to stay with the devil they know. That goes for departments more than just the Scouting Department.

[CoachLite]

4 minutes ago, CoachLite said:

Nope. Some employees are like cockroaches. They are survivors, not performers. People tend to stay with the devil they know. That goes for departments more than just the Scouting Department.

The one obvious department I had great hopes for, and was totally disappointed, was the Analytics Team. Analytics should not be confused with magic or fortune telling, but if you don't know the difference, they look the same.

[NewColtsFan]

14 minutes ago, CoachLite said:

Nope. Some employees are like cockroaches. They are survivors, not performers. People tend to stay with the devil they know. That goes for departments more than just the Scouting Department.

That maybe true in the real business world, I don’t think it’s true in an NFL franchise.   

[ColtV]

2 hours ago, CoachLite said:

Like any company, it's hard to evaluate the contributions of one person, or even one department, due to the internal power structures. We don't really know how the scouting department performs in the context of the Colt's winning and losing record. I suspect, however, that there are certain people in the organization like Wally from Dilbert - people that at best don't do anything and at worst hinder the performance of competent people. All you can say is that certain people, like Grigson and Reich IMO,  Luck's untimely retirement, and Jim Irsay's understandable histrionics, damaged the Colts in ways that can't be ignored. A large number of people, perhaps like our scouting department, didn't inform the others in the front office (at least loud enough) to see the effects it was having on the Colts place in the greater football community. It's not just losing a locker room, it is losing faith in the whole organization.

 

I've seen this kind of problem ruin companies.

The good news is that even if the team has a Wally, they can still produce the Gruntmaster 6000

[throwing BBZ]

51 minutes ago, NewColtsFan said:

If the scouting department had some bad people — and that’s a very BIG IF by the way — wouldn’t you think those people are long, LONG gone?   They shouldn’t be hard to identify.  Any decent GM should be able to spot the weakest link in a department full of people.  

 

 The scouts/Dodds are given Ballard's well defined parameters on what he is looking for. Not sure how you assign the blame for any of those 160 or so on our draft board that have been assessed by so many that are in our process.

 After this long questioning Ballard's grading philosophy certainly is on the table. 

[NewColtsFan]

2 minutes ago, throwing BBZ said:

 

 The scouts/Dodds are given Ballard's well defined parameters on what he is looking for. Not sure how you assign the blame for any of those 160 or so on our draft board that have been assessed by so many that are in our process.

 After this long questioning Ballard's grading philosophy certainly is on the table. 

BBZ….    I’m not sure we’re talking about the same thing.  
 

I could be wrong, but I think @CoachLite is talking about some key administrative type who might be working on something like the chart for when to go or not go for a first down when it’s 4th down.    I believe he thinks there is someone who is bad at their job within the Colts front office.   I disagree.   And that’s where we are.   I don’t think he’s talking about how the Colts set up their Big Board.  
 

If he’d like to clarify, he’s got the opportunity to right here.  

[GoColts8818]

On 3/27/2024 at 11:56 AM, Superman said:

The Texans have one good season and all of a sudden they're a top five scouting department... 

proof people get caught in the what have you done lately narrative.  Not saying the Texans don’t deserve credit, they do, but yeah that seems a bit over rated to me based on one season.

[Yoshinator]

5 hours ago, GoColts8818 said:

proof people get caught in the what have you done lately narrative.  Not saying the Texans don’t deserve credit, they do, but yeah that seems a bit over rated to me based on one season.

It's not based on one season. He became the GM of the Texans in 2021. He's done a good job since he took over and built the Texans well. He's done it for 3 going on 4 years now (which is half the time Ballard has been in charge).

 

[GoColts8818]

3 hours ago, Yoshinator said:

It's not based on one season. He became the GM of the Texans in 2021. He's done a good job since he took over and built the Texans well. He's done it for 3 going on 4 years now (which is half the time Ballard has been in charge).

 

The Texans were literally the worst team in the league before last year if it hadn’t been for a Hail Mary vs the Colts.

 

Like Superman said and I agree with he had some major hits last year and it vaulted them way up the charts.  

 

[Yoshinator]

2 hours ago, GoColts8818 said:

The Texans were literally the worst team in the league before last year if it hadn’t been for a Hail Mary vs the Colts.

 

Like Superman said and I agree with he had some major hits last year and it vaulted them way up the charts.  

He's had major hits every year though. It's just more obvious since he took Stroud and Anderson at two and three. Again, it bothers me that people are saying it's "just luck" that the Panthers didn't take Stroud. That generally happens every year that good or great players fall past other players that aren't as good as that position. 

 

They were the 2nd worst team because of the QB position. However, they fixed that quickly in half the time it took Ballard to fix it for us (and we don't know for sure if Richardson is the guy yet where it's almost guaranteed at this point Stroud is the guy).

 

Caserio is just as good as Ballard in the draft to boot and he's aggressive in FA as well to build around Stroud. This is what a lot of the Texans talk is about from people (including me).

 

[wig]

On 4/5/2024 at 10:29 AM, Moosejawcolt said:

Do i think they are top 5? No as it is to early, however one can look at their roster of young players and they appear to have some play makers moving forward. QB, DE, Safety, WR and I still think Stingley is going to be good if he can stay heathy. It could all fall apart as expectations will be high this year and they will not be taken lightly by the competition. Now when i look at the Colts roster, I see one  young playmaker and that is our RB. After 8 years of drafting and heading into this season, we are banking on a young  QB to lift the offense up and everyone will finally reach their potential. I am  big Richardson fan but it is about 4 years now that we are banking on young players to improve. It was  the Oline,, WR, TE Dline and last year we banked on the secondary taking some strides.  Every year it has been the same  and after every off season, Ballard comes out and says he got it wrong and should have supported the coaches more.  

 

Having top 5 picks helps

[CoachLite]

20 hours ago, NewColtsFan said:

BBZ….    I’m not sure we’re talking about the same thing.  
 

I could be wrong, but I think @CoachLite is talking about some key administrative type who might be working on something like the chart for when to go or not go for a first down when it’s 4th down.    I believe he thinks there is someone who is bad at their job within the Colts front office.   I disagree.   And that’s where we are.   I don’t think he’s talking about how the Colts set up their Big Board.  
 

If he’d like to clarify, he’s got the opportunity to right here.  

My point is not to blame the Scouting Department, directly. IMO, blame is a worthless effort. My point is that we, as fans, are not privy to how the decisions are being made - and that's OK. My concern is that many decisions are team (group) decisions where one group (the owner, this or that coach, some specialty department, the GM) holds more 'political' sway over the others, and that group isn't performing up to potential, and within the Colts there is no way to evaluate which section is the problem. This only leads to finger-pointing, and "fire the SOB". Furthermore, I'm concerned that many decisions are made 'by-the-seat-of-their-pants' (ad hoc). That's a killer because there is no objective way of evaluating performance, let alone objectively evaluating the evaluation process itself (the term I've used in the past is a rubric). For those who've had some experience in these matters, they will see why I'm suspect of the way analytics are used within the Colts, and in football in general. Seems to me they were sick the days they taught that in school, or they failed the test on that subject.

[CoachLite]

14 hours ago, Yoshinator said:

He's had major hits every year though. It's just more obvious since he took Stroud and Anderson at two and three. Again, it bothers me that people are saying it's "just luck" that the Panthers didn't take Stroud. That generally happens every year that good or great players fall past other players that aren't as good as that position. 

 

They were the 2nd worst team because of the QB position. However, they fixed that quickly in half the time it took Ballard to fix it for us (and we don't know for sure if Richardson is the guy yet where it's almost guaranteed at this point Stroud is the guy).

 

Caserio is just as good as Ballard in the draft to boot and he's aggressive in FA as well to build around Stroud. This is what a lot of the Texans talk is about from people (including me).

 

How can you measure the effects of "great timing" and "good luck"? Frankly, the game of football, the game of business and the game of life is far more complex and complicated than most people know or will ever believe. For example, you cannot optimize any system where humans are part of that system (and Colts are a system component in the system of NFL football) by optimizing each part of the team. One weak part of that system is called the constraint. If you fix that component, the constraint 'moves'. Some people use big honkin' computers to model this 'theory of constraints' to make boat-loads of money (or win football trophies).

 

The rest are simply lambs being led to slaughter.

[Solid84]

On 3/27/2024 at 4:56 PM, Superman said:

The Texans have one good season and all of a sudden they're a top five scouting department... 

Not really very different from Ballard & co. though?

 

The Colts 2017 draft was pretty forgetable, but then they had the 2018 and all of a sudden they were top 5?

 

They’ve steadily dropped down the ranks since. 

[CoachLite]

25 minutes ago, CoachLite said:

My point is not to blame the Scouting Department, directly. IMO, blame is a worthless effort. My point is that we, as fans, are not privy to how the decisions are being made - and that's OK. My concern is that many decisions are team (group) decisions where one group (the owner, this or that coach, some specialty department, the GM) holds more 'political' sway over the others, and that group isn't performing up to potential, and within the Colts there is no way to evaluate which section is the problem. This only leads to finger-pointing, and "fire the SOB". Furthermore, I'm concerned that many decisions are made 'by-the-seat-of-their-pants' (ad hoc). That's a killer because there is no objective way of evaluating performance, let alone objectively evaluating the evaluation process itself (the term I've used in the past is a rubric). For those who've had some experience in these matters, they will see why I'm suspect of the way analytics are used within the Colts, and in football in general. Seems to me they were sick the days they taught that in school, or they failed the test on that subject.

To the point @NewColtsFan made, there is no chart that can tell you whether to go for it on fourth down. All that chart tells you are the probabilities averaged over many games where the conditions that permitted an outcome (the context) are 'forgotten'. Only an * (pardon the judgmental term) would solely rely on a chart for making decisions. The outcome of any probable event is only realized in the current context. A good coach pays far more attention to the contexts at that point in the game than what some piece of paper he's holding in front of him says.

 

That's what concerns me about so-called 'artificial intelligence' too, and I work in AI everyday. It's not AI, it's people who use (or abuse) it.

[NewColtsFan]

1 hour ago, CoachLite said:

To the point @NewColtsFan made, there is no chart that can tell you whether to go for it on fourth down. All that chart tells you are the probabilities averaged over many games where the conditions that permitted an outcome (the context) are 'forgotten'. Only an * (pardon the judgmental term) would solely rely on a chart for making decisions. The outcome of any probable event is only realized in the current context. A good coach pays far more attention to the contexts at that point in the game than what some piece of paper he's holding in front of him says.

 

That's what concerns me about so-called 'artificial intelligence' too, and I work in AI everyday. It's not AI, it's people who use (or abuse) it.

And yet all 32 NFL head coaches hold their own chart every game.  To be clear, all 32 charts are different as each team has their own proprietary data.   But they do have a chart.  
 

How much each coach weighs or values the chart is unknown.   How much other factors are considered is also unknown, though it stands to reason that the context of the game would be heavily factored.  That’s a fair point. 

[jvan1973]

5 hours ago, CoachLite said:

To the point @NewColtsFan made, there is no chart that can tell you whether to go for it on fourth down. All that chart tells you are the probabilities averaged over many games where the conditions that permitted an outcome (the context) are 'forgotten'. Only an * (pardon the judgmental term) would solely rely on a chart for making decisions. The outcome of any probable event is only realized in the current context. A good coach pays far more attention to the contexts at that point in the game than what some piece of paper he's holding in front of him says.

 

That's what concerns me about so-called 'artificial intelligence' too, and I work in AI everyday. It's not AI, it's people who use (or abuse) it.

Analytics are used by every team, in every sport.  It's used in almost all large corporations.   It doesn't mean every call is determined by it.    I'm not sure how AI plays into Analytics.   2 completely different things. 

 

Also,  if you work with AI everyday,  why would you call it so- called "artificial  intelligence "

[Superman]

13 hours ago, Solid84 said:

Not really very different from Ballard & co. though?

 

The Colts 2017 draft was pretty forgetable, but then they had the 2018 and all of a sudden they were top 5?

 

They’ve steadily dropped down the ranks since. 

 

I don't understand the point of the comparison. I think it's premature to pump up the Texans staff, especially given how forgettable everything they've done has been prior to 2023.

[Superman]

On 4/5/2024 at 10:29 AM, Moosejawcolt said:

Do i think they are top 5? No as it is to early

 

That's all I'm saying.

[GoColts8818]

14 hours ago, Solid84 said:

Not really very different from Ballard & co. though?

 

The Colts 2017 draft was pretty forgetable, but then they had the 2018 and all of a sudden they were top 5?

 

They’ve steadily dropped down the ranks since. 

Saying the Texans vaulted up the rankings after one season has nothing to do with the Colts and where they stand is no way meant to say the Colts should be top five.  This seems to pushing for an argument that doesn’t need to happen because the other side wasn’t saying that about the Colts.

[Solid84]

38 minutes ago, Superman said:

 

I don't understand the point of the comparison. I think it's premature to pump up the Texans staff, especially given how forgettable everything they've done has been prior to 2023.

I agree it is, I just think people (not saying you) have a different have a different set of rules for the Colts than other teams and what’s accepted for them is frowned upon when it goes for other teams. 

[Solid84]

4 minutes ago, GoColts8818 said:

Saying the Texans vaulted up the rankings after one season has nothing to do with the Colts and where they stand is no way meant to say the Colts should be top five.  This seems to pushing for an argument that doesn’t need to happen because the other side wasn’t saying that about the Colts.

I’m not saying the Texans have a top scouting department. I’m calling out people for not having a problem crowning the Colts after one good draft then turning around and saying it’s premature to do the same to the Texans. 

[CoachLite]

16 hours ago, jvan1973 said:

Analytics are used by every team, in every sport.  It's used in almost all large corporations.   It doesn't mean every call is determined by it.    I'm not sure how AI plays into Analytics.   2 completely different things. 

 

Also,  if you work with AI everyday,  why would you call it so- called "artificial  intelligence "

I say "so-called artificial intelligence" because there is only intelligence or not. Generative and transformers AI used in LLMs are not intelligent, they only act like an intelligent agent, sometimes. It's the difference between a surgeon and an actor who plays a surgeon on TV.

[Superman]

10 hours ago, Solid84 said:

I agree it is, I just think people (not saying you) have a different have a different set of rules for the Colts than other teams and what’s accepted for them is frowned upon when it goes for other teams. 

 

Feels like a strawman, to be honest. I don't think anyone is frowning upon the Texans, including Colts fans. They're getting plenty of credit, and it's pretty well deserved.

[2006Coltsbestever]

10 hours ago, Solid84 said:

I’m not saying the Texans have a top scouting department. I’m calling out people for not having a problem crowning the Colts after one good draft then turning around and saying it’s premature to do the same to the Texans. 

I seriously doubt as of now that you will find more than 5 people that post in here out of the usual 50 that doesn't think Houston will win the Division and had a better offseason than the Colts had. I am picking Houston as of now. I haven't seen anyone crowing the Colts regarding anything. I have seen a bunch of people saying they aren't sure that AR will be good or can even last a season, or Ballard should be fired. Not sure what you are reading?

[Moosejawcolt]

On 4/6/2024 at 10:54 AM, NewColtsFan said:

That maybe true in the real business world, I don’t think it’s true in an NFL franchise.   

The non hire of Bill in Atlanta would seem to suggest other wise and even Vrabel. A lot of people did not want him coming into the building as they knew he was going to clean house.  They were whispering in the owners ear and they got their way. So, they don't hire Bill at say 15 million a year but go ahead and sign Cousins at over 40 mill a year who has really done nothing in the NFL but continue to set the bar for NFL qbs in terms of guaranteed money lol. I think the NFL is an old boys club and there are many dysfunctional NFL franchises. Look at Carolina who promote Morgan when he was part of the problem . You can probably count of 2 hands the number of teams who are really driven to win a championship. The rest are owned by a billionaire who really has little interest in the teams success on the field and more on the bottom line!!

[NewColtsFan]

1 hour ago, Moosejawcolt said:

The non hire of Bill in Atlanta would seem to suggest other wise and even Vrabel. A lot of people did not want him coming into the building as they knew he was going to clean house.  They were whispering in the owners ear and they got their way. So, they don't hire Bill at say 15 million a year but go ahead and sign Cousins at over 40 mill a year who has really done nothing in the NFL but continue to set the bar for NFL qbs in terms of guaranteed money lol. I think the NFL is an old boys club and there are many dysfunctional NFL franchises. Look at Carolina who promote Morgan when he was part of the problem . You can probably count of 2 hands the number of teams who are really driven to win a championship. The rest are owned by a billionaire who really has little interest in the teams success on the field and more on the bottom line!!

Moose?   I’m not trying to yank your chain here, but I don’t think you were following the conversation I was having with Coach Lite.  
 

He was saying there’s an administrative aide who works inside the Colts front office who is terrible at his job and has been hurting the Colts for years, if not longer.  I disagreed.   He was saying there’s a person like that dug in to his job most everywhere in business.  I was saying likely not in a football franchise.  And we disagreed. 
 

So he and I were talking about a much different thing at a much lower level.  Your response had nothing to do with my conversation with Coach Lite.  
 

Hope this explanation makes sense to you. 

[Moosejawcolt]

38 minutes ago, NewColtsFan said:

Moose?   I’m not trying to yank your chain here, but I don’t think you were following the conversation I was having with Coach Lite.  
 

He was saying there’s an administrative aide who works inside the Colts front office who is terrible at his job and has been hurting the Colts for years, if not longer.  I disagreed.   He was saying there’s a person like that dug in to his job most everywhere in business.  I was saying likely not in a football franchise.  And we disagreed. 
 

So he and I were talking about a much different thing at a much lower level.  Your response had nothing to do with my conversation with Coach Lite.  
 

Hope this explanation makes sense to you. 

Gotcha

[DattMavis]

4 hours ago, 2006Coltsbestever said:

I seriously doubt as of now that you will find more than 5 people that post in here out of the usual 50 that doesn't think Houston will win the Division and had a better offseason than the Colts had. I am picking Houston as of now. I haven't seen anyone crowing the Colts regarding anything. I have seen a bunch of people saying they aren't sure that AR will be good or can even last a season, or Ballard should be fired. Not sure what you are reading?

If AR is healthy, I like us over Houston. CJ looked good when he was given forever to stand in the pocket and looked bad under pressure. If Gus will call up some blitzes against him, we can win.

 

Regarding the Texans scouting department convo, 2023 alone doesn't make their group good. 2018 alone doesn't make Ballard's group good. 2012 alone didn't make Grigson's group good.

[2006Coltsbestever]

3 minutes ago, DattMavis said:

If AR is healthy, I like us over Houston. CJ looked good when he was given forever to stand in the pocket and looked bad under pressure. If Gus will call up some blitzes against him, we can win.

 

Regarding the Texans scouting department convo, 2023 alone doesn't make their group good. 2018 alone doesn't make Ballard's group good. 2012 alone didn't make Grigson's group good.

Yeah I was just saying, I don't see many crowning the Colts. If AR has a great season and Stroud has a sophomore slump, sure we could win the division. I am not saying that as of now though.

[masterlock]

The Colts scouting under Ballard has yielded a 54-60-1 record, so I'd put them somewhere in the middle of the pack...unfortunately.