POLL: fire ballard?

[Superman]

3 minutes ago, stitches said:

Yah, I corrected the above and it was in 2023 for the HC position, but still... as a defensive coach, Martindale would have the biggest say and possibly the biggest disagreements with Ballard precisely on the side of the ball he has expertise in. At least that's my assumption. Of course, I could be wrong here and we will never know. I don't even know what would be big enough disagreement that Martindale would even mention it later after not getting the job.

 

IDK, your viewpoint is definitely legitimate. I just never understood Wink's candidacy. Ballard doesn't like 3-4 defense, he made that clear. Wink is a 3-4 guy, and even though there's a lot of nickel now, there are still different responsibilities and different linemen, even in sub packages. 

 

So you're presumably interested in this HC candidate because of the success he's had running his defense, but you're going to consider hiring him even though you have different defensive philosophies? Okay, fine. But you want him to change his approach, which is presumably the reason you're interested in the first place? That seems crazy to me. I just don't get why they would be interested in him, and interview him twice, if they weren't open to his defensive scheme.

 

Maybe Wink just said that because it sounded better than 'they decided they liked the other guy more than me.' Maybe he didn't feel like complaining about how hard it is for defensive guys to get HC jobs. 

[stitches]

19 minutes ago, Superman said:

 

IDK, your viewpoint is definitely legitimate. I just never understood Wink's candidacy. Ballard doesn't like 3-4 defense, he made that clear. Wink is a 3-4 guy, and even though there's a lot of nickel now, there are still different responsibilities and different linemen, even in sub packages. 

 

So you're presumably interested in this HC candidate because of the success he's had running his defense, but you're going to consider hiring him even though you have different defensive philosophies? Okay, fine. But you want him to change his approach, which is presumably the reason you're interested in the first place? That seems crazy to me. I just don't get why they would be interested in him, and interview him twice, if they weren't open to his defensive scheme.

 

Maybe Wink just said that because it sounded better than 'they decided they liked the other guy more than me.' Maybe he didn't feel like complaining about how hard it is for defensive guys to get HC jobs. 

Maybe they felt he was more of the "leader of men" type of candidate and wanted him to be that rather than wanting his specific defensive scheme. And maybe he thought of himself as a great defensive coach and even them asking if he'd be willing to change his defense ( maybe even hire someone below him to be directly responsible for that) felt wrong to him. Wrong enough to mention it in an interview

[ColtAndOrioles]

8 hours ago, KB said:

I'd say Ballard normal issue with FA is usually just the big names. The bargain bin/no name free agents have done great for us. Those bargain bin free agents were honestly the missing ingredient from this offseason.

Have they really though?   Almost every gm signs a guy or 3 cheaply during the off season that starts and gets some action and people say "wow, that was a good signing".

 

But as I said, almost all GMs do that.  The difference is signing difference makers.  Ballard doesn't do that.  Ever. 

[ColtAndOrioles]

6 hours ago, Thunderbolt said:

I totally agree, Ballard needs to go, he's destroyed this team. No progression in 7 years, only two playoffs to show for it. He's quoted saying, he's not changing his approach, and if he get's fired so be it.. Irsay honor that quote. Give him his pink slip as in yesterday.

100%.  If the CEO of a company provided no growth, whether that be to the stockholders or on the bottom line accounting wise, after 8 years?  He would be fired.  In fact he would have been fired after year 3 or 4.

 

Luck gave him an excuse and that has kept his job safe for the past 4 years.  But he has proven to me that he has no ability to build a SB winner.  He is a .500/average GM.  And he is fine with that.  He collects a nice paycheck and gets told by the Indy media and a lot of message board posters how great he is.

 

I honestly think if he came from an organization like the TB Bucs?  Instead of the Chiefs?  He would have been fired years ago.  But the mystique of the KC Chiefs gives him credibility. 

[ColtAndOrioles]

5 hours ago, Moosejawcolt said:

I like Steichen and he seems like a very intelligent man. However, he has strike one. His retention of Gus confounded me and it made no sense.  Steichen has to take responsibility for the defenses performance the last 2 games. If he would have cut ties with Bradley last year, we could have  started to construct the defense starting with the draft.  Most likely Bradley will be gone at the end of this year. We have just added more players in this draft and free agency that fit this scheme. It now puts us another year behind in terms of building this defense. I would love to add a coach like Martindale. I actually believe he could save this defense and maybe institute a 3-4. I think Latu and Paye could play linebacker in his scheme. Would need a whole retooling of  the corner back room, but I dont think the shift to his defense would need for a lot of change.

The issue I have with SS so far is this.  When he was brought in I thought we would have more of an Andy Reid/Mike McDaniel head coach on offense.   Lots of motion.  Configurations.  Formations. Etc.  Interesting stuff.  New stuff. 

We have seen nothing of that.

 

And remember how all we heard all off season was how dangerous the AR/JT combo would be with the RPO's.  

 

We have seen NOTHING of the kind.  So far we have run a VERY vanilla and boring offense. I don't see any sort of a innovation at all. It really reminds me of a Reich offense.  Who was also supposed to be an O guru like SS.  Until he wasn't. 

 

Part of it may be because they don't want AR hurt again.  But wow is the offensive game plan terrible. 

[Moosejawcolt]

50 minutes ago, ColtAndOrioles said:

The issue I have with SS so far is this.  When he was brought in I thought we would have more of an Andy Reid/Mike McDaniel head coach on offense.   Lots of motion.  Configurations.  Formations. Etc.  Interesting stuff.  New stuff. 

We have seen nothing of that.

 

And remember how all we heard all off season was how dangerous the AR/JT combo would be with the RPO's.  

 

We have seen NOTHING of the kind.  So far we have run a VERY vanilla and boring offense. I don't see any sort of a innovation at all. It really reminds me of a Reich offense.  Who was also supposed to be an O guru like SS.  Until he wasn't. 

 

Part of it may be because they don't want AR hurt again.  But wow is the offensive game plan terrible. 

I think u have to remember that Richardson has played like what 19 games in college and the NFL. I think u have to take baby steps. We don't know what the plan is but I do trust SS in that respect.  I think where I challenge him is on being a head coach and not just a coordinator masking as a head coach. Make the tough decisions and don't always play with analytics. 

[AKB]

43 minutes ago, Moosejawcolt said:

I think u have to remember that Richardson has played like what 19 games in college and the NFL. I think u have to take baby steps. We don't know what the plan is but I do trust SS in that respect.  I think where I challenge him is on being a head coach and not just a coordinator masking as a head coach. Make the tough decisions and don't always play with analytics. 

good to see your name on the board again

[#12.]

3 hours ago, ColtAndOrioles said:

 

 

I honestly think if he came from an organization like the TB Bucs?  Instead of the Chiefs?  He would have been fired years ago.  But the mystique of the KC Chiefs gives him credibility. 

 

I'm not sure about that.  When Ballard arrived, the Chiefs had no mystique.  They hadn't won a Super Bowl in 50 years and more often than not choked in the playoffs, like against us a number of times.

 

Four reasons why Ballard was supported longer than another GM with a similar record might have been:

 

1.  The Luck situation.  No explanation needed.

2. He wasn't Grigson.  For years, many had the attitude that anything was better than Grigson.

3. People like Ballard.  Not everyone does, but generally people do.  As a person, I'll take him over Polian, for sure.

4.  The Jeff Saturday freak show.  Even some of Ballard's biggest critics on this forum looked at that situation and said, give me Ballard every day of the week over Irsay, Saturday and this insanity.  

 

 

[Superman]

4 hours ago, stitches said:

Maybe they felt he was more of the "leader of men" type of candidate and wanted him to be that rather than wanting his specific defensive scheme. And maybe he thought of himself as a great defensive coach and even them asking if he'd be willing to change his defense ( maybe even hire someone below him to be directly responsible for that) felt wrong to him. Wrong enough to mention it in an interview

 

Yeah, maybe keeping Bradley was a condition, although again, I think that's crazy. Maybe having a separate defensive play caller. Or maybe he just made it up.

 

I don't think Wink has this reputation as a leader of men, and I'm not sure what attracted the Colts to him in the first place. He wasn't on anyone's radar before 2022, and now he's a college coordinator. Again, it's one of the candidates that made little sense to me, for several reasons. And he got two interviews...

[Moosejawcolt]

1 hour ago, Superman said:

 

Yeah, maybe keeping Bradley was a condition, although again, I think that's crazy. Maybe having a separate defensive play caller. Or maybe he just made it up.

 

I don't think Wink has this reputation as a leader of men, and I'm not sure what attracted the Colts to him in the first place. He wasn't on anyone's radar before 2022, and now he's a college coordinator. Again, it's one of the candidates that made little sense to me, for several reasons. And he got two interviews...

Yeah and Belichick can't get a job in the NFL. Not a lot of things make sense in the NFL.

[Defjamz26]

10 hours ago, Superman said:

What's more concerning to me is that we seem to have one glaring issue after another. It feels like we don't have enough fingers to plug the holes in the dam. It also feels like there's a general lack of urgency among the coaches and players; from the opening plays on Sunday, it seemed like the team was unprepared and unengaged. To me, these are much bigger issues than whether we're good enough in the secondary (and my underlying belief about the defense is that Gus Bradley is the main problem, no matter who we have at corner or safety). 

The constant glaring holes is coming from this conservative team building approach that you mentioned. Basically anything that isn’t fixed in the draft is left as is and then that’s when the “we like our guys” gets rolled out.

 

The lethargic effort they are putting out also is coming from the camps. Not bringing in vets also leads to complacency.  Also doesn’t help that underperforming players are rarely cut, traded, or benched. Leonard and Hines are the rare exceptions. The players have zero fear of any repercussions for poor play, because there’s never been any to speak of. People really underestimate how important it is to have constant competition 24/7. Pagano always use to say that Man sharpens man like iron sharpens iron. 
 

I mean you just re-signed every core player so these big contracts. They know they’re not going anywhere.

 

While I agree that Bradley is a big key in all of this, I really think a lot of boils down to Ballard and his roster construction method. On top of all the things mentioned, the other issue I’m finding with Ballard is that he’s too much of a Glass half full type of guy. He always seems to think that the team is better than what we saw, and that players are better than what they are.

 

[OLD FAN MAN]

ballard should have given ar more help and put a talented team around him. ar has the whole game on his shoulders with too much just average talent around him. I hope this dosent get ar hurt again or destroy his confidence

[shasta519]

18 hours ago, Moosejawcolt said:

The argument goes back and forth whether it is a talent issue or coaching with regards to the lack of success of this defense. I say it is both and will not get much better. I think Bradley's reputation has taken a huge hit. I truly believe that he has little faith in the linebackers, safeties, and corners ability to cover. Even in obvious scenarios where he should be playing 5 yards off, he plays 15. If I were him, I would do this. I would be ultra aggressive from here on out. Give  the media and fans what they want. Abandon the conservative approach and let it rip. I bet u this. If he took that approach, we would be saying, "Oh my God, the secondary  and  lienbackers can't cover at all". I would for one would love to see it lol. Teams are not even testing the secondary as Moses is parting the sea for the opposing rbs.

 

 

 

Beyond DeFo and Shaq in his prime, I think there has been a lot of overrating of Colts' defensive players. 

 

Kenny Moore is the best example. Bryce Young made a lot of people forget how bad he was in 2022. But it wasn't difficult to predict that he could struggle this year. He's nearly 30 now...and can't cover or tackle. And is limited to playing near the LOS. And he's signed through 2026.

 

Blackmon has struggled with injuries his whole career and ended up on IR last year. Now he's hurt. I was fine with bringing him back on a cheap deal, but not to be the second-best player in the secondary. Now, he's hurt with the same shoulder than landed him on IR back in January.

 

Zaire Franklin is a great story...a STer-turned starting MLB. But he has always been limited as a player. But because he makes a lot of tkls, so it goes unnoticed. But now it appears he's not really able to do that. He's "only" 28, but got a 3-year extension a year early, for some strange reason, that keeps him here through 2027 (when he will be 31).

 

Grover will turn 31 this year. He was suspended for 6 games last year. He's been a good player, but he's also supposed to be the lynchpin of the run defense, which is currently historically bad. And he's signed through 2027.

 

Some of this was fool's gold IMO, but it was still a big risk to not only run it back, but to also commit a few more years to this defense.

 

Age-based regression or injuries can ruin seasons. And a good amount of this defense have been in the league since Luck was here. But it's also been an issue of talent as well, along with coaching. All of it just coming together at the wrong time.

[CoachLite]

I'm not sure firing Ballard will help. The Colts will just hire another guy with the same misguided beliefs, and nothing will change.

Ballard needs to learn to challenge his own belief system, and learn from his mistakes. The ego it takes to be a good GM, makes most GMs mediocre without the ability to challenge their beliefs.

 

"This is the way we've always done it" is not a good reason to continue doing it.

[Superman]

37 minutes ago, CoachLite said:

I'm not sure firing Ballard will help. The Colts will just hire another guy with the same misguided beliefs, and nothing will change.

Ballard needs to learn to challenge his own belief system, and learn from his mistakes. The ego it takes to be a good GM, makes most GMs mediocre without the ability to challenge their beliefs.

 

"This is the way we've always done it" is not a good reason to continue doing it.

 

I can only think of one GM in recent history who has changed his method of team building, Les Snead. And he changed when he won the power struggle with Jeff Fisher, and then hired a cutting edge young guy to be HC. It's like the shackles were taken off. 

 

I'm not holding my breath waiting for Ballard to suddenly change his ways. For Ballard to have success, he'll have to nail the draft multiple years in a row, Richardson will have to be a star, and we'll need high level coaching across the board. 

[Mitch Connors]

On 9/17/2024 at 9:20 AM, RollerColt said:

Let's all just give up and burn everything down each year. 

Or? Build a quality team that can help a rookie QB. 

[RollerColt]

1 minute ago, Mitch Connors said:

Or? Build a quality team that can help a rookie QB. 

I’d much rather do that. Agreed 10,000%. 

[Moosejawcolt]

4 hours ago, shasta519 said:

 

Beyond DeFo and Shaq in his prime, I think there has been a lot of overrating of Colts' defensive players. 

 

Kenny Moore is the best example. Bryce Young made a lot of people forget how bad he was in 2022. But it wasn't difficult to predict that he could struggle this year. He's nearly 30 now...and can't cover or tackle. And is limited to playing near the LOS. And he's signed through 2026.

 

Blackmon has struggled with injuries his whole career and ended up on IR last year. Now he's hurt. I was fine with bringing him back on a cheap deal, but not to be the second-best player in the secondary. Now, he's hurt with the same shoulder than landed him on IR back in January.

 

Zaire Franklin is a great story...a STer-turned starting MLB. But he has always been limited as a player. But because he makes a lot of tkls, so it goes unnoticed. But now it appears he's not really able to do that. He's "only" 28, but got a 3-year extension a year early, for some strange reason, that keeps him here through 2027 (when he will be 31).

 

Grover will turn 31 this year. He was suspended for 6 games last year. He's been a good player, but he's also supposed to be the lynchpin of the run defense, which is currently historically bad. And he's signed through 2027.

 

Some of this was fool's gold IMO, but it was still a big risk to not only run it back, but to also commit a few more years to this defense.

 

Age-based regression or injuries can ruin seasons. And a good amount of this defense have been in the league since Luck was here. But it's also been an issue of talent as well, along with coaching. All of it just coming together at the wrong time.

This D will be a total rebuild after this year. U think it is bad now. Just wait till our best players are one year older and near the end. I also don't see any youth that are promising. Itw actually quite a mess

[Moosejawcolt]

4 hours ago, CoachLite said:

I'm not sure firing Ballard will help. The Colts will just hire another guy with the same misguided beliefs, and nothing will change.

Ballard needs to learn to challenge his own belief system, and learn from his mistakes. The ego it takes to be a good GM, makes most GMs mediocre without the ability to challenge their beliefs.

 

"This is the way we've always done it" is not a good reason to continue doing it.

So we have to wait for Ballard to grow? He's had 8  years, and he is still stunted.

[CoachLite]

18 minutes ago, Moosejawcolt said:

So we have to wait for Ballard to grow? He's had 8  years, and he is still stunted.

I guess so.

4 hours ago, Superman said:

 

I can only think of one GM in recent history who has changed his method of team building, Les Snead. And he changed when he won the power struggle with Jeff Fisher, and then hired a cutting edge young guy to be HC. It's like the shackles were taken off. 

 

I'm not holding my breath waiting for Ballard to suddenly change his ways. For Ballard to have success, he'll have to nail the draft multiple years in a row, Richardson will have to be a star, and we'll need high level coaching across the board. 

I never said it was going to be easy ...

[GwinnettColt]

16 hours ago, Moosejawcolt said:

Yeah and Belichick can't get a job in the NFL. Not a lot of things make sense in the NFL.

 

I had a passing thought and I found it funny and unrealistic.   Would it not be funny if Belichick somehow wound up here as GM/coach like he did in NE and won a couple of Super Bowls?  The man we Colts fans hated for nearly two decades.  

 

I think the same sentiments were present when Brady was looking for another team. 

[GwinnettColt]

I don't see Irsay doing anything with Ballard yet.  I think he will wait and see how Richardson works out.  Due to AR's injury last year, this is sort of his rookie year.   If AR doesn't work, I'm not sure what else Ballard can do at that point.   From my understanding and I may be wrong, but I thought it was Irsay who wanted Richardson but Ballard would take the heat for it if he doesn't work out.  

[ColtStrong2013]

1 hour ago, Moosejawcolt said:

So we have to wait for Ballard to grow? He's had 8  years, and he is still stunted.

 

Eh, he's made a big effort to address premium positions and has attempted both a big free agency signing and a move up in the draft this offseason. I think he's grown some. And he's no doubt feeling the heat on what needs to be done. I think he's probably scratching his head at why the run defense is so poor like the rest of us. And if he's given another year, it will no doubt be a focal point. I just hope AR grows and the offense comes together.