Time to evaluate

[NewColtsFan]

12 minutes ago, ShuteAt168 said:

See, I form my own opinion. You let Irsay form yours (at the time of his dismissal.) That’s sad and really strange. Or in your style, “Dear God.” Were you ever a boss or manager? I’ll bet your employers loved cutting out early knowing ol NCF is OK with mediocrity. Aim higher. It’s not too late. 

Your own opinions are pitiful.  I’d be embarrassed to make the contributions you make.   
 

Your view is that I should be fine with dumping Ballard because lots and lots of posters here want to get rid of them.  I rarely follow the crowd in life and certainly not following the crowd in this community.   
 

I think there is an argument for Ballard.  It’s not hard to make.  And you making fun of deferring to the judgement of the owner, who is the only person who knows the full story, shows how little you know. 
 

You're a fan who likes football.  Nothing wrong with that.   But let’s not pretend you do much more than post Ballard’s record.  That’s your typical contribution.   
 

And as I’ve shared with you in the past, you make lazy arguments.   Arguments that I’d doubt you’d accept from your students.  
 

I’ve reached out publicly and privately.  You’ve rebuffed them all.  So try not to act surprised when we agree on nothing.  

[Superman]

3 hours ago, Defjamz26 said:

I never said it was a minor thing. I definitely understand how a QB retiring after the draft can affect a franchise. What In saying is you can give him grace for 1 maybe two years for that, but after that he was facing not having a franchise QB on the roster, which is a situation that a lot of 1st time GMs hired in the same period. It’s fair to give him a pass, but not the 4 year pass he sometimes gets. Especially when you can argue that there were opportunities as early as 2020 to get another QB. That class had Herbert, Tua, Love, and Hurts (not including Burrow because Bengals were not moving off the pick).

 

I’m not ignoring the context. I definitely understand how a rookie QB (especially one with 13 starts and raw mechanics) can put a cap on the ceiling of a team. But like you said, I’m judging him for the misgivings of how he manages the team before and after the addition of the QB. While patience has to be exercised with Richardson, the same doesn’t hold true for the rest of the roster. There are multiple players and position groups where large amounts of money are being committed for guys who aren’t rookies. Those guys are not performing up to par, and that isn’t because the young QB is learning to play the game. There are also a number of bad players who have no business starting and/or being on the roster. 
 

So I’m not content to give him a pass just because he first had to change plans with the unexpected retirement of an elite QB and now the development of a rookie QB. It is possible to both exercise patience with AR, and be frustrated with the poor roster management that has occurred with Ballard at the helm. The QB situation does not forgive Ben Banogu, Gus Bradley, bargain bin FAs, the TE room, mediocre LBs, Rodney Thomas at FS, etc… they’re unrelated IMO.

 

It’s like having an employee that has their car stolen. You’ll give them a certain amount of grace for maybe coming into work late while they secure another means of transportation, but if their performance at work is poor, and was so before the car incident, you can still hold them accountable for their poor performance, and on top of that the free pass on coming into work late is eventually going to run out too.

 

I don't think anyone should be given a pass. Maybe that's directed at other people, but it drives me crazy. Just to be clear, he should be judged on his work and the results, just like everyone else. 

 

My point is that the 'no accomplishments in eight years' argument implies that the Colts have never had a good roster in eight years. And the 'how long should we give him' argument pretends that the Colts didn't reset in 2023. I don't think Ballard should have 4-5 years of grace, and I don't think acknowledging the reset in 2023 is giving him a pass for another four years.

 

However, I do think it's unlikely that any change is made until after Richardson's third year. 

[stitches]

6 hours ago, Superman said:

 

I don't think anyone should be given a pass. Maybe that's directed at other people, but it drives me crazy. Just to be clear, he should be judged on his work and the results, just like everyone else. 

 

My point is that the 'no accomplishments in eight years' argument implies that the Colts have never had a good roster in eight years. And the 'how long should we give him' argument pretends that the Colts didn't reset in 2023. I don't think Ballard should have 4-5 years of grace, and I don't think acknowledging the reset in 2023 is giving him a pass for another four years.

 

However, I do think it's unlikely that any change is made until after Richardson's third year. 

I'm sorry Superman, but how exactly did we reset in 2023 when we returned like 19-20 out of 22 starters? I just completely disagree with this framing. Yes, we finally brough in a young QB and a new HC in 2023, but the team was largely the same. And in 2024 it was again largely the same. Someone pointed out we still have 16 of the 22 starters from the horrible 2022 season. To me this doesn't even seems like a regular NFL turnover, and we are calling it a reset? 

[Defjamz26]

8 hours ago, Superman said:

 

I don't think anyone should be given a pass. Maybe that's directed at other people, but it drives me crazy. Just to be clear, he should be judged on his work and the results, just like everyone else. 

 

My point is that the 'no accomplishments in eight years' argument implies that the Colts have never had a good roster in eight years. And the 'how long should we give him' argument pretends that the Colts didn't reset in 2023. I don't think Ballard should have 4-5 years of grace, and I don't think acknowledging the reset in 2023 is giving him a pass for another four years.

 

However, I do think it's unlikely that any change is made until after Richardson's third year. 

I think “reset” is the wrong word. It was mostly the same players from 2022. And it’s mostly the same guys (mostly veterans too) this year. A reset would indicate you are going in another direction with the roster entirely. 
 

Drafting a rookie QB shouldn’t warrant an automatic reset anyways though. Especially in the case of the Colts. If they wanted to reset they should have traded guys like Buckner, Moore, Stewart, Franklin, etc… and used the assets to get players to grow with AR. Keeping and extending those players means that you still believe you can win at least double digit games.

[ShuteAt168]

10 hours ago, NewColtsFan said:

Your own opinions are pitiful.  I’d be embarrassed to make the contributions you make.   
 

Your view is that I should be fine with dumping Ballard because lots and lots of posters here want to get rid of them.  I rarely follow the crowd in life and certainly not following the crowd in this community.   
 

I think there is an argument for Ballard.  It’s not hard to make.  And you making fun of deferring to the judgement of the owner, who is the only person who knows the full story, shows how little you know. 
 

You're a fan who likes football.  Nothing wrong with that.   But let’s not pretend you do much more than post Ballard’s record.  That’s your typical contribution.   
 

And as I’ve shared with you in the past, you make lazy arguments.   Arguments that I’d doubt you’d accept from your students.  
 

I’ve reached out publicly and privately.  You’ve rebuffed them all.  So try not to act surprised when we agree on nothing.  

You should be fine w dumping CB because of his track record. Did you support Reich until he was fired? Grigson and Pagano — full support until Irsay canned them? I can’t think of a stance much lazier than saying you’ll support CB up until the moment he gets fired. Very odd. I can’t tell if you really support CB or you’re so committed to this bizarre stance simply because you’ve held it for so long. 

[#12.]

In 8 years of Ballard, this team has only played high-level, playoff football for a very short period of time.  Remember, in 2018, they were bad the first half.  They only looked like a playoff team toward the end.  In 2021, they played high level football for about a month, then choked.  In 2020, there was a little more.  Of course, at the end, they choked vs. the Steelers and almost blew it vs. the Jags.  If you added it up, in 8 years, this team has played high level, playoff football for less than a year.  They have looked like a playoff team for less than a year.  In 8 years, we've only had a handful of exciting, big games, the type of games in the previous 20 years we saw every other week.

[DougDew]

18 hours ago, smittywerb said:

Agreed, but it’s still on the coach to bring that out and that’s the point.  Having a higher floor does make it easier, but the coach is in charge of the progression.  Unless you’re an Andrew luck, or Mahomes, it starts with the coach.  Nix could’ve easily ended up with a team like the panthers and been garbage.  
 

Just to provide a flip side, look at Caleb Williams.  VERY high floor.  At the beginning of the season, betting odds had him pegged as the OROY, especially with the weapons he had.  But since eberflus is his coach, he’s been very inconsistent this year.   
 

It begins with the coach.  

Its the player, because all coach's teach the same stuff.  There isn't some special football knowledge that one coach has over another, especially how often they bounce around different teams.   Its like going to Harvard or Ball St.  Math is math, and its not like the better schools have some secret knowledge that others lack.  Most college players don't even make it to the NFL because of what they lack as players.  High potential players bust a lot, because they can't ever put together the stuff they've been taught.  Bryce Young will probably always suck as a pro, and it has nothing to do with what Frank did or didn't teach him, IMO.  If he succeeds, he deserves the props and not the new HC, JMO.

[richard pallo]

I’m expecting AR to continue to improve as we end the season.  I’m also expecting Shane and Ballard to return.  It makes sense to me to give the three of them one more season together before making any judgments.

[JMichael557]

1 minute ago, DougDew said:

Its the player, because all coach's teach the same stuff.  There isn't some special football knowledge that one coach has over another, especially how often they bounce around different teams.   Its like going to Harvard or Ball St.  Math is math, and its not like the better schools have some secret knowledge that others lack.  Most college players don't even make it to the NFL because of what they lack as players.  High potential players bust a lot, because they can't ever put together the stuff they've been taught.  Bryce Young will probably always suck as a pro, and it had nothing to do with what Frank did or didn't teach him, IMO.

Actually, nothing could be further from the truth. I coached for 15 years and attended many seminars. It was amazing what coaches did not know about coaching.  Some would run offenses incorrectly or not understand how defense worked. On the other hand, all successful coaches who would speak had the same basic quality. Their teams were highly disciplined. Very few penalties, and limited mental mistakes. This was because they knew how to coach these things. Most coaches do not. 

[smittywerb]

46 minutes ago, DougDew said:

Its the player, because all coach's teach the same stuff.  There isn't some special football knowledge that one coach has over another, especially how often they bounce around different teams.   Its like going to Harvard or Ball St.  Math is math, and its not like the better schools have some secret knowledge that others lack.  Most college players don't even make it to the NFL because of what they lack as players.  High potential players bust a lot, because they can't ever put together the stuff they've been taught.  Bryce Young will probably always suck as a pro, and it has nothing to do with what Frank did or didn't teach him, IMO.  If he succeeds, he deserves the props and not the new HC, JMO.

I think we disagree with where the coach plays a part in the players development.  And this is where I say you are incorrect if you think all coaches teach the same thing when it comes to that.  That’s why some coaches are good and some are bad, because they literally are not teaching the same stuff lol.  And I’ll bite, let’s say they do “teach the same stuff”, coaches still have to set the culture, coaches still have to set up the meetings, coaches still have to get the players to go to different camps and freelance specialists to hone their skills and mechanics, etc.  Coaches do a lot more than you think.

 

it took our coach almost 2 years to find out AR wasn’t doing what was needed to be an NFL QB.  You think Sean Payton waiting that long to set AR straight?

[ADnum1]

23 hours ago, Solid84 said:

Speaking of evaluating. This is a play AR gets dinged for by box score scouts:

It's not the first time something like this has happened and it's not the first it's happened with Granson as the target. Goes back to the lack of talent.

I'm going to defend the receiver here.

 

That was a misfire by AR.

 

Hopefully soon AR learns that not every pass has to be a 100mph laser. 

 

Receiver is wide open. Take a little bit off and loft it right out in front of him. Easy catch

[Solid84]

8 minutes ago, ADnum1 said:

I'm going to defend the receiver here.

 

That was a misfire by AR.

 

Hopefully soon AR learns that not every pass has to be a 100mph laser. 

 

Receiver is wide open. Take a little bit off and loft it right out in front of him. Easy catch

This is not a misfire by AR. Granson is wide open and he can see that. There's no excuse for him not to be looking back towards AR.

[ADnum1]

34 minutes ago, Solid84 said:

This is not a misfire by AR. Granson is wide open and he can see that. There's no excuse for him not to be looking back towards AR.

Look at the video again.

 

Granson turns his head for the pass and extends his arms for the catch.

 

If he were not looking back then why would he extend his arms ?

[Superman]

6 hours ago, stitches said:

I'm sorry Superman, but how exactly did we reset in 2023 when we returned like 19-20 out of 22 starters? I just completely disagree with this framing. Yes, we finally brough in a young QB and a new HC in 2023, but the team was largely the same. And in 2024 it was again largely the same. Someone pointed out we still have 16 of the 22 starters from the horrible 2022 season. To me this doesn't even seems like a regular NFL turnover, and we are calling it a reset? 

 

4 hours ago, Defjamz26 said:

I think “reset” is the wrong word. It was mostly the same players from 2022. And it’s mostly the same guys (mostly veterans too) this year. A reset would indicate you are going in another direction with the roster entirely. 
 

Drafting a rookie QB shouldn’t warrant an automatic reset anyways though. Especially in the case of the Colts. If they wanted to reset they should have traded guys like Buckner, Moore, Stewart, Franklin, etc… and used the assets to get players to grow with AR. Keeping and extending those players means that you still believe you can win at least double digit games.

 

From 2019 to 2022, the objective was to try to salvage the window they thought they were in, with veteran QBs. They fired the HC who appeared to be a primary advocate of that strategy, hired a new HC, and decided to draft a QB. I think changing HCs and QB strategy qualifies as a reset. You're both talking about what they've done since then.

 

Either way, I don't want to debate over the use of the word "reset." My point is that they changed strategies, and Irsay decided to keep Ballard, so more time was added to the clock at that point. I'm not defending it or advocating for it, I'm just acknowledging that it's the reality. So arguing about 'how long do we have to give Ballard' is kind of pointless. Irsay is giving him enough time for this new strategy to play out, which is probably at least through 2025.

 

I think 2023 was significant in another way. Rather than extending their players with expiring contracts -- as their pattern had been -- they decided to let the majority of them play out their final year. The only exception was Jonathan Taylor, and that's because he went nuclear. The plan was to evaluate whether this core was good enough to stay together. That core won 9 games with Minshew at QB, which convinced the decision makers that they should keep them together. Like defjamz says, they thought they could still win double digit games. That's not a complete fantasy, despite all the nonsense that's happened so far in 2024.

 

To me, using 2023 to evaluate was a good strategy. Doubling down on this core in 2024 was not a good strategy. Especially on defense. I didn't like it in the offseason, it hasn't worked out since then. And as I stated earlier, it's one of the reasons I'm convinced that our ceiling is limited with Ballard. It speaks to a culture of not aiming high enough. Double digit wins actually shouldn't be the bar. I think we squandered the opportunity to really make something of this reset by reinvesting in this core that's not good enough.

[Solid84]

34 minutes ago, ADnum1 said:

Look at the video again.

 

Granson turns his head for the pass and extends his arms for the catch.

 

If he were not looking back then why would he extend his arms ?

He does, but way too late.

[Superman]

5 minutes ago, Solid84 said:

He does, but way too late.

 

Richardson had time to wait, but I can't blame him for throwing when he did, not with all the pressure he was under during the game. But Granson should have been hot, there was a blitz from his side. I don't know how that's being taught during the week, but typically he'd be looking back a lot sooner when he knows a blitzing backer just ran by him toward the QB. It seems like he and Richardson are never on the same page.

[jemack]

1 hour ago, ADnum1 said:

I'm going to defend the receiver here.

 

That was a misfire by AR.

 

Hopefully soon AR learns that not every pass has to be a 100mph laser. 

 

Receiver is wide open. Take a little bit off and loft it right out in front of him. Easy catch

It could go either way. It could be the pass was off but it could be Granson didn't curl in enough. What was the route suppose to be? Did Granson wait too long to get his head around?

Too many variables to actually know what happened.

[compuls1v3]

On 11/25/2024 at 2:19 PM, Restinpeacesweetchloe said:

Hot take. Linebackers are the weakest part of colts defense 

I don't think that's a hot take.  That's more like a fact.

[NewColtsFan]

3 hours ago, ShuteAt168 said:

You should be fine w dumping CB because of his track record. Did you support Reich until he was fired? Grigson and Pagano — full support until Irsay canned them? I can’t think of a stance much lazier than saying you’ll support CB up until the moment he gets fired. Very odd. I can’t tell if you really support CB or you’re so committed to this bizarre stance simply because you’ve held it for so long. 

The fact that you think it’s a bizarre stance tells me even more about you.  And it’s not good.   Why would it be a bizarre stance?   Because it’s not popular on this website?   Puh-Leeezeez! 
 

Did I support Frank until he was fired?  Yes.   He had a winning record.  Given your obsession with Ballard’s record, I would think you’d understand that.   
 

Did I support Pagano till the end?   Not really.   But Irsay and Ballard telegraphed the end was coming after the 2017 season.   And everyone could see how Ballard staffed the team.  The Colts planned on going roughly 4-12 that year.  It was always a one year plan for Chuck.  A really good and decent man.  
 

Did I support Grigson until the end?   No.  I supported him for his first 4 years.  Then, in his 5th year,  all the ugly stories about him spilled out into public view.  And it was BAD!   His fighting with Pagano.  His bad treatment of Reggie Wayne and Pat McAfee.  On an on.  It was easy to abandon that sinking ship.  I was happy when he was shown the door. 
 

There’s an argument FOR Ballard.  But I’ve played it out for you before and you’ve dismissed it.   So no need to beat that dead horse.   We see the same thing differently.   But typically when the majority of this community goes in one direction I’m often on the other side.   And I’m fine having unpopular opinions. Always have been. 
 

Happy Holidays to you and yours….  

[stitches]

37 minutes ago, Superman said:

 

Richardson had time to wait, but I can't blame him for throwing when he did, not with all the pressure he was under during the game. But Granson should have been hot, there was a blitz from his side. I don't know how that's being taught during the week, but typically he'd be looking back a lot sooner when he knows a blitzing backer just ran by him toward the QB. It seems like he and Richardson are never on the same page.

Chemistry or distrust usually builds up naturally. Granson has screwed up Richardson so many times that if I was in his place I would have close to zero trust in him. 

[cdgacoltsfan]

On 11/24/2024 at 6:00 PM, Moosejawcolt said:

I know the season is not over and they still may go on a run of horrible teams and make playoffs. However, they just played an elite team. Based on their play and performance today and against play off teams. What changes do u want to see in terms of coaching, front office and players? To me, I have seen enough and making the playoffs can not mask what changes need to occur after the off season. 

I think they may have won if starting OL played. But they need a lb,TE and CB (Womacks side). Hopefully Ballard addresses these needs this off season.

[compuls1v3]

3 hours ago, ADnum1 said:

I'm going to defend the receiver here.

 

That was a misfire by AR.

 

Hopefully soon AR learns that not every pass has to be a 100mph laser. 

 

Receiver is wide open. Take a little bit off and loft it right out in front of him. Easy catch

I guess you and I are seeing things differently.  That was NOT an AR laser to me, and was very catchable.

[compuls1v3]

3 hours ago, Solid84 said:

This is not a misfire by AR. Granson is wide open and he can see that. There's no excuse for him not to be looking back towards AR.

I feel like AR and Granson need to spend like 30 reps a day to get on the same page.  This has been a problem since Game 1 this year.

[Defjamz26]

3 hours ago, Superman said:

To me, using 2023 to evaluate was a good strategy. Doubling down on this core in 2024 was not a good strategy. Especially on defense. I didn't like it in the offseason, it hasn't worked out since then. And as I stated earlier, it's one of the reasons I'm convinced that our ceiling is limited with Ballard. It speaks to a culture of not aiming high enough. Double digit wins actually shouldn't be the bar. I think we squandered the opportunity to really make something of this reset by reinvesting in this core that's not good enough.

I think this is where we definitely agree. Not only had that same core group showed multiple times that they couldn’t get it done, I also think the moment you draft a QB you sink all your assets into developing and supporting him.

 

To me the strategy should’ve been to acquire elite weapons at WR and TE. Also going with younger guys on defense who could potentially be better than some of the vets who are aging and not playing well. They should’ve traded a few guys under contract for draft capital and moved up in the first for Bowers, Nabers, or whoever they were willing to go to pick 6 for. 

[Superman]

7 hours ago, Defjamz26 said:

I think this is where we definitely agree. Not only had that same core group showed multiple times that they couldn’t get it done, I also think the moment you draft a QB you sink all your assets into developing and supporting him.

 

To me the strategy should’ve been to acquire elite weapons at WR and TE. Also going with younger guys on defense who could potentially be better than some of the vets who are aging and not playing well. They should’ve traded a few guys under contract for draft capital and moved up in the first for Bowers, Nabers, or whoever they were willing to go to pick 6 for. 

 

I think the WR room is well balanced. I could argue that they could have upgraded from Pittman, but he's a reliable target for a young QB, when he's not playing through injury. Downs, Pierce, and the upside of AD, I like the way that position looks right now. 

 

At TE, with the benefit of hindsight, we should have taken the swing and went for Bowers. I know they tried, and maybe the teams that were in range just wouldn't budge, but that would have been the move. And that might have been the kind of move to make everyone feel differently about the direction of this team. (I was a big believer in Woods, though. I don't know why he hasn't been able to play in two years, but he's more talented than most TEs that are generally available in the draft or free agency. I hope he's able to contribute next year, but they still need to make a move at TE.)

 

Bigger picture, not just keeping the defensive core, but doubling down on it with new contracts for Stewart and Franklin especially -- two guys who don't move the needle for our pass defense -- was the wrong move, IMO. And then the only defensive guy they brought in is someone who also doesn't improve the pass defense. 

[ColtsGermany]

11 hours ago, cdgacoltsfan said:

I think they may have won if starting OL played. But they need a lb,TE and CB (Womacks side). Hopefully Ballard addresses these needs this off season.

We all hope every year that he adresses the weaknesses of this team.....

But he never did it 100% . Maybe doubling down in the draft on one position.

I lost hope that he does. He is who he is and will not change his approach. 🤷‍♂️

[Zoltan]

Honestly I think one of my frustrations with this year goes back to the offseason, where they said they wanted continuity which just left us with the same weaknesses as last year. They brought back Gus who continues to have a bottom ranked defense, they brought back the same players with the same weaknesses and expected doing the same thing would have better outcomes. 

Imagine if we had a defense that didn't give up 70% completion or could get off the field on the 3rd and long and while they have increased the blitz rate since Steichen talked to the media about getting pressure on opposing QBs, Gus always reverts to his habits when the game is on the line. This defense needs another starting LB in a bad way, I think Carlies has potential as a coverage back but they should have never given Franklin the starting LB job without competition. Idk if it's another situation where Bradley favors a player so they get the starting position no matter what like the Facyson situation or if they overestimated his ability to cover. 

As for the offense I was surprised when they didn't bring in another RB after Moss left for a starting position, you can tell they don't trust the backups currently and AR would benefit if they could run a detroit style run game where you have two RBs that have different strengths but equally effective. I don't blame them for the OL situation because it's hard for any team to have 3 starters out on the OL and be effective. I think the biggest worry was Kelly and they got a rookie that can replace him. 

 

Going forward if Ballard is kept they need to stop with this continuity trend and push competition at every position, we have too many players that are comfortable with their play level and that is because they aren't worried about losing their jobs. I think that is one of the problem in the Colts culture there has been so many excuses that they have gotten complacent and the organization has become too loyal to players.

 

Rant over

[Superman]

 

Not saying I want to see the Colts involved in a giant brawl. But it would be nice to see someone defend our QB after a late hit.

[stitches]

1 hour ago, Superman said:

 

Not saying I want to see the Colts involved in a giant brawl. But it would be nice to see someone defend our QB after a late hit.

If someone made that hit on our QB... or on ANY player really. I AM saying I want the Colts involved in a giant brawl... or at least doing what the first teammate of Lawrence did. From then on it's on the opponent if it evolves into a brawl... but if it does. I don't mind it. At some point you just have to defend your teammate and make it clear to any opponent in the future that there will be repercussions to doing something like this... 

[Superman]

23 minutes ago, stitches said:

If someone made that hit on our QB... or on ANY player really. I AM saying I want the Colts involved in a giant brawl... or at least doing what the first teammate of Lawrence did. From then on it's on the opponent if it evolves into a brawl... but if it does. I don't mind it. At some point you just have to defend your teammate and make it clear to any opponent in the future that there will be repercussions to doing something like this... 

 

I agree with where you landed on this. Just saying the objective is not to start a brawl or to show how tough we are. The point is that you defend your teammates, especially your QB. 

 

We all remember the Giants game a couple years ago. But there have been other situations where our QB took a late hit, and no one even flinched in the direction of the opponent. There's a lot of space between 'giant brawl' and 'stand by and do nothing.' We're basically guaranteed to stand by and do nothing.