They both should’ve gotten another year, not sure you can blame Ballard for these moves though.

Speaks volumes Chrome.

For the record, here is a couple Ballard quotes of the shit I apparently made up:

“Development of young players—that’s on us, and that’s on the coaching staff. I’ve always believed that coaches coach. You can't rely on a veteran player to coach up a young guy when that veteran is trying to fight for his own career and his own job."

“Young players don’t care what a guy did five years ago. They respect what you do today. They respect what you put on tape. If you bring a veteran in just to sit in the locker room and be a 'mentor' but he can't run or play anymore, the young guys see right through that."

Both said when he was questioned about going so young and not providing vet leadership. This is what I was referring to when I referenced Hankins, because that’s when he spelled out his philosophy. I guess with you not knowing he signed Hankins I shouldn’t have expected you to know his stated belief on the subject.

Now here are a few recent Ballard comments on the culture of his team:

"Instead of really creating competition throughout and throwing new blood into the locker room, new players into the locker room, I said, 'You know what? We're going to run it back.' That was a mistake." He also addressed the resulting entitlement and complacency: "There was an entitlement that, 'You know what, I'm back. I deserve to be back.'"

"Players in that locker room, they can B.S the media, they can B.S. their family, but they cannot B.S. each other. And Pat was on good teams, Pat was a great player, Pat knows what it looks like, so he saw the cracks. The biggest issue and our players know this because I voiced it, how about solving the problem? Like it's easy to voice the problem in public, but how about being part of solving the problem. That's what we need."

“A good culture has some friction in it, because there's some accountability within that challenges each other and never walks by a mistake, and we've got to get there. That was not done this year, and that's probably my biggest disappointment.”

You can obviously agree with Ballard’s philosophy. And you can believe there is no connection between that philosophy and the culture we have seen from the team during his tenure. What you can’t do is say I made it up. Or argue that every GM has that same philosophy. Or claim there has never been a culture issue with the team. For me, when he expressed that philosophy (and a few others) I disagreed with it. Strongly. It doesn’t help that he has tended towards “technical” coaches, not disciplinarian coaches and has never established a strong culture of accountability (his own words allude to it). You don’t have to connect the same dots between those quotes that I do. I really don’t give a fuck.

With that clarified, you can fuck off.

Enjoy the season.

It was pretty obvious what both players were when Ballard moved on. There are several things I believe you can criticize Ballard for, but acquiring and then moving on from these guys aren’t on the list.

I'm not entirely sure I agree; I'm close but there is a part of me that says he is to blame there as well.

We sure do seem to be observing a pattern of guys going elsewhere and doing okay. If that is acknowledged as a trend (I think Brissett had a really solid year last year- I admit to not having looked it up), then one must ask, is the franchise in its current form just incapable of making players better and in turn are the coaches we've had just atrocious at development? Perhaps they aren't that terrible, and would like to develop players, but big dick Ballard is the constant in the whole thing? It certainly seems like he is the one single variable that has not changed, and the output for his entire tenure, regardless of coaches- and that is the full spectrum of coaching positions- regardless of players- we have had and have some really good ones, has been ground hog day. To me, that points to him as the rot in the middle of the basket, everything around him begins to mold and decay because he does nothing but pollute.

Everyone blasted Ebron for what he said- and yeah it was over the top about Luck, but that's smoke. There's so much smoke you cannot help to think that these players walk out the door from the Colts HQ and think "man it feels good to not be around that prick any longer" and in turn, they turn things around under admins that are better at, well at everything.

I think it is pretty simple. Ballard sucks at drafting players, especially players in the first and second round. If we had hit on our last 3 second round picks this is a whole different team. We didn't and haven't for years. It is crippling for an organization. It isn't about missing on one or two QBs, its almost never hitting on any of your top draft choices. Maybe its coaching but Ballard owns that to. It is early but this year looks exactly like what people who wanted Ballard fired (and have left the site because they are sick of this shit) thought it would. I have been here before with this team. All you can do is watch and hope that one or two players make an impression for the future. I feel for Q and those great players who have worked in this shit for years with nothing but a ton on money (that is a nice consolation prize) to show for it. Glad some hard ass fans have decided to see it through here. The feeling will be great when we finally turn this bitch around.

One of the more frustrating things for me is realizing the great players Ballard has acquired have given the bulk of their careers to the mediocrity. Leonard, Q, Buckner, Taylor, Stewart. Legitimately great acquisitions whose primes are wasted with damn near no meaningful games or team accomplishments. That has to be frustrating as hell. As a fan and season ticket holder it’s frustrating. I can’t imagine giving up my body and career to this shit. Of course I’d happily trade for the money part I guess, but that was a given for them no matter where they played.

We can argue why. I lean heavily on culture, coaching, lack of accountability, and what I’ve seen as the “next year mentality” (that has admittedly finally lessened some). But you aren’t wrong on draft picks. I think Ballard is a pretty good drafter overall, but he has certainly struggled at certain premium positions - especially DE and CB.

I just get tired of being told he’s great when there is plenty of evidence he’s not. I hope he learns, changes his methods, and shines somewhere else. I have nothing against the guy personally. But he has been a failure as Colts GM and I don’t understand how anyone can say otherwise. Early on when I disagreed with his philosophy and thought it would lead to a consistently mediocre team, I still advocated for him to have the time to prove it out. I understand you can’t switch trains every two years and succeed. But that time has well passed. Nearly any other Franchise would have fired him 2+ seasons ago. We have watched many teams fall and rise again in the time Ballard has had. I’m done.

Ballards teams have always ended up less than the sum of their parts. IMO some of that has been positional value (not all All Pros have the same value), some of it is the huge holes he’s left in areas to fill later, and some is culture. But every teams has players that leave and succeed to some degree elsewhere. Scheme fit, maturity, or support by other positions (pass rush can make corners better and vice versa). I don’t think the Colts would have been better off keeping either, even if they end up performing elsewhere. I do always root for Brissett though.

RM1369 I agree with everything you said. They are all interrelated and his failure at high draft picks are certainly influenced greatly by the issues you have brought up. I wouldnt argue which is most important, they all are. It is why Sherck thinks we need a complete redo (I agree) from top to bottom. I also root for Brissett, like i will for AR when he leaves. Lousy organization right now. I don't see us turning this season around. Hope i am wrong.

I was curious so I went and looked up Ballards second round picks.

2017-Quincy Wilson: grade F.
2018-Shaq Leonard A+ Braden Smith A Kemoko Turay F Tyquan Lewis C
2019-Rock Ya Sin F Ben Banogu F- Paris Campbell F
2020- Michael Pittman Jr A+ Jonathon Taylor A+
2021- Dayo Odeyingbo C
2022- Alec Pierce A+
2023- Juju Brents F
2024- AD Mitchell F
2025- JT Tuimoloau incomplete but not looking good.
2026- CJ Allen. Incomplete.

So that’s four home runs, one excellent pick, two decent picks, two unknowns, and seven busts.

I’m not sure what the average is in the 2nd round but that doesn’t strike me as very good.

I have a simple question for you, did you play any football?

He gambles a lot on traits in the second round. Why it’s home runs or strike outs. Now compare it with the rest of the league. .500 is above average for drafting. And usually drafts are judged if the player is still in the league contributing. Yeah it sucks if he doesn’t stay with your team, but they have a cap for a reason.

Usually you judge by home run, starter, contributor/backup, bust

Busts are usually half the draft or more. Home runs are super rare.

I guess my issue isn't exactly that he misses so many second rounders, it is that he misses on so many defensive lineman and corners in the second round. On our roster if he had hit on even a few of them we have a totally different defense. I like Ballard as a human being but he sucks at evaluating players at incredibly important positions

Yes, but not to a level that will satisfy you. And as I’ve already stated, the questions being asked were by media, not me, so other people had concerns or at least questions about the methods. Ballard has had plenty of questions locally and nationally about the exact things I’ve brought up. I’m not pretending to have some deep insight, I had a strong belief that so far has been pretty damn accurate. I really don’t care if you agree. Hell, in some of Ballard’s quote HE agrees that he failed in areas I pointed out.

I really don’t care if you agree with WHY I think Ballard has failed. For all my supposed ignorance I do know how to read a won / loss record. I’ve watched every game of his tenure. I’ve seen how his team has performed. If you think he’s a great GM, so be it. I just hope he takes his greatness to another team. Soon. It hasn’t worked here. I know there are different team building styles even if you think there aren’t. There are different opinions on leadership and different opinions on how to develop a young QB (I agree Irsay forced the AR start).

You seem to think because I have an opinion on my favorite team, I think I’m an expert and qualified to run a team myself. It’s a ridiculous notion on your part. This is exactly what fans do. My disregarding Polians opinion is because Ballard is 9 years in, we are well past the point that I need to defer to Polian as to how Ballard will perform. Polian is a HOFer but he’s also been wrong. That’s not a knock, it’s fact. It’s pretty clear to a lot of people this is one of those times. I hope Ballard is successful in his next job. And I agree he will get another. But you can also tell from his comments that he has learned and changed some from this process. Or at least he claims he has.

The ironic thing is that you almost never see me discussing or evaluating players pre draft. The reason is because I don’t study tape and I don’t research of follow that level of player evaluation. However I do have decades of experience in leadership and team building, so I have a higher degree of opinion on that. And I do find NFL and NBA team building fascinating and have researched the assembly of different high level teams. That has colored my opinion. Not to a PHd level or anything but it is something I find fascinating. Which is why I bristle every time one of Ballard’s supporters pretends there was no other viable way to build a team other than how he has done it. I know damn well that’s not true.

There are plenty of Ballard “failures” that I don’t say anything about. Every GM is going to have a good amount of individual failures. Hell, I have a lot of experience in hiring people and know how difficult it is. I know it’s even more difficult at that level. The ones I hit Ballard on are the ones I see as systemic to his philosophy. That typically means things he has said and then we’ve seen his actions back it up. Not individual player evaluations but the repeating larger philosophy that I’ve never agreed with and believe has undermined the things I believe Ballard does do well. And I point out that I’ve been saying it for years because every Ballard supporter has done exactly what you are trying to do, but their usual tactic has been to accuse me of hindsight. Now even though I have accurately stated exactly where the team would be (mediocre, rarely bottom of the league) I’m just ignorant. So be it. I’ve already given your arrogant ass much more time than I should.

As I said, enjoy the season. I have nothing else to say to you about it.

So how often did a player you were competing with for a position take you under his wing and teach you things? It's rare; people don't want to help their replacements. Some vets are very frank about it, like Joe Flacco. What often happens is the opposite: plenty of stories of young players being sabotaged by vets. It happens more than you think.

Your corporate environment is not really comparable unless you worked in a boiler room. Sure, some concepts are universal, but the environments and employee makeup are very different, and making an employee teach a replacement is a crappy thing to expect in any field. You are talking about a bunch of type A, perhaps doped up, athletes around the same age competing for the same jobs. And before you start up yeah, I have an MBA, and I've studied team building. Read the prerequisite sports books etc.

As for the Hankins stuff, you are reading way too much into it. Me not remembering Ballard signing him is a memory thing, not a football thing. Hankins being let go is because he didn't fit Eberflus' defense, not because Ballard dislikes veterans. It's simple things like this that make me think you don't know what you are talking about. Ballard values vet leadership; he just doesn't think it's fair to expect them to coach their replacements, and he is right. The coach should be the teacher and the guy the player trusts to have his best interests. When I refer to his philosophy, I'm talking about the draft strategy, positional emphasis and design of the team, where to spend money and why.

When you are talking team building and accountability, that is more in the coaches' department. That is why I get sick of the posts, because people don't know how football teams work, division of responsibilities. People just blame one guy because people don't like complicated. However, that isn't how NFL teams work. What does maga say, "orange man bad", or the other side would say, "thanks Obama," no matter what happens. That's what I think I see out of the fanbase and it's exhausting. As I said, there is plenty to hold him accountable for. No GM is perfect, you just hope he is right more than he is wrong. But you pay them to make decisions.

No, I think you are dismissive of other people's opinions bc it doesn't fit your confirmation bias. I think it's an ego thing. I know enough about football to know I don't know a shit ton and I played in college and coach my kid's teams.

No matter what I have done I have been made better by those around me who know what they are doing. Yes, even those around me I’m in competition with. I’ve seen where they are better than me and learned from it. I’ve learned how to prepare and how to conduct myself in different environments. That’s both athletically (on field, court, mat) and in an office setting. You (and Ballard) are pretending that people believe the only way a veteran can improve a team is if he’s acting exactly as a coach. Creating competition, learning how to prepare mentally and physically, and creating a culture of accountability are all benefits vets can bring to young players without directly acting like a coach. Not to mention seeing techniques and picking vets brains. And of course playing. Ballard has several times given the coaches very few veteran options, going young and cheap at positions. Typically those we know he’s going to address later.

QB I do believe is different with vets. It is the one you can pay someone with little expectation of playing. Within the same draft class as AR, Stroud had a 35 yr old Case Keenum in his QB room his rookie year, documented as being a huge mentor for him. He’s now moved on to serve the same role with Williams in Chicago. Young had a 36 yr old Andy Dalton. AR had a 27 yr old Minshew expecting to compete and 24 yr old Ehlingher. You don’t see the difference apparently and that’s fine. But other teams have done things differently. In the exact method my egotistical and ignorant ass sees as more beneficial to developing a young QB. I’m not advocating for something no teams has ever done and calling everyone stupid. I believe in a method other teams have used.

The thing here is you claim I have an ego because I believe in a different philosophy than Ballard. The funny part is, I acknowledge there are different beliefs in things. It’s YOU that are saying that you and Ballard know the only way, to the point of pretending there are no other viable theories for team building. And calling me ignorant for believing anything else. Anyone that has followed the NFL has seen different ways to assemble teams. The Rams certainly constructed their team differently than Ballard has.

On Hankins I will say now for the third time - I don’t give a fuck about Hankins. I know the stated reason for why he was cut. I referenced him being cut as a time marker for when Ballard expressed his belief on bringing in outside vets. He certainly echos your view that outside vets add no value beyond their playing ability. I’m well aware of his belief on having home grown vets and a culture set by his coaches. The comments were in the same press conference. Ballard has mostly backed his words with his actions. At least until more recently where he himself expressed regret in the lack of outside competition. So even Ballard admitted he erred in not doing something I have criticized, yet I’m still wrong and ignorant?

Most people understand that coaches are largely the drivers of team culture, although it isn’t limited to them. Many of us believe that vet players also play a major role. Where we place blame on Ballard is that he has led the search and played a major role in the hiring of the coaches. Neither of which were considered disciplinarians. You couple that with him not creating competition (don’t tell me it’s not true, he expressed regret about it). minimizing the value of external vets, basically gifting roles to young players and we wonder where the accountability is actually going to come from. Then we see and hear evidence of bad team culture (former players even calling it out) and we see a lot of things that point back to Ballard. Yet it pisses you off that people question Ballard and believe he is ultimately responsible? Believing the lack of knowledge in the fan base is the reason? Come the fuck on. In a knowledgeable city Ballard would have been gone a few seasons ago. You can easily look up the history of GMs with his track record.

It’s going to be very interesting to see how you react when there is a new GM. When they do things differently than Ballard will you criticize them? Or is your whole belief that fans shouldn’t have an opinion on the jobs professionals are doing? I’d think that’s the case except you clearly have opinions on the philosophy and job done by Grigson. So it would appear you think others, including NFL execs, are ignorant simply because they don’t agree with you.(yes Grigson was awful and deserved to be fired)

Spot fucking on.

o


In the 2nd round of the draft, I'll take 4 home runs and 6 busts over 4 starters and 6 middle-of-the-road players any time.

o

His tenure has spanned 4 coaches, 2 of which Ballard led the hiring for. He is the longest tenured GM with a losing record without a major playoff run. You both want to blame fans, but Ballard stands alone because other NFL organizations have cut bait from their GMs. Not fans. NFL teams have blamed their GMs when they’ve experienced this level of mediocrity. I guess it’s really NFL teams who don’t understand the complexities.

o


Hey, if nothing else, your game thread has gotten a lot of mileage.

o

Yeah, but I am not starting one this week. I jinxed the team, lol

There is not one player or coach on this team that were on the team when Ballard became the person who was given the job to hire coaches and put the team together. He hand picked every person currently on the team, signed off on every coach and i assume the vast majority of front office people, so I'm still going to blame him.

o


If the Colts don't at least give the Chiefs a good game today, then you jinxing them will be the least of their problems.

o

The Ravens lost at home today to the Saints. They had 300 yards of offense, 200 less than they did on the road against the Colts.

Now, it’s possible the Saints are a lot better defensively than anyone thought.

I think it’s just as likely that the Colts are just bad on defense. Like, really bad.

We’ll know more tonight. I’m not optimistic.