I come to praise Chris Ballard, not to bury him.
 

First of all, apologies to William Shakespeare for plagiarizing Julius Caesar.

Second, I know that there’s a lot of anger and hostility flowing in the direction of the Colts front office. Somewhere east of the White River, crowds are gathering, heating up tar and feathers, and passing out torches and pitchforks.

Most of the angst Centers around Anthony Richardson, Daniel Jones, and the quarterback position. Let me be the first to say that I join you in your unhappiness. So far in his career, Anthony has disappointed. Some of the blame, of course, falls on Chris Ballard’s shoulders. He drafted the man and he entrusted Shane Steichen with the responsibility of developing the young man’s vast potential. Ultimately, we have no idea of how the Richardson experiment will play out. The Colts aren’t cutting ties anytime soon, and there is still a glimmer of hope that things will work out.

But, even if they don’t, I’m not ready to crucify the general manager. Drafting a quarterback might well be the biggest crapshoot in the NFL. The majority, no matter how talented, will fail. That’s a simple fact of life. The Colts spent the better part of a quarter century looking for a replacement for Bert Jones. In the interim between Jones and Manning, we saw a host of quarterbacks lining up under center, the likes of which included names like Don Majkowski, Chris Chandler, Marty Domres, Blair Kiel, and Dan Orlovsky. One first round draft choice was spent on Art Schlichter, another on Jeff George. If Anthony doesn’t work out, we simply have to suck it up, move on, and take a shot in a 2026 draft class that Mel Kiper says is six deep.

I’m not sure that there’s any potential GM hire I trust more than Chris Ballard to make the call. No less an eminence than Bill Polian peered out over the draft landscape in 1998 and, save for the intervention of a stiff necked Jim Irsay, would’ve gifted us with Ryan Leaf.

At the end of the day, after all the grumbling, we face the stark fact that our perception of this club is shaped by Anthony Richardson‘s struggles. Last year‘s club was on the cusp of the playoffs even though they were helmed by a quarterback who completed less than 50% of his passes. That is a testament to the kind of team that Chris Ballard puts on the field. As I see it, this is a team with at least a dozen pro bowl quality players…Pittman, Pierce, Downs, Raimann, Nelson, Warren, Taylor, Buckner, Franklin, Bynum, Ward, and Moore.

There is nothing wrong with Chris Ballard’s ability to identify talent. There’s no reason to burn the organization to the ground and start over from scratch with another GM, especially when you consider that finding another Bill Polian is almost as elusive as finding another Peyton Manning.

Agree. Apparently, not everyone does.

When they come for you (and they will shortly), ask them who is good at finding quarterbacks.

My top issues do not include not finding a QB. It’s with a philosophy that was all but guaranteed to result in mediocrity. Something I’ve been saying since he had Luck and said he was going to waste years with an elite QB building slowly. I blame Ballard for signing Rivers and doing jack shit with the rest of the roster. I blame him for acquiring Ryan and then trusting a 3rd round rookie who had only played LT for 2 yrs in college, and a journeyman guard to play LT. I blame him for acquiring Wentz and then trotting out a DE group with no player with double digit sacks COMBINED for their CAREERS. And I blame him for drafting the rawest rookie QB ever, starting him game 1 and then benching him, starting him again, and benching him again - in basically two calendar years.

He is a decent talent evaluator but he has no plan besides "next year" and no idea how to construct a team to win. None. He seems to believe a journeyman QB is sufficient to win, but he has never assembled a complete team to make that possible. Every team has had a major obvious hole that he has been continent to wait to fill 1-3 yrs down the line.

It’s hard as fuck to find a QB. IMO if you don’t have a franchise guy you have two options 1) be aggressive in finding that guy or 2) build a complete team that can support a journeyman. To this point Ballard has done neither. The only reason they were in the position to draft a QB high was because of Irsay. And this is the best team he has ever put together and it is only because he is finally scared for his job. Otherwise CB and safety would have continued to wait like we’ve seen every other year under Ballard.

So combine my complete disagreement with his team building philosophy, with his gifting players spots and his belief that veterans don’t matter, and I can’t wait for Ballard to be gone. I’m not scared of finding a worse GM, because honestly what Ballard has done is worse than swinging big and losing. He’s made me and the fanbase apathetic. I’m turning in my season tickets at the end of this year regardless of the results. I’m tired of spending my money on a team that clearly has had no plan.

For all the good Ballard has done, and he’s done a lot, he’s also had some pretty egregious brain farts.

For instance, Ballard was convinced that Danny Pinter and Matt Freaking Pryor were competent starters on the offensive line.

That decision alone basically cost us an entire season and would have been enough to get him fired in most places.

He fucking sucks, one of the most incompetent ass clowns in the history of the NFL. Has snuck by on the grace of a very distracted and overly loyal owner.

That time is rapidly coming to an end and soon he will be gone, and that will be a great day for this franchise.

The roster is decent. Ballard has found talent in the late rounds. I think a lot of the talent on defense was wasted under Bradley, and injuries got a few.

As to the QB, and the idea that Ballard does not want a complete team, preferring a slow build, I will give my thoughts. First, I think Irsay (may he rest in peace) had a lot to do with the QB situation, both with the Ryan, Wentz, and Rivers experiments, and how the AR situation played out He was impatient to get a guy in there, and said get the vets, and then said start the rookie. He was also the catalyst for Grigson trading for Trent Richardson. Second, Ballard said he wanted a complete team that was not 100% dependent on a Manning or Mahomes type to bail them out. I think the fact Irsay's fortune was not as liquid as most played a part in free agency, ashas been mentioned in previous years. Third, I think he made it clear that he was planning to build from the lines first, and then work out from there. He has invested a lot of capital on both lines. Yes, edge rushers don't seem to have been a hit, but Bradley's scheme was a big factor in that. Glad that guy is gone. I think it was a year too late. Last year's team could have won the division despite poor QB play if the defense was not so soft in coverage, leading to death by 1000 paper cuts. There was no Maniac to create the turnovers any longer.

This is not to say Ballard is blameless, but it puts a lot into perspective. This roster is talented enough that average QB play would win the division, and possibly get us to 11-12 wins.

Give me a break. He signs two FA this offseason and everyone loses their minds like he's had some awakening... But in 2020 him bringing in Rivers, Xavier Rhodes, and trading a 1st for Buckner is "jack shit."

By the way, without a first he still got Pittman, Taylor, Blackmon, Pinter, and Rodgers in that draft. Top-10 in both offense and defense that year.

https://www.spotrac.com/nfl/free-age...on/ed/type/ufa

There you go, big dog. It's even sorted for you. Show me the move you were clamoring for Ballard to make. Was it Carl Lewis? Romeo Okwara?

I somehow doubt the difference between your criticism and acceptance is the highly fussed-over Denico fucking Autry.

Top-9 in scoring for both offense and defense that year, too.

Yes, bad move. But he wasn't relying on Raimann. He wasn't supposed to go in yet, although, unlike with Richardson: baptism-by-fire worked well for him.

Pryor was supposed to be the bridge, and he never looked anything like he did in 2022 prior (heh) to that. Pinter also never looked like that before or since. 2022 was fucking bizarro world.


The whole team benched him. Sorry, tapping out of a game, turns out, rubs guys the wrong way. Buckner, Nelson, and whoever else had words with him. It wasn't a small thing. That's not even considering the 47%.

AR was not benched this summer, Jones beat him out. They said it since January that they tried the baptism-by-fire route, and he was drowning. They're trying an alternate route. I'm sorry you and most others didn't believe them.


That's great. We haven't seen a down played, but you'll say this is the best team? I guess he did sign two FA's, which is goal. I know it doesn't occur to people... but consider that we brought in, not just a new DC, but one that is radically and fundamentally different than the previous.

This one has a particular type of DB room he wants which, maybe, factors into what the GM looks for and prioritizes.

1.) I don't see how drafting AR wasn't aggressive. If you listen to every pundit out there today, apparently everyone knew AR never should have been drafted at #4 (except that whole consensus top-3 QB label).

2.) This is outcome bias. There's no other way to put it. Ballard has kept his job for a decade precisely and ONLY because of what he puts around the QB. I mean, 9 years... He doesn't have Epstein files on the Irsays despite what Chopped will tell you. It's his rosters.

You Sir have put the whole situation in the proper context, that most of fandom disagrees with.

Jim became Robert, in his last few years, and was a detriment to winning. Don't get me started on Bradley though. He made Eberflus look like Belichick.

The bottom line is winning. Ballard has what, two playoff appearances and one playoff win in 9 years. We win 9 games or so a year yes, but we wouldn't if we didn't play in the worst division in football, which we cannot seem to win. How many years do you give a guy to show you who he is? None of his teams have ever won an opening game (we aren't close to the record, it's 29 straight games without a win by the Cardinals). He chose the coach and the players for these teams. He is a mediocre talent evaluator if you go by results.

Well said.

o


Posts like this are so reactionary, biased, and irrational ...... I prefer the more objective and articulate takes, such as this one.

o

I started to type out an individual response to your points, like who the leading WRs were the Rivers year and how everyone except apparently Ballard knew it was an issue. How long everyone knew the secondary was an issue but we always liked our guys. How low balling Autry is a prime example of Ballard’s conservatism that keeps the books looking good but loses games, and an example of his stated disregard for the value of veteran leadership. Etc. But then I read Oldcolts post and thought better of it. None of it matters. Ballard’s fans consistently see a genius and find excuses for his consistent failures. I’ll just ask this - why has such a well run team filled with so much talent never won the worst division in football under his brilliant leadership? They aren’t in a division with a power house. In fact all three other teams in the division have finished first. Houston and Jacksonville have finished last in the division and turned around and won the division all within Ballard’s tenure with the Colts. Tennessee finished last in the division a year before Ballard and won the division during his tenure. So every other team in the division has faced adversity and won. But not a Ballard led team. Seems strange for such a good GM….

I agree with you about the handling of Richardson, but as Racehorse said, I think that's the result of ownership meddling in part. I strongly felt AR should sit for a year. It sounds like the coaches and scouts may have also felt that way. But pressure from ownership can change those opinions.

In regard to the issues you bring up with the team building philosophy, he inherited Grigson's mess when he came in, he knew those teams overachieved because Andrew Luck drug them to success. He wanted to build slowly because he wanted to put a talented roster around his franchise QB. Then his franchise QB did the unthinkable and retired at 30. So there was a roster of talented players with no QB. The QB position had to get settled first, and after 1 successful experiment, 1 failed experiment, and 1 colossal failure of an experiment, the Colts finally had a top 5 pick and Irsay insisted on drafting a QB with it. That was Richardson. As far as the secondary issue in 2023, why invest in a position when you expect to be bad? In 2024, he found Womack off the street who played like a starter.

The OL issue I can't really say anything about other than I hope he learned from it, because trusting Matt Pryor as your LT was far from ideal.

Ballard came from KC, and his team building philosophy is nearly identical to Brett Veach's, the latter of whom just came 1 game short of winning 3 consecutive Super Bowls. The only tangible differences I can find between their team building styles is that Veach drafted Mahomes, and Veach had an opportunity to get a haul of draft picks for a player he didn't want to sign long term.

I think this is pretty much accurate. Owners typically have more say in QB decisions than we realize, because ultimately they're the ones dishing out the ridiculous contracts attached. Are there things I feel could've been done differently, both with regard to the QB position and general roster building? Yes, the primary one being that I think the "moving heaven and earth" talk from Ballard should've been followed through by trading whatever it took to get to 1 and take Stroud. That said, everyone has their pet QB move that should've been made, whether it's Stafford, Mayfield, Hurts, Love, Herbert, etc. They ultimately went with Richardson, and the book isn't fully closed on him yet. It's not a good look for him to lose a QB battle with Janiel Dones, but he's 23. He could come back next year, or maybe even later this year, and have everything click.

So would you say Ryan Grigson was a better GM?

Beat me to it. But, yeah, it's a dead horse. It's not about comparing Ballard to Grigson. It's the flaw in the reasoning.

It's the same approach I see people take in the Manning-Brady debate where they point to 2008 when the Patriots went 11-5 without Brady... "they missed the playoffs without him."

Or the Seahawks winning the division and a playoff game at 7-9 in 2010.

Two HC/GM's in these examples. I guess the former is Belichick failing without Brady and the latter is Carroll getting "results." Outcome bias, same as poker.

Dam, not sure how I felt about Grigson has anything to do with how I feel about Ballard. I am not upset because of any one QB I think he should have gotten. He just has not gotten anyone. Nine years is enough to find at least one competent QB. As far as excuses for why you lose, every loser has a ton of them. What ifs abound with teams like ours.

As I pointed out, the three other teams bottomed out and then won the division in less time the Ballard as been GM. The team Ballard inherited was not significantly worse than those teams. Believing they were is the result of the same outcome bias Chaos is accusing people of using.

Is Ballard a better GM than Grigson. Yes, maybe? IMO Grigson has the correct philosophy for the modern NFL, Ballard’s philosophy is antiquated. Grigson’s primary issue was that he sucked at a talent evaluator. In that regard, Ballard is certainly superior, no argument. But I don’t believe Ballard will ever win a SB, and I believe that even if he had Luck at QB. Why? Because he’s too risk adverse to ever make the moves to help his team peak. Ballard supporters always talk out of both sides of their mouths on this point. They claim that he’s not been aggressive only because he hasn’t had the QB. They say he didn’t move up to get the QB because it was too risky without drafting high. Then they defend his decisions that kept the team from bottoming out and drafting high. Irsay’s decision is the only reason the team was in a position to draft AR.

Rivers wasn’t a successful experiment, he was an example of Ballard’s failed philosophy. I don’t know how anyone can defend signing rivers and not going all in. He was a 1-2 yr QB max. Either swing for a deep run or don’t sign him.

Everyone talks about how talented the team has been over this run, but every single year it has had some aspect that is bottom of the league that he just does nothing with. Of course pointing that out does no good because it gets in to what I mentioned before - “why solve CB (or DE or TE, or LT, etc) when the team doesn’t have a QB…” And yes the DC sucked,but how was he ever brought here? Ballard.

I see plenty of differences between KC and Ballard. How did they draft Mahomes? They made a risky move and went and got him. The exact thing Ballard has not done for a QB, always stating it was too risky. There are plenty of other things they have done that are completely unlike Ballard.

When I hear Ballard pontificate, there is no way any team in the NFL can be any good, just not possible. Every team should be very tightly banded together in a 7 to 10 win window and that is the very best any team could accomplish because it is SO DAMN HARD.

Yet every single year I seem to see multiple teams that win 12,13,14, and even an occasional 15 games, some of them even do this for several years in a row. I am sure they must be cheating or something because I believe in Ballard and by God, 8 wins is pretty damn good, he should get a raise!

Aside from the scarce true elites, these are short bursts. When you compare a team against the field rather than another team... There's always going to be a different slant to it.

I wonder how many people realize that since 2018, when Pagano left and the new regime started, the Colts have the best record in the division.

Colts 58-57-1
Titans 57-59
Texans 52-63-1
Jaguars 37-79

Ballard isn’t solely making decisions, clearly Jim would intervene when he felt necessary and clearly he gives his coaching staff creative control based on players they like for whatever reason.

Certain moves have Ballards name written on them and you can tell, certain moves were specifically for a coach and at the time it was obvious, and then hiring a guy off ESPN set, obviously the owner.

I think Ballard does a good job of balancing it all

The 12+ win teams, without exception, have great quarterbacks. The nfl is a never ending search for a good quarterback. Without that, you have nothing and you’re better off winning 1 game than 9, because the only real way of GETTING a good quarterback is through the draft.

And even then it’s a crapshoot as Colts fans know all too well.

I did. It’s an example of my issue with his philosophy. Best record and not a division title to show for it. Just year after year of middle of the road finishes. Mediocrity. The numbers would be even “better” (worse) if not for Irsay’s intervention. You can crow about it, but it’s exact what I hate about Ballard’s style. And I expect a similar outcome this year.

You can probably convince me Irsay added pressure to start AR. After year after year of reclamation projects I could see it taking its toll on Jim’s patience. It did with the majority of the fan base. I’m sure that played into the one thing we know was Irsay’s decision- hiring Saturday and tanking the season to actually be in a position to draft a QB. Everything else is Ballard. You likely can’t convince me otherwise. Signing an aging QB and doing a slow rebuild with the rest of the roster is exactly Ballard’s philosophy at work.

Because firing Ballard isn't the end. He has to be replaced. He could be replaced by a talentless hack that Lucks into a franchise QB and gets him killed to the point that said franchise QB retires because of his injury history.

There haven't been many opportunities to add a franchise QB since Luck's retirement.

Current starters drafted 2020 or later: Joe Burrow, Tua Tagovailoa, Justin Herbert, Jordan Love, Jalen Hurts, Trevor Lawrence, Justin Fields, Brock Purdy, Bryce Young, C.J. Stroud, Caleb Williams, Jayden Daniels, Drake Maye, Michael Penix Jr., J.J. McCarthy, Bo Nix, Cam Ward

Eliminating the ones that were drafted before the Colts had a pick, we are left with: Jalen Hurts, Brock Purdy

Current starters acquired via trade or free agency since 2020: Matthew Stafford, Jared Goff, Baker Mayfield, Geno Smith, Sam Darnold

So, realistically, the current starting QBs the Colts had the opportunity to acquire were: Jalen Hurts, Matthew Stafford, Jared Goff, Baker Mayfield, Brock Purdy, Geno Smith, and Sam Darnold

Jalen Hurts: The Eagles sat Hurts for the better part of a year, and that was after he had over 40 college starts. Given what happened with AR, do we think the Colts would have done the same, or that he would have turned out to be as good here?

Matthew Stafford: Many Colts fans wanted him, but three 1s was far too high a price for Stafford.

Jared Goff: Offloaded in the Stafford trade, was thought to be on his way out of the league at the time he was traded. I will say this was an opportunity missed, but it may have been a completely unknown opportunity to the FO.

Baker Mayfield: Also thought to be on his way out of the league when he was a free agent, he appeared to be a bridge signing for the Bucs after Brady retired.

Brock Purdy: The whole league missed on him, including the 49ers, who luckily stumbled into him.

Geno Smith: Was considered a bust as a free agent and an aging league average starting QB when traded to the Raiders this offseason.

Sam Darnold: Started for two different teams and performed horribly before having a career renaissance under Kevin O'Connell last year.

MAYBE three of those guys (Goff, Mayfield, Purdy) would've been as successful with the Colts, and it's questionable for each. What this exercise tells me more than anything is that being patient with AR is the right move since the Colts chose to draft him instead of trading up for Stroud.

Each of those teams has drafted a QB at 1 or 2 in that time as well. That makes a huge difference. If the Colts had Joe Burrow, C.J. Stroud, Caleb Williams, or Jayden Daniels, they'd be running away with this division every year.

Ballard is unquestionably a better talent evaluator than Grigson, and I would wholeheartedly disagree with the idea that "Try to cover talent evaluation and drafting deficiencies by throwing a bunch of money around in free agency" is a winning roster building philosophy in the modern NFL.

Rivers got the Colts to the playoffs and retired a year earlier than expected. His time here was a success (and I hate Rivers, so I don't like admitting that), it was just shorter than expected. As someone else pointed out, I think Wentz could've been a success had he not been an idiot and gotten the COVID vaccine. Everyone here knows I would've traded whatever it took to get to 1 and draft Stroud, but AR isn't necessarily done. Again, if you get rid of Ballard, you have to replace him. I know I would be pissed if 5 years from now, we're talking about how another Ryan Grigson type has destroyed the team while we watch top 10 QB AR start for the Rams or Raiders or Seahawks.

The team has had a lot of talent with no QB, it's a truth that anyone who knows football can recognize. You don't get to near .500 with bad QB play if your roster sucks. Those teams typically pick 1 or 2. The 2011 Colts earned the #1 pick because the roster around Manning was bad or aging, and Manning got hurt. Not fixing the CB position in 2023 makes sense because it allowed for a lot of the players the Colts just drafted to get PT, which allowed Jaylon Jones to develop into a starter, and in 2024, Ballard found a starter off the street in Womack. I agree that Matt Pryor as starting LT was a terrible decision, I won't defend that, but you can find bad decisions on any GM's resume. As for hiring Bradley, was that Ballard’s pick, or Reich's? That said, firing Reich was an opportunity to fire Bradley that Ballard didn't take.

I see two major differences between Veach and Ballard as team builders:

1) The Chiefs lucked into a franchise QB being available at 10 and traded up to get him. They also sat him for the first year and he credits that for a great deal.of his NFL success.

2) Veach was able to trade Tyreek Hill for an extra half of a draft in 2022 and 2 extra picks in 2023. That trade has been the catalyst of their recent success.

The Colts have not had the level of good fortune to have a franchise QB available at 10 or to have a player that another team would trade as much as the Dolphins traded to get Hill. They have Taylor, but the RB position is devalued in the modern NFL and I doubt anyone would trade a 1, let alone a package of picks like the Dolphins traded, for him.

He’s 28 and I’m sure Steichen had a say in this. If Ballard just called shots and slammed the gavel we would have Jordan Love right now

If I understand you Dam you're perfect for this team. You do not want to get rid of Ballard because there would be a chance we get someone worse. So let's play this safe and stay with proven mediocrity. The issue is that there are teams out there that don't play it safe. Yes, most of them fail (like this 'safe' team has the last decade) but every once in a while they hit, and when they do you cannot compete with them by being safe and mediocre. In addition Ballards philosophy has never worked and never will. He believes you buy physical talent and ignore how they play football. He believes his coaches can coach them up. They have failed miserably at that. So yes I want him gone (if he hit on one physically talented guy-AR for instance- I would change my mind, but he hasn't)

I’m talking about Rivers, not Jones. Don’t get me wrong, I’m not a fan of the DJ decision, but I think it was a completely stupid move to sign rivers and not go all in with him. All Ballard’s supporters will point out (like Dam is) that Ballard hasn’t drafted high enough to get a franchise guy. The reason he hasn’t drafted high enough is because of moves like that. I would have been fine going all in for 1-2 years with Rivers origins with starting a complete scrub and bottoming out. I wasn’t fine with splitting the middle like Ballard did. Moves like that are why the team is where it is - the only team in the division to not have a division title in Ballard’s tenure.

I feel this is the year that ends. I know a lot of you don't want that to happen, because of irrational hate for Ballard, but I think our roster is good enough, if we can get solid QB play out of Jones. Houston is not as good as some think, and neither is Stroud. Jaguars are in the same boat, although Hunter might be a huge help. Lawrence is JAG at QB. Titans are the Titans, talentless, and starting a rookie QB. Maybe one of those three surprises me, but I think we have just as good of a shot as anyone in the division, with solid QB play. Heck, we were close with the 55th ranked QB last year.

The best thing that ever happened to Ballard was Grigson. It has allowed Ballard to be Teflon with certain portions of the fan base. Guys like Dam are scared to change because it could be worse. The crazy thing is that when you point out how other teams have rebuilt quicker that the Colts, they will point out (like Dam has) that they were able to do it because they had higher draft picks than the Colts have had. That’s the whole point! Ballard’s philosophy helps keep them in mediocrity. His conservatism limits their valleys but it also clips their peaks. And you don’t win without peaks. Evidenced by the constant 2nd and 3rd place division finishes in each year.

The other thing you notice is that when other teams make a move it was always that they got lucky. It’s never that they went and made something happen, it’s always that they are lucky. Now when Ballard hits a franchise LT in the 3rd it’s an example of his genius, not luck that bailed him out like other teams. But fuck it, what’s the saying- Better to be lucky than good. I guess I’d prefer a “lucky” GM then. According to his supporters he’s had the worst run of luck in the history of the NFL. Time to move on from Bad Luck Ballard.

Racehorse not sure who you meant this for but for me I have supported Ballard until this year. I don't hate him and it is certainly not irrational to want change after 9 years of mediocrity. We have been mediocre so long that your dream scenario is us making the playoffs. It is a dream probably only possible in our division.

No, the ones who have been griping for the past 6 years.

I think Ballards idea of drafting for physical talent and trying to coach them up was an interesting one and was worth the attempt. I supported him in trying this method. At some point I think most would have to admit it just doesn't work at this level.

I'm not crowing. I don't think I've ever even brought that stat up, let alone bragged about it. I'm just pointing out that the "no division titles" narrative has a particular connotation and I would wager that most fans would be surprised to learn that the Colts have the best record.

Division titles aren't meaningless, but they're also not binary like they're being presented. Like any stat, there is context. Nobody here cared too much about a division title in 2018 when we beat the division champs twice on the road, including the playoffs. Neither did the Texans.

Congrats to JAX for taking the division in 2022 at 9-8 while the rest of the division was imploding. We were 11-5 in 2020 and lost a tie-breaker. Steichen was a bad 4-yard pass away from the division title with Gardner fucking Minshew at QB in '23.

The Texans earned the 3rd, 3rd, and 2nd overall draft picks consecutively from '22-'24 after two overrated years with Watson. And then the retarded Browns gave HOU THREE more 1st-rounders, a 3rd, and two 4ths in that same stretch. And they barely got by the Colts the past two years with Gardner fucking Minshew and a 47% passer.

TEN was in a similar boat with a solid roster and underwhelming QB play until Ryan Tannehill was available. They had four straight 9-win seasons, but by chance, that resulted in two playoff berths. Both of our 9-win seasons sent us home.


What does that mean?

Not to speak for him, but I've read him say it, and I agree... It's not so much fear of something worse.

It's fear of booting a guy who puts out a good roster and THEN landing a QB. He's right. If we had one of those QB's listed, the Colts would run away with this division yearly.

That would be me. Actually I’ve criticized him since his 2nd offseason when he cut vets, rolled out his long term rebuild plan with a franchise QB in place, made statements minimizing the importance of the QB (IMO), and started minimizing the importance of veteran leadership on a team (coaches job). None of my criticisms have been hindsight. I said then that his methods would lead to mediocrity. I went so far as to do an analysis of the turnover starters on SB winning rosters to show how the little continuity there actually is year to year in the NFL. What in the world has he done that has proven me wrong or should make me rethink my position?

I haven’t always wanted him fired. I even stated early that he needed time to fully prove out his philosophy. I recognize that starting down a path and switching quickly usually isn’t productive. I also constantly heard he’d flip a switch and become aggressive - next offseason. Season after season it didn’t happen and I heard all the excuses. This is the first offseason where maybe it’s true, but only because he’s finally about to be fired. IMO his philosophy has been proven out. It’s lead to exactly what I thought it would- a consistent record that doesn’t bottom out but never reaches anything higher either. Give Ballard a franchise QB and certainly the bar is raised some. But the team IMO would never peak due to his philosophy. I loved the Polian Colts, but Bill had a very similar philosophy that saw the greatest QB ever IMO win only one SB. I’ve seen a similar philosophy play out in GB with the same results. I’m simply not a fan even when paired with a historically great QB. Paired with mediocre QB play and it has me turning in my season tickets.

Why on earth does everyone think we have such a great team? The only quasi all pro on this team is a guard. We have zero difference makers on defense, unless you count Buckner, who wasn't even drafted by us.

starting Gardner minshew wouldn't have really inspired much confidence in the fan base

Again, you have to consider the markets. Green Bay and Indianapolis are small markets. It takes them a generational quarterback to get them into elite territory. We had manning, GB had Favre, and then Rodgers. KC has Mahomes. Small markets do not attract free agents like the big ones do, and their owners do not have cash to overpay signing bonuses. Then we had Luck to mask deficiencies and get us to 11-5 nearly every year. Do I wish Ballard had dome some things differently? You bet I do, but I understand why a lot of things we wanted did not happen. The only real miss I see at QB was not getting Baker. I remember most here were against it, too. It seemed like an illogical choice, and it took him three teams to find success. Maybe Jones can do that for us.

I will give you props for coming and admitting your position.

it is a solid roster. that is a problem with Ballard that I see. he gets a lot of B players and very few super stars. not really been killing the 1st round

I honestly don't know how a team with the 55th ranked QB and 28th ranked defense wins 8 games? Statistical anomaly, a credit to offensive coaching, or a better than average roster?

I sincerely doubt that this has ever happened in the NFL before.

Because the toughest strength of schedule this team has had in the Ballard era is 23rd. Divisions play a huge role in that and the AFC South has also been the worst division in football over Ballard’s tenure. That’s how good he has been. Imagine if he played in an actually competitive division.