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

[rm1369]

Originally Posted by ChaosTheory

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

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.

[rm1369]

Originally Posted by apballin

Ballard is 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

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.

[Dam8610]

Originally Posted by Oldcolt

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.

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.

Originally Posted by rm1369

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.

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.

[apballin]

Originally Posted by rm1369

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.

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

[Oldcolt]

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)

[rm1369]

Originally Posted by apballin

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

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.

[Racehorse]

Originally Posted by rm1369

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.

[rm1369]

Originally Posted by Oldcolt

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)

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.

[Oldcolt]

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.

[Racehorse]

Originally Posted by Oldcolt

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.