The build

[rm1369]

Originally Posted by Chaka

Beating the teams in our division is nice, but what good is it if we get smoked in the playoffs by NE, KC or PIT? The underlying principle that I think is driving Ballard's decisionmaking is the idea that to be truly great you need a solid foundation of home-grown players.

Experience? Does that no longer have value?

The idea that you have to spend 2-3 years drafting before any free agents have value is complete and utter BS. Signing free agents affects two things with the draft:

1) it increases competition for roster and, most importantly, starting spots. Is competition a bad thing now too?

2) it lowers your draft position by making you win more games. But when I have said Ballard has knowingly sacrificed wins this year (soft tank?) by his moves or that his methods were making the rebuild longer I’m certain you are one that has told me that’s not the case.

So other than decreasing competition or decreasing wins (and therefore increasing draft position) why do you think free agents keep you from building through the draft?

[Chaka]

Originally Posted by rm1369

Experience? Does that no longer have value?

The idea that you have to spend 2-3 years drafting before any free agents have value is complete and utter BS. Signing free agents affects two things with the draft:

1) it increases competition for roster and, most importantly, starting spots. Is competition a bad thing now too?

2) it lowers your draft position by making you win more games. But when I have said Ballard has knowingly sacrificed wins this year (soft tank?) by his moves or that his methods were making the rebuild longer I’m certain you are one that has told me that’s not the case.

So other than decreasing competition or decreasing wins (and therefore increasing draft position) why do you think free agents keep you from building through the draft?

Nothing prevents using free agency, and I'm certain we will do so, but Ballard's made it clear that he wants to build an internal culture first.

I'll also ask you the same question that I've asked several others on this board in response to their complaints - it's easy enough to complain, but please be a bit more specific: who do you believe that Ballard should have signed from last year's available free agency pool that would have solved the problems you're complaining about?

[rm1369]

Originally Posted by Chaka

Nothing prevents using free agency, and I'm certain we will do so, but Ballard's made it clear that he wants to build an internal culture first.

I'll also ask you the same question that I've asked several others on this board in response to their complaints - it's easy enough to complain, but please be a bit more specific: who do you believe that Ballard should have signed from last year's available free agency pool that would have solved the problems you're complaining about?

I won’t play the who should he have signed game. It’s a game that’s impossible to win and you know it. The team had the third pick in the draft last year and are currently 2-5. The idea there weren’t players available that could help this team is ridiculous.

I guess I’m just someone that believes it’s hard to build a winning culture through losing. And I believe experience counts. Especially when you also have a very inexperienced coaching staff.

[VeveJones007]

Originally Posted by rm1369

I won’t play the who should he have signed game. It’s a game that’s impossible to win and you know it. The team had the third pick in the draft last year and are currently 2-5. The idea there weren’t players available that could help this team is ridiculous.

I guess I’m just someone that believes it’s hard to build a winning culture through losing. And I believe experience counts. Especially when you also have a very inexperienced coaching staff.

Devil's advocate: aren't a lot of players getting experience this season when they would have been blocked by free agent vets? By last count, Colts had second most snap counts among rookies in the league.

[rm1369]

Originally Posted by VeveJones007

Devil's advocate: aren't a lot of players getting experience this season when they would have been blocked by free agent vets? By last count, Colts had second most snap counts among rookies in the league.

It’s a valid question. My thinking is that guys should get on the field when they earn it. If you are trying to build a winning culture isn’t that a huge part of it? And it’s a huge part of coaching to be able to identify the guys that deserve to be on the field or show them why they aren’t good enough yet.

Either way, rarely can you both give young guys tons of time and win. And that’s where I feel like Chaka and a few others are simply being intellectually dishonest. The goal posts keep getting moved. Ballard sacrificed this season to get all of these young guys time, several clearly before they are ready. And he unnecessarily held other positions open to do it again next year. If you are fine with that, that’s ok. I just disagree. But it would be nice if guys quit denying that’s what happened.

[Oldcolt]

It all depends on what you want out of the season whether you think Ballard sacrificed it. I want Super Bowl wins so to me anything that isn't part of getting us there is a sacrifice. To me, signing players so we can better, maybe be the worst team in the playoffs at best, is something I'm not interested in so to me Ballard sacrificed nothing. Let me also be clear that I would love to be the worst team in the playoffs this year. Difference to me is that if we do it this year it will be with young players who should be getting better, not veterans who are playing the best they ever will.

[VeveJones007]

Originally Posted by rm1369

It’s a valid question. My thinking is that guys should get on the field when they earn it. If you are trying to build a winning culture isn’t that a huge part of it? And it’s a huge part of coaching to be able to identify the guys that deserve to be on the field or show them why they aren’t good enough yet.

Either way, rarely can you both give young guys tons of time and win. And that’s where I feel like Chaka and a few others are simply being intellectually dishonest. The goal posts keep getting moved. Ballard sacrificed this season to get all of these young guys time, several clearly before they are ready. And he unnecessarily held other positions open to do it again next year. If you are fine with that, that’s ok. I just disagree. But it would be nice if guys quit denying that’s what happened.

1) Look up my preseason predictions and my take on what they did in UFA. I have never moved the goal posts on what 2018 is about. Development & Evaluation. The team's record is secondary.
2) I never denied that's what happened, and if you've listened to Ballard, he told you this was his plan since the end of last season.

Your strategy is perfectly fine, but so is Ballard's. It all comes down to execution. It's way too early to know for sure.

[Puck]

Originally Posted by rm1369

It’s a valid question. My thinking is that guys should get on the field when they earn it. If you are trying to build a winning culture isn’t that a huge part of it? And it’s a huge part of coaching to be able to identify the guys that deserve to be on the field or show them why they aren’t good enough yet.

Either way, rarely can you both give young guys tons of time and win. And that’s where I feel like Chaka and a few others are simply being intellectually dishonest. The goal posts keep getting moved. Ballard sacrificed this season to get all of these young guys time, several clearly before they are ready. And he unnecessarily held other positions open to do it again next year. If you are fine with that, that’s ok. I just disagree. But it would be nice if guys quit denying that’s what happened.

Why draft them if your not going to give them a chance? Might as well trade all your picks for FA's

[FatDT]

Originally Posted by Puck

Why draft them if your not going to give them a chance? Might as well trade all your picks for FA's

Why keep any player not on a rookie contract? Just trade away all good players over 25 for draft picks and bring in young players every year. Cap space forever, building culture forever.

Wait that sounds almost as dumb as your post, nevermind.

[Chaka]

Originally Posted by rm1369

It’s a valid question. My thinking is that guys should get on the field when they earn it. If you are trying to build a winning culture isn’t that a huge part of it? And it’s a huge part of coaching to be able to identify the guys that deserve to be on the field or show them why they aren’t good enough yet.

Either way, rarely can you both give young guys tons of time and win. And that’s where I feel like Chaka and a few others are simply being intellectually dishonest. The goal posts keep getting moved. Ballard sacrificed this season to get all of these young guys time, several clearly before they are ready. And he unnecessarily held other positions open to do it again next year. If you are fine with that, that’s ok. I just disagree. But it would be nice if guys quit denying that’s what happened.

Either way, rarely can you both give young guys tons of time and win. And that’s where I feel like Chaka and a few others are simply being intellectually dishonest. The goal posts keep getting moved. Ballard sacrificed this season to get all of these young guys time, several clearly before they are ready. And he unnecessarily held other positions open to do it again next year. If you are fine with that, that’s ok. I just disagree. But it would be nice if guys quit denying that’s what happened.

Because I don't agree with you I'm intellectually dishonest? That's silly - I always try to explain my position in terms of actual information. Please point out my prior posts where you think I'm not being forthright or "moving the goalposts" on you. My position has always been that a healthy Luck gives us a chance to win almost any game - perhaps our chances could be slightly improved by signing a bunch of free agents, but I'll trade a few extra mistakes in exchange for the long term benefits that I think following Ballard's plan will bring.

And by the way, what players is Ballard playing "clearly before they are ready"? It appears to me that the areas of greatest concern are those that are manned largely by players that have been in the league for several years: CB and WR. Most of the rookies have performed admirably, and a review of the stats reveals that our defense is actually far better statistically than it was with all of the old guard you argued so strongly that we should have kept (Hankins, etc.). Despite our 2-5 record, we've actually scored more points (189) than we've given up (185).

Simply put, while your comments often reflect commonly held sentiments about the Colts, they aren't supported by the facts. Now THAT is intellectually dishonest, and that's why I've been pressing you to provide me with real-world information that we can all analyze in support of your position.