Free agency 2023

[ChaosTheory]

Originally Posted by rm1369

Ahh yes - stating in year 2 that you disagree with a philosophy and continuing to disagree in year 6. If he had proven me wrong it would be easy to show. The funny part is I said he was planning a 4-5 yr rebuild and was told I was crazy. Same kinds of shit you are saying now. Little did I know I was being optimistic.

Fanboys tend to do what you are doing - complaining about any critique. Must be nice to have a job that doesn’t require performance.

Just because you type it doesn't make it true. Your idea of "performance" is totally narrow. It's how a guy like Dan Dakich arrives at his take. Grigson had results and Ballard doesn't. None of his other "performance" matters when you're trying to make a point. Just flash his record without context.

The QB situation is simply the easiest to point out. Nobody stays afloat for 6 years with our circumstances. We did until last year. I won't even ask you if Luck had stayed around if we'd be a year-in-year-out elite team with Ballard's exact same team-building approach. It'd be a dumb question.

Even if we time-traveled, Luck stayed, we had multiple good records and a SB... you just say Luck won it despite Ballard.

[Dam8610]

Originally Posted by rm1369

I find it strange that Ballard’s ardent defenders would be fine condemning him based off of one bad choice. Hell even I admit this is at best a 50 / 50 shot. I don’t believe Ballard’s tenure should be determined by one draft choice. Especially considering that by Chrome’s reasoning they only even have this shot thanks to Irsay. Ballard wouldn’t have gotten them here to have this choice.

Unfortunately this is the Not For Long. You can be great at everything else, but you fuck up that QB pick and you're done. That said, he has probably the best collection of scouts in the league to help him make the decision, and he's a crafty bastard of a negotiator. I'd be shocked if Ballard wasn't at least partially responsible for the recent wave of stories tamping down expectations of crazy Bears fans thinking they were going to get the moon and the stars for the #1 overall pick. Clearly the front office in the league most likely to trade for that pick is the Colts. Ballard even tipped his hand far more than he normally would in his end of year presser, saying he'd do whatever it took to land the right QB if said QB is in this class. Given the team's proximity to the #1 pick and the owner's damn near public mandate that the team draft and develop a QB, "the right guy" is whoever the front office thinks is the best QB in this draft. Given my opinion of this QB class and Ballard and Co.'s acumen at talent evaluation and acquisition, I believe they'll arrive at what I believe to be the correct conclusion that C.J. Stroud is the clear #1 QB in this draft and they'll trade a reasonable, not king's ransom package to Chicago to move up and get him.

The only way I can see Ballard getting this wrong and keeping his job is if Irsay comes in and forces his will as an owner to trade up and pick "that Alabama kid" over Ballard’s objections, and Young ends up busting for whatever reason. That said, Irsay has been involved in the NFL long enough to believe that his comment in that press conference may have been a smokescreen to hide the true interests of the Colts' front office regarding this QB class.

[ChaosTheory]

Originally Posted by IndyNorm

The point I was making is that LT is WAY more critical than LG, and a great LT can cover for a bad LG. Not the vice versa. Back when we had Tarik Glenn at LT we could put whoever at LG and the OL was fine. Looked what happened when we put a shit LT next to the supposed greatest LG in the history of football this season.

I know what you're saying, I just don't agree with the cliché.

-Darius Leonard was drafted high and eventually paid because he was making edge rusher levels of impact to games from the WLB spot

-Luck is the biggest albatross this team has had and it wasn't caused by LT (we had underrated Castonzo)... he was demolished by years of a pathetic interior OL.

-Grigson finally drafts Kelly on his way out in desperation, Luck misses '17, again because of the interior OL, and Ballard spends the #6 and #37 on guards. Until snake eyes hit this year, they were worth the draft capital and earned their paydays.

-Glenn was a really good LT, but I think I even remember reading Mudd or Dungy or somebody saying that Jake Scott was our best OL. We had a good OL across the board. It's also difficult to judge in a vacuum since Manning was the hardest to sack QB ever.

-Yes, Pryor was a disaster. But Nelson also wasn't himself last season which was part of the rationale behind Reich and Ballard going with Pryor to start. Again, that was about Pryor, not LT. If Pryor and Nelson switched positions, we'd be back to the Luck days desperate to improve the interior OL.

[Dam8610]

Originally Posted by IndyNorm

The point I was making is that LT is WAY more critical than LG, and a great LT can cover for a bad LG. Not the vice versa. Back when we had Tarik Glenn at LT we could put whoever at LG and the OL was fine. Looked what happened when we put a shit LT next to the supposed greatest LG in the history of football this season.

Come on, he's not John Hannah yet.

[rm1369]

Originally Posted by ChaosTheory

Just because you type it doesn't make it true. Your idea of "performance" is totally narrow. It's how a guy like Dan Dakich arrives at his take. Grigson had results and Ballard doesn't. None of his other "performance" matters when you're trying to make a point. Just flash his record without context.

The QB situation is simply the easiest to point out. Nobody stays afloat for 6 years with our circumstances. We did until last year. I won't even ask you if Luck had stayed around if we'd be a year-in-year-out elite team with Ballard's exact same team-building approach. It'd be a dumb question.

Even if we time-traveled, Luck stayed, we had multiple good records and a SB... you just say Luck won it despite Ballard.

It’s strange - when we argued about Polian the only thing that mattered to you was wins and losses. And the fact it was done with Manning was largely irrelevant. Polian was an obvious genius because of his wins and losses. Now on Ballard, wins and losses means nothing and his QB situation is critical in analyzing his performance.

Luck retiring was unprecedented. However needing to fix the QB situation situation is hardly unusual. It’s a situation most GMs face. I don’t knock Ballard for not having a franchise QB in place, I knock him for his half assed approach to the position and the roster. Acquiring vet QBs and prioritizing development for the rest of the roster has been stupid. It’s kept the team mediocre - good enough for you guys to say he can’t draft his QB, yet bad enough that the team isn’t winning anything meaningful- 1 playoff win in 6 years, no division titles in one of the leagues worst divisions. I would have been fine with a worse record developing a young QB. I would have been fine shooting their shot with any of those QBs and coming up short. What I’m not fine with is the “safe” middle that you guys seem to love and that has gone exactly as I expected. But it makes sense. Ballard has said it, Dam is saying it, Chrome is saying it - once he drafts a QB then his excuse goes away and he will likely be fired if he misses. Again I disagree with the logic. But it makes sense that he has continuously punted on the decision and made no “big” mistakes. Job security. And hell, if it wasn’t for Irsay getting involved (which I didn’t like) he still wouldn’t be in a position to fix the QB position. As long as he had that crutch and wasn’t Grigson he was untouchable.

I asked Chrome for some kind of measuring stick for Ballard going forward. His answer is simply draft well. I’m curious whose job in the organization is it to put together winning teams? According to him that shouldn’t be the measure for Ballard. He’s largely drafted well for 6 fucking years and yet the Colts were one of the worst teams in the league. If he’s drafted well for 6 years yet the team still sucks don’t you think it is fair to question some of his methods, his team building philosophy? That’s why I say he’s not required to perform.

[JAFF]

Originally Posted by rm1369

BS I’m tired of hearing the hindsight argument on any criticism of Ballard. I’ve consistently criticized Ballard’s stated method since his second off season. That’s not hindsight. And I pretty much never criticize him for who he has drafted or who he signed at QB. Everyone is going to miss on players. It’s constantly wasting season after season on development that pisses me off. In 6 years he still hasn’t had a season where he pushed to win. Not fucking once.

Send in an application.

[rm1369]

Originally Posted by JAFF

Send in an application.

I’m guessing you never criticized Grigson or Pagano? How about a player? Fuck off with your childish BS arguments.

[JAFF]

Originally Posted by rm1369

I’m guessing you never criticized Grigson or Pagano? How about a player? Fuck off with your childish BS arguments.

No, I had my critic of both of them, after the fact. But I dont pretend to know how to run a draft.

Im not going to pretend to know what goes on in the front office on 54 th street, let alone in Irsays head. He may be serious about trading up to get the kid from Alabama.

I dont pretend to know more than someone who has actually spent most of his entire adult life working inside football. Ballard doesnt get the gift of hindsight. It could have been Irsay who told him to trade for Wentz. Did we have all the info on that trade the day it happened?

I will give you my guess for the future. It wont matter who they draft as a Qb if they dont fix the O line. Draft it, trade for it, I dont care. Cut guys if they cant get something for them, but make some room and bring some one who is a hitter.

From HINDSIGHT, it wont matter who the Qb is. He will look like the kid with the bears. Running for his life trying to make plays. Unless our future Qb is an olympic sprinter, it will be a football version of Groundhogs day all season long

[Chromeburn]

Originally Posted by IndyNorm

Overpaying at less critical positions and going cheap at the critical ones is how you end up w/ shit like the highest paid but arguable worst performing OL in the league.

Not really. Other teams have paid guards. Cowboys have pulled it off. The underperformance is the problem. And that is mostly attributable to one player disrupting the entire unit. Pryor just couldn’t get in sync with the oline at tackle or guard. Things started to stabilize once Raimann got better.

The defense was very good, but they missed Leonard’s turnovers which is an elite skill worth paying. Again you ignore the fact that removing those players just creates a performance gap. It isn’t replaced by another player somewhere else.

[ChaosTheory]

Originally Posted by rm1369

It’s strange - when we argued about Polian the only thing that mattered to you was wins and losses. And the fact it was done with Manning was largely irrelevant. Polian was an obvious genius because of his wins and losses. Now on Ballard, wins and losses means nothing and his QB situation is critical in analyzing his performance.

That's hilarious because I'm the least single-issue minded person you'll come across. I've had guys bitch at me for getting too bogged down in the details, even you I believe. I've never had somebody say my argument is too narrow. You either didn't read my posts or are intentionally omitting details. The first bold text, for example, is such a mischaracterization that it basically qualifies as made up.

And the second bold is a similar example of mischaracterizing where you take things to ridiculous extremes.

The rest of your post is stuff we've scrapped over already. We disagree. I think your premise is wrong. Going back to the original point of bringing up Polian's record in our previous conversation... even if this team drafts a great QB in '23 and begins a run of 10 years of success akin to the 2000's Colts, that won't be good enough for you.

You won't view Ballard in a positive light until he signs a bunch of big names from other teams. And it's not like it's about whether those moves work out or not... you'll say, "At least he took his shot."