#41
|
|||
|
|||
I didn't mean that to be a critique of Ballard, I just meant he doesn’t have a real track record to have any faith in. He’s a first time GM in year 2.
|
#42
|
||||
|
||||
Quote:
My recollection of Freeney is a bit different. He was undersized and considered a reach, but he was picked somewhere in the early teens so there wasn't as much national attention paid to the pick. I recall reading that the Colts had the opportunity to trade down to the late teens (where Freeney was had been projected to be picked), but Polian ultimately decided not to do it because the were afraid someone else would have grabbed him. Again, the move was panned at the time, and ultimately the Colts were proven right. You make a fair point that Ballard doesn't yet have the track record of Polian (very few do), but I'll simply respond by saying he doesn't have a Ditka track record either. Ballard's first draft looks promising and, as I think I've made clear in other posts, I like the guy's overall approach so I'm inclined to give him the benefit of the doubt. As in most endeavors, you don't get anywhere in the NFL by following the pack, and people who take a different approach can do great things when it turns out they're right - and I'll go on record as saying I think Ballard is right. |
#43
|
||||
|
||||
Quote:
If the QB that BUF wants is still available at #6, then we could get their #12, #22 and their top pick of the 3rd round for it. Edmunds (or Smith) at #12 and LVE at #22 is possible. 2nd round picks at #36, #37 and #49. 3rd round picks at #65 (1st in 3rd round) and #67 (3rd in 3rd round) That would be 7 picks of the top 67 or fully 10% of the overall picks. If picked well, that is the way you rebuild a team. Walk Worthy,
__________________
============== Thad The future is so bright; I gotta triple up! |
The Following User Says Thank You to sherck For This Useful Post: | ||
Racehorse (04-07-2018) |
#44
|
|||
|
|||
Quote:
My concern is that while you may see his approach as unique I simply see it as ultra conservative. It brings to mind Polian and Ted Thompson. Successfull GMs sure (especially Polish), but I belief both have cost their teams titles by their conservative approaches. Manning and Rodgers should have more than a title each (with Colts for Manning). Their complete reliance on the draft and their “do what we do” attitude helps maintain consistency, but doesn’t push their teams over the top quite enough. I’d rather have a few more valleys to have a few more higher peaks. So when I see Ballard cut a 26 yr old performing Hankins because the players in this D need to be drafted into it I hear “do what we do” and think back to all those vanilla and ultimately underperforming Colts teams coming up short - year after year. The best teams scheme around their talent - not the other way around. “Do what we do” and ignoring free agency brought this team one title forarguably the GOAT, but without a doubt one of the top 3 QBs to ever play. That doesn’t make me optimistic for Ballard since early Polian was largely money in the draft. Ballard better but a damn drafting genius. Now, I said there wasn’t a track record for me to have faith in Ballard he also doesn’t have a track record for me to KNOW that this is the same path Ballard will take. So I try to remain caustiously optimistic. But I tend to believ what’s someone says until I have a reason not to and all of Ballard’s words, quite a few of his actions, and the Colts available cap space and mediocre signings say he is absolutely on the the Polian and Thompson level for conservative team building. |
The Following User Says Thank You to rm1369 For This Useful Post: | ||
Kray007 (04-08-2018) |
#45
|
||||
|
||||
Quote:
|
#46
|
|||
|
|||
Quote:
|
#47
|
||||
|
||||
I get what you are saying but NE is really the inly team that can operate that way. You dont see that ability elsewhere, even if they have coaches from the BB tree.
|
#48
|
|||
|
|||
I’m not asking for a full on BB approach. But to me there is a huge gulf between saying players need to be drafted into this D and full BB. Pissing away a 26 yr old performing player on a team friendly contract because he doesn’t exactly fit your ideal player in the D (when he hasn’t played a down in that D for you) is way, way to one side of that. And I’d argue that Philly had the same mentality I’m asking for and it directly contributed to their success. They didn’t say you only win by drafting players. They were aggressive on and off the field and it paid off for them. I doubt you will see Philly under current leadership have the same obvious flaws year after year after year without making aggressive moves to address it. Will they have the sustained regular season success the Manning Colts had? Probably not. But they’ve already won as many titles as the Manning era Colts did.
Last edited by rm1369; 04-06-2018 at 01:30 PM. |
#49
|
||||
|
||||
Quote:
|
The Following User Says Thank You to Chaka For This Useful Post: | ||
Racehorse (04-07-2018) |
#50
|
|||
|
|||
That’s fair. I’ll just say it like this. To me Ballard doesn’t come off as just having a plan, he comes off as rigid. Thats not what I want from a coach or a GM. But it’s early and we’ll see how it goes.
|
|
|