The build

[Dam8610]

Originally Posted by JesusChrist

You are skewing your perception of the "evidence" to make it fit your argument. You even admitted that this team has had more than it's fair share of injuries. If our injury situation wasn't as ridiculous as it has been, we would probably be at 4 wins at the very least right now. Coaching absolutely matters on game day. You need talented players and you need coaches who can scheme and call plays to put those players in the best possible position to use their talent. Pagano's dumb ass had no idea how to do that.

Good players can overcome bad scheme. Bad players can overcome good scheme. The latter happens far more often. The job of coaches is to get their players to maximize their talent. Scheme can help with that, but ultimately the coach can't go out and catch the ball or make the tackle. The player has to do that. That's why the impact of coaching is negligible on gameday.

[Dam8610]

Originally Posted by Chaka

Sorry, no offense intended, I meant it to be more of a joke given how much debate that issue has generated here. Not trying to beat that dead horse any further.

No offense taken, it was more of an opportunity to clarify than anything.

[VeveJones007]

Originally Posted by omahacolt

Good teams use guys like Mike Adams all the time as filler for a few years. I like it

This is where you argument falls short. Say it with me, "there was no combination of moves Ballard could have made in 2018 UFA that would have made the Colts a Super Bowl contender this season." You're arguing for a more competitive team in 2018 with no chance of winning a title. Keep your eye on the prize.

This team's window starts to open in 2019. Maybe Ballard makes a few key additions in UFA next offseason. I'll be disappointed if he doesn't, but we can't judge him on 2018.

[Puck]

Originally Posted by Dam8610

Good players can overcome bad scheme. Bad players can overcome good scheme. The latter happens far more often. The job of coaches is to get their players to maximize their talent. Scheme can help with that, but ultimately the coach can't go out and catch the ball or make the tackle. The player has to do that. That's why the impact of coaching is negligible on gameday.

But they shouldnt have too... that is why we have a new coach

[JAFF]

Originally Posted by Dam8610

Good players can overcome bad scheme. Bad players can overcome good scheme. The latter happens far more often. The job of coaches is to get their players to maximize their talent. Scheme can help with that, but ultimately the coach can't go out and catch the ball or make the tackle. The player has to do that. That's why the impact of coaching is negligible on gameday.

Good coaching shows up on game day because you "coach them up", educate them, teach them, drill them... to be ready for game day.

You know why Howard Mudd kept getting jobs? He could take a guy like Jeff Saturday, a smart hard working guy, and turn him into an all pro. Peyton Manning was not a great athlete. But he may have been one of the smartest. He had a lot of help from Tom Moore. Moore gave him the concepts, he went out and completed them.

Ryan Leaf was a better athlete than Manning. I saw them play in Indy in the preseason. Leaf could throw the ball out of the dome. But he couldn't be coached.

Great players, have ability and they can take coaching. It's a marriage. Great athletes can be schemed. Their ability to change and defeat the scheme is what makes them great. But that takes coaching.

Using your logic, I should be an NFL coach and in the HOF

[Maniac]

Originally Posted by Dam8610

Good players can overcome bad scheme. Bad players can overcome good scheme. The latter happens far more often. The job of coaches is to get their players to maximize their talent. Scheme can help with that, but ultimately the coach can't go out and catch the ball or make the tackle. The player has to do that. That's why the impact of coaching is negligible on gameday.

The idea is for the players not to have to overcome the stupidity of their coaching staff, which, like Puck said, is why we have a new coach. Coaches shouldn't put them in bad situations and say "Well, you should be able to overcome me being a moron." They should put them in the best situations possible, and all of that matters on game day.

[Racehorse]

Originally Posted by rm1369

Chaka, I see no reason to continue this conversation. The point to me seems pretty fucking simple - inexperienced teams have a hard to winning consistently. You’ve said they probably haven’t won as much so far because of their youth, but can’t get it through your head that’s that’s my primary point. I simply don’t see a reason to be so young and / or thin at certain spots to start the season. There is nothing in your mind that could allow the team to be 4-3 or 5-2 at this point and still have Leonard, Nelson and a slew of young players with upside. To you as soon as you bring in another vet at LB (doesn’t matter which of the 3 positions) Leonard disappears from the team. You are happy with 110% of Ballard’s moves and I’m happy with probably 85% of them. Somehow that means I give him no credit for anything.

I’ve told you I won’t play the “tell me who” game. I know exactly how that goes. If Ballard hadn’t signed Ebron and I now identified him as a target you’d have 15 reasons we couldn’t have signed him, he wouldn’t help, and / or he would just hold back Swoope’s development. If I had identified Mitchel as a player that could help this team (I wouldn’t have) before he was signed would you have agreed? Fuck no you wouldn’t have! But here he is helping the team win. So no, I won’t play that BS game with you. I’ve already kept Leonard from being drafted. I sure as hell don’t want to get TY cut by improving a shitty WR core.

I’ve said I like the team. I like the progress. I like Ballard. I expect him to get the team back to contender status. I like the coaching staff. I like the majority of the individual players. I simply don’t agree with the depth of the youth movement. I believe (as you have said) that it has cost us games this year. You see the fact they were in a lot of close games as progress. I don’t disagree. But I also see it as proof they could be sitting at 4-3 or 5-2 with small improvements in some areas. Like WRs that can catch. I see the fucking progress, I’m in no way trying to minimize it. Yes I expected progress with the return of a franchise QB and a competent coaching staff. That doesn’t mean I don’t also see the progress in other areas. I’ve said I do. Because I see and expected progress is the reason I only agree with 85% of Ballard’s moves. If I thought everything sucked and had to be burnt down I would, like you, agree with Ballard 100%.

That’s it. I’m done with this conversation. I don’t troll and I don’t criticize every Ballard move. I simply state my opinion. It’s stated. You disagree. Time to move the hell on.

Short version: I get the last word because I say so.

[Racehorse]

Originally Posted by Dam8610

Good players can overcome bad scheme. Bad players can overcome good scheme. The latter happens far more often. The job of coaches is to get their players to maximize their talent. Scheme can help with that, but ultimately the coach can't go out and catch the ball or make the tackle. The player has to do that. That's why the impact of coaching is negligible on gameday.

We really need a “Ha ha” button when we need to laugh at moronic ideas.

[rm1369]

Originally Posted by Racehorse

Short version: I get the last word because I say so.

Fuck off. Chaka can respond and say whatever the hell he wants. How the fuck am I stopping him from responding? I’m simply not continuing arguing about it. Seems pretty clear we don’t agree.

Not surprised you are the one stirring the pot though.

[Racehorse]

Originally Posted by rm1369

Fuck off. Chaka can respond and say whatever the hell he wants. How the fuck am I stopping him from responding? I’m simply not continuing arguing about it. Seems pretty clear we don’t agree.

Not surprised you are the one stirring the pot though.

Maybe you should seek help. Your anger about a stupid message board is not healthy.

On the football side, I think you have a different idea about how to build a team than Ballard does. I get it. Not all GMs are identical in how they do it. Now I don’t think you’re a troll, but I do disagree with your criticisms. As a HS coach, I see the value in taking a step back to build a culture because I had to do it. It sacrifices a season, but pays off dividends in the future. Maybe you agree on that, but just can’t explain it in a way that we can agree. Maybe you don’t. Hard to tell on here.