The build

[omahacolt]

Originally Posted by VeveJones007

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.

Free agents can sign multi year deals. So no. My argument stands tall

[rm1369]

Originally Posted by Racehorse

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.

Who said I’m angry?

I understand the importance of culture. I’m aware of companies that have had to start from scratch to effect the necessary change. But while I would never suggest the Pagano lead Colts had a great team culture, I’m not aware of it being that degree of toxic either.

Interestingly I just went back and read the first 20 pages of the off-season free agency thread. I saw plenty of big wishes on who the team would sign. And I saw arguments on the value of certain players. Want to know what I didn’t see? Anyone suggesting that Ballard couldn’t bring in free agents because they would stunt the growth of the young players. Or anyone suggesting the team needed to “take a step back” to rebuild the culture of the team. I find that interesting considering how obvious both of those things seem to many now. So obvious that any suggestion otherwise is now considered not only wrong, but apparently so wrong as to basically be ridiculous. I wonder what the reception of those opinions would have been BEFORE Ballard preached them? I have a feeling they would have sounded as out there as I apparently sound now.

[Dam8610]

Originally Posted by Puck

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

Every team has bad scheme occasionally. Good players can still make good plays in those situations.

[Butter]

Originally Posted by Dam8610

Every team has bad scheme occasionally. Good players can still make good plays in those situations.

[Chaka]

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.

Fair enough. You're a smart guy and I respect your opinion, but ultimately you're correct that we just disagree. It's been fun discussing it with you, nevertheless.

[Racehorse]

Originally Posted by rm1369

Who said I’m angry?

I understand the importance of culture. I’m aware of companies that have had to start from scratch to effect the necessary change. But while I would never suggest the Pagano lead Colts had a great team culture, I’m not aware of it being that degree of toxic either.

Interestingly I just went back and read the first 20 pages of the off-season free agency thread. I saw plenty of big wishes on who the team would sign. And I saw arguments on the value of certain players. Want to know what I didn’t see? Anyone suggesting that Ballard couldn’t bring in free agents because they would stunt the growth of the young players. Or anyone suggesting the team needed to “take a step back” to rebuild the culture of the team. I find that interesting considering how obvious both of those things seem to many now. So obvious that any suggestion otherwise is now considered not only wrong, but apparently so wrong as to basically be ridiculous. I wonder what the reception of those opinions would have been BEFORE Ballard preached them? I have a feeling they would have sounded as out there as I apparently sound now.

Looks like we agree more than it appeared. However, I see it as crying over spilt milk. You can't get it back, so try to make the best of what is instead of what could have been. To me, that is where the debate is. I get it that many here wanted to win more games this year, because so did I. However, I also see the value in taking a step back out of the ditch in order to be able to move forward. That is where my thoughts come from. It really is an apples and oranges thing.

[rm1369]

Originally Posted by Racehorse

Looks like we agree more than it appeared. However, I see it as crying over spilt milk. You can't get it back, so try to make the best of what is instead of what could have been. To me, that is where the debate is. I get it that many here wanted to win more games this year, because so did I. However, I also see the value in taking a step back out of the ditch in order to be able to move forward. That is where my thoughts come from. It really is an apples and oranges thing.

I don’t see that I’m crying about it. I recognize that the Colts hired Ballard to rebuild and it’s going to be done his way, not mine. And I’ve specifically said he has to be given time to build his version of the team. I simply state my opinion and try to explain / defend it. And I try to do it in the appropriate threads. I’m not interjecting my opinion in other threads like the Mitchel thread. I wasn’t in the game thread complaining about Ballard not improving the WR core after drops. Not even the 3 & 4 drop by Johnson in OT with Houston. Nor did I crow in the game thread about the Hairston hold on 2nd & 26 against the Eagles - another clear example of my point about experience effecting the outcome of games. I stated my opinion here because it’s relevant to the rebuilding topic. To me that’s not crying. And it doesn’t mean I’m not happy with the team or that I don’t see a bright future.

[VeveJones007]

Originally Posted by omahacolt

Free agents can sign multi year deals. So no. My argument stands tall

But you acknowledge that the 2018 season was not going to result in a title either way?

[Racehorse]

Originally Posted by rm1369

I don’t see that I’m crying about it. I recognize that the Colts hired Ballard to rebuild and it’s going to be done his way, not mine. And I’ve specifically said he has to be given time to build his version of the team. I simply state my opinion and try to explain / defend it. And I try to do it in the appropriate threads. I’m not interjecting my opinion in other threads like the Mitchel thread. I wasn’t in the game thread complaining about Ballard not improving the WR core after drops. Not even the 3 & 4 drop by Johnson in OT with Houston. Nor did I crow in the game thread about the Hairston hold on 2nd & 26 against the Eagles - another clear example of my point about experience effecting the outcome of games. I stated my opinion here because it’s relevant to the rebuilding topic. To me that’s not crying. And it doesn’t mean I’m not happy with the team or that I don’t see a bright future.

It was an expression, not meaning literally crying. Maybe I could have said it was water under the bridge, but I didn’t see you as a sensitive fellow, nor as a troll.

[omahacolt]

Originally Posted by VeveJones007

But you acknowledge that the 2018 season was not going to result in a title either way?

Of course.