The build

[VeveJones007]

Originally Posted by ukcolt

I wouldn't write off the prospect of us making the playoffs this year. I am not expecting to win big by any stretch of the imagination, but our division is so weak that we could yet sneak into the playoffs. The goal has to be to be a legitimate superbowl contender though, which we all realise is a long way off just yet.

I think they missed their chance with all those close losses the first month of the season. If they had 1-2 more wins at this point, I would like their odds a lot better. It'll probably take 9 wins to take the South. This team isn't good enough to go 8-2 over 10 games.

[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

Then feel free to ignore it, but that's kind of the problem here. I see a lot of the same complaints over and over (Ballard's wasting Luck's best years, Ballard failed to spend on free agency, etc.), and unfortunately the explanation for why he might be doing this can't be laid out in a tweet-long response (or if it can, I'm not a skilled enough writer to do it).

Its possible to understand the reasons Ballard gives yet still disagree with them. I understand perfectly what Ballard says are the reasons. I also understand many that agreed with his methods didn’t expect to be sitting at 2-5 yet now act like of course this was the plan all along.

[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.

[albany ed]

Personally, I feel this team is leaps and bounds beyond last years' team. I only remember about 6 or 7 plays in the entire season last year to get excited about, but this year, they've been competitive in almost every game. Even the best teams have a game or two where they look bad, so I don't hold that against them. Another successful draft this spring and some key free agent signings and this team will return to the top of the division and in the hunt for the Super Bowl. And, along the way, they'll be fun to watch and that's good enough for me.

[Oldcolt]

Originally Posted by rm1369

Its possible to understand the reasons Ballard gives yet still disagree with them. I understand perfectly what Ballard says are the reasons. I also understand many that agreed with his methods didn’t expect to be sitting at 2-5 yet now act like of course this was the plan all along.

I see your point and I think it is valid. For me the weight of the argument lands on the side of doing what Ballard is doing but it’s not like it’s 100%. It’s close enough that you could absolutely turn out to be correct. As far as our record goes, I was never concerned about it for this year. I wanted improvements, especially along the offensive line. If the line wasn’t gelling with all that Ballard has thrown at it I believe you would have a legitimate bitch. He threw resources at it and he did a damn good job of fixing it. Add to the fact that we actually are getting to the quarterback without blitzes and for the first time almost ever we have a defense that creates turnovers. I’m very pleased at where we are and at in this rebuild

[Maniac]

Originally Posted by omahacolt

We have Andrew luck and play in a shitty division. That is the reality. Competing and winning this division should t take long at all.

I don’t hate Ballard. I just disagree with some of the moves. Or non moves. Taking 3 years to be competitive with a great qb is nonsense

Competing just because we are in a shitty division isn't much to brag about. I would rather them build the team to where we can compete for championships for the longer term, not just AFC south divisions.

But no matter what you're competing for, it takes more than a year or two to overhaul a team and build it correctly. They changed defensive and offensive systems. They have to retool the roster not only for talent, but also for fits for that scheme, and that takes time. The fact that in year two people are complaining that it's not quick enough is just ridiculous, and like I mentioned, this was the first year with their own scouting staff and info from that.

You've been pretty critical of Ballard. He's made mistakes here and there, but from the looks of it, he had a very solid draft in his first one with his own staff. I think he'll ramp up things in free agency now that there is a better core on this team.

[FatDT]

Everyone is polarized these days. The truth is, outside of Spike (who is known to go off the emotional deep end before reeling it back in) no one is calling for Ballard to be fired. Everyone wants him to succeed.

What gets obnoxious is the attempts to shout down arguable criticism. Ballard has made some good moves/non-moves, and some bad ones. Some of the moves/non-moves that seemed to be bad are showing signs that perhaps they were actually good. Some of us on either side will be wrong, and if we are grown-ups we will admit it. Ballard's plan will take time, and it is fun to discuss and debate while we wait to see how it goes.

What isn't fun is dealing with arguments like "You're just a hater" or "Go root for another team if you hate the Colts so much" or "There's a reason he's a GM and you're just a guy typing on a computer". These 'arguments' are lazy bullshit.

1 - Criticism is not hate. It is largely born out of a desire to see the team do well, and overcome the same pitfalls that plague them every year.

2 - GMs and other "professionals" make dumbass decisions all the time. The Raiders gave Gruden a 10 year guaranteed contract. Gruden traded Mack away and then complained that pass rushers are hard to find. The Cowboys gave Gruden a 1st for a fake WR1 with bad hands on his way to being a bust. Ryan Grigson was a GM for 5 years. Matt Millen was a GM. The Browns themselves have dozens of examples of professionals that sucked and got fired. The Giants are a mess because of bad decisions by their coaching staff and front office. The Seahawks were almost a dynasty but they got rid of good players and now they suck.

"Appeal to Authority" is literally a logical fallacy and therefore is a bad and dumbass argument every time.

Everyone here is a Colts fan. We can argue. I can call you a dipshit and you can call me a fag and we will be fine because we are all still Colts fans that want to see the team do well. Disagreement is just part of the deal. It's a lot easier to disagree when we are winning and it suddenly seems a lot more serious and emotional when we suck. But it's just a football discussion board. Debate ideas, and if you want name call like children. But trying to silence each other seems like the wrong road to take.

[Oldcolt]

People care so they get pissed. Gotta love that there is a place like this for us to hang out