Gerald McCoy

[Chromeburn]

Originally Posted by Chaka

I’ll stop “lecturing” people about sound management of team resources when people stop trying to justify the signing of an over-the-hill player based upon the amount of cap space that we have. It’s a lame justification. And the only “hand wringing” I see is the anxiety that so many here have expressed over the large amount of cap space the Colts are sitting on.

Looking through all of the garbage in your last post, it doesn’t appear we even disagree very much in principle. Of course you need to draft well, and of course you need to make good free agent signings. That’s really all I’ve been saying all along. Where we disagree is how that strategy is implemented. It is indeed a cost benefit analysis, just as you’ve said, and I just don’t think the costs of signing the type of older players you’ve been advocating (like McCoy) are likely to provide a equivalent or greater benefit. Time will tell, I guess, and it certainly isn't impossible, but as we sit here today I just don’t think history suggests that’s a good move.

But I never said we shouldn’t sign free agents – that’s a ridiculous distortion – and with perhaps the exception of the Houston signing, I’ve only spoken up when people here start criticizing the team’s failure to sign a ultra high end free agent or an expensive castoff from another team. I praised the 2018 free agent class we signed, which led to a fair amount of criticism and similar comments last off season (perhaps even from you – but I’m not going to hunt down those comments right now), and had no problem with the Funchess signing except for the length of contract/lack of options stuff I mentioned. I’m not a big fan of the Houston signing – primarily for the costs and guarantees involved. That’s it.

P.S. So now Ballard is both reactive AND proactive - do I have that right? (sorry, couldn't resist)

The fact that we have available cap space was only one factor in signing McCoy, not the only factor. If you read through the thread you would know that, but I think you ignore it because it doesn't fit the narrative you are trying to establish. We actually don't disagree on very much, however you misinterpret things quite a bit and it is exhausting.

Maybe some appreaciate the lectures, I already have an MBA and I don't think your 'run it like a business' model is applicable to building a winning football team. The problem is I just don't think you know a whole lot about football. The fact that the only problem you have with the Funchess signing is that it is one year contract reinforces that notion. If you don't know much about football it is hard to tell what is a good decision and a bad decision concerning personnel. So you fall back on a trope of arguing against over-paying for free agents and big names. "Oh no stupid fans, they don't know what they are talking about. They just want to sign big name players past their prime. I better tell them how you are suppossed to run a football team." Well that isn't really the case here. Considering we have a ton of cap space, makes it more a football fit argument than a cap argument concerning McCoy. If you want to argue that spending money on McCoy will keep us from resigning our own guys, fine do that. Look at the free agents for next year. Some of these guys we will resign, more I think we will replaced through the draft. But just saying "oh no spending ten million now will keep us from resigning guys" is a blanket statement that doesn't hold any weight because it is conjecture.

As for the proactive thing. I know you think you are making a joke, but you do know premptive and proactive have two different meanings? You remind me of Biff Tannen who thinks he is being witty when he tells someone to make like a tree and get outa here. Ballard is only proactive once a glaring hole is exposed on the field. The past couple years we have entered the season with obvious holes. OL year one, year two pass rush and WR, year three looks like interior d-line to me as it stands. I would like to see him address these issues more before it is exposed on the field, hence he is reactive to roster issues after the fact, then he becomes proactive. That is not the same as preemptive. This comes into the reading comprehension, I really think you have a hard time figuring out what people are trying to say on here. I have to explain things to an obsurd detail. I noticed it the last time we got into it and you doing it with other posters as well.