Ballard vs Grigson - Change of Culture

[rcubed]

Originally Posted by FatDT

You have objectively demonstrated a measure of intelligence by your interest in stats, your ability to write clearly, some of your analysis. I don't believe you are actually a stupid person. But I do not understand why you choose to narrow the set of facts to only fit your chosen narrative and then pretend like you aren't doing it. Why be intentionally dense? You know just as well as everyone else that your winning percentage argument, and the implied conclusion that it justifies his coaching, is nonsense. Just stop it with this superior "I know better" shtick. The case against Pagano is well-established. Demanding that it be reproven to you is just a tactic meant to wear others down so you can appear right.

No one here hates Pagano. No one wants him to fail, that means the Colts fail and it's not logical to be a fan but want your team to fail. The fear you are mischaracterizing is that the increase in talent and competence in the front office will mask Pagano's incompetence and keep him in charge of the team despite his demonstrated lack of ability to handle it. You know this but you still set up straw men and then pretend you've won something by defeating them.

Sorry to write so much but I've had a few beers and am feeling verbose.

Then you should drink and post more often

[Dam8610]

Originally Posted by FatDT

You have objectively demonstrated a measure of intelligence by your interest in stats, your ability to write clearly, some of your analysis. I don't believe you are actually a stupid person. But I do not understand why you choose to narrow the set of facts to only fit your chosen narrative and then pretend like you aren't doing it. Why be intentionally dense? You know just as well as everyone else that your winning percentage argument, and the implied conclusion that it justifies his coaching, is nonsense. Just stop it with this superior "I know better" shtick. The case against Pagano is well-established. Demanding that it be reproven to you is just a tactic meant to wear others down so you can appear right.

No one here hates Pagano. No one wants him to fail, that means the Colts fail and it's not logical to be a fan but want your team to fail. The fear you are mischaracterizing is that the increase in talent and competence in the front office will mask Pagano's incompetence and keep him in charge of the team despite his demonstrated lack of ability to handle it. You know this but you still set up straw men and then pretend you've won something by defeating them.

Sorry to write so much but I've had a few beers and am feeling verbose.

I'm not demanding any proof of anything. These are all opinions, but coaches with .600+ winning percentages don't grow on trees. There are 35 in NFL history, six of which are active. You claim incompetence, but to me, it requires a great deal of cognitive dissonance to make your argument work. You claim that an infusion of talent would "mask Pagano's incompetence", but Occam's Razor would suggest that if a talent deficiency caused poorer than expected results the last two seasons, and a talent infusion fixes the problem, then perhaps the talent deficiency was the problem all along.

Also, you may not be part of the group, but there is a large contingent here that seems to be hoping for a bad season to get rid of Pagano. Personally, I'd rather go back to the days where the playoffs were all that mattered, and making it there was a foregone conclusion and an expectation.

[rcubed]

^^^ to me its not about his record.
The team is extremely unprepared most of the time.
There doesnt seem to be a lot of adjustments.
He has an old-school mentality with little forward thinking.
In game decision making is not his strong suit.
Regularly gets out coached.

If you want to talk record:
His entire first year of "wins" should be attributed to arians.
His record outside the crappy AFC south stinks.
Playoff record stinks as do the outcomes of many of the games

[Dam8610]

Originally Posted by rcubed

^^^ to me its not about his record.
The team is extremely unprepared most of the time.
There doesnt seem to be a lot of adjustments.
He has an old-school mentality with little forward thinking.
In game decision making is not his strong suit.
Regularly gets out coached.

If you want to talk record:
His entire first year of "wins" should be attributed to arians.
His record outside the crappy AFC south stinks.
Playoff record stinks as do the outcomes of many of the games

Over the last two years, the team's performance has essentially been dependent on the offense. If Luck came out hot, the team won most of the time, sometimes in convincing fashion. If the offense struggled, the team lost. To me, that suggests a one dimensional team that lacked talent on the other side of the ball, which doesn't fall on the coaching staff. The times the team "looked unprepared" or "came out flat" were the times the offense struggled. Having a one dimensional team reflects poorly on talent evaluation, not coaching.

[rcubed]

Originally Posted by Dam8610

Over the last two years, the team's performance has essentially been dependent on the offense. If Luck came out hot, the team won most of the time, sometimes in convincing fashion. If the offense struggled, the team lost. To me, that suggests a one dimensional team that lacked talent on the other side of the ball, which doesn't fall on the coaching staff. The times the team "looked unprepared" or "came out flat" were the times the offense struggled. Having a one dimensional team reflects poorly on talent evaluation, not coaching.

He is the head coach. He is responsible for the whole team. That's what he signed up for. If the O is flat, he needs to get on his coordinators and players to fix that shit. Not clap and pat them on the ass.

Pags is supposed to be a defensive wiz. Even with lesser talent than the top teams, I would still expect some growth. Really the only growth that comes to mind is the maturation of davis after being traded here, and who knows if pags had anything to do with that. Maybe davis just realized he needed to get his shit together.

You conveniently didnt mention any of the other points listed above. You just always fall back on lack of defense players given to him by grigs and that pags had no input into those players.

[Dam8610]

Originally Posted by rcubed

He is the head coach. He is responsible for the whole team. That's what he signed up for. If the O is flat, he needs to get on his coordinators and players to fix that shit. Not clap and pat them on the ass.

Pags is supposed to be a defensive wiz. Even with lesser talent than the top teams, I would still expect some growth. Really the only growth that comes to mind is the maturation of davis after being traded here, and who knows if pags had anything to do with that. Maybe davis just realized he needed to get his shit together.

You conveniently didnt mention any of the other points listed above. You just always fall back on lack of defense players given to him by grigs and that pags had no input into those players.

The expectation on this board that a team and its players play their sharpest and best football at all times is unreasonable and unrealistic. Players are not always going to be at their best. To blame that on coaching is lazy, short-sighted thinking.

[rcubed]

Originally Posted by Dam8610

The expectation on this board that a team and its players play their sharpest and best football at all times is unreasonable and unrealistic. Players are not always going to be at their best. To blame that on coaching is lazy, short-sighted thinking.

[rcubed]

Originally Posted by Dam8610

The expectation on this board that a team and its players play their sharpest and best football at all times is unreasonable and unrealistic. Players are not always going to be at their best. To blame that on coaching is lazy, short-sighted thinking.

No one here has that expectation. You are projecting that to fit your narrative.

I DO blame the coaches for consistently not having players prepared, not having an intelligent game plan, or making adjustments. To not hold the coaches accountable for such consistent failure is stupid, short-sighted thinking.

[Dam8610]

I don't understand how you find that to be such a difficult concept. The mark of a great team is not an ability to consistently play well, it's being able to respond to and overcome adversity. Being able to win games when they don't perform their best, or "have no business winning". That's a trait the team has shown under Pagano. Maybe not all the time, but more often than not, and more often than most teams. The 2006-2009 Colts tended to fall behind early and have these dreaded "slow starts", but no one cared because they came back from it and won typically. I'd rather have a team that can overcome adversity than a team that doesn't have to deal with it, because the 2005 Colts folded when faced with their first dose of adversity.

[rcubed]

Originally Posted by Dam8610

I don't understand how you find that to be such a difficult concept. The mark of a great team is not an ability to consistently play well, it's being able to respond to and overcome adversity. Being able to win games when they don't perform their best, or "have no business winning". That's a trait the team has shown under Pagano. Maybe not all the time, but more often than not, and more often than most teams. The 2006-2009 Colts tended to fall behind early and have these dreaded "slow starts", but no one cared because they came back from it and won typically. I'd rather have a team that can overcome adversity than a team that doesn't have to deal with it, because the 2005 Colts folded when faced with their first dose of adversity.

That's completely backwards.

"The mark of a great team is not an ability to consistently play well..." Seriously? WTF man!?

Great teams win consistently without having to regularly overcome huge deficits. Being able to sometimes dig down and come from behind is a great trait to have, but that cant be how you regularly operate. The 2006 colts had a big come from behind win against the pats to go to the SB. The pats had a huge come from behind win in the last SB. But in general, great teams go out there and handle their business. Thats how dynasties happen, they win consistently by playing consistently well.