Yes, bold statement: The 2000's New England dynasty (set aside questions of legitimacy), with Belichick as coach/GM, was better than Polian's Colts. Actually, it ended up only being the first half of a 20-year dynasty. You know who else they were better than? Quite possibly everyone in NFL history. Why is that a particular knock on Polian? Their system worked well. That doesn't invalidate Polian's system. Colts easily could've won another Super Bowl or two if they didn't play alongside that team. They were already a Dwight Freeney sprained ankle away from winning their second and tying PIT for the decade.

Also, go back and dig a little with NE and you'll see a splash like in '07, but mostly "bargain bin" guy as you say. And what Belichick was known for which was actually trading away his good players in exchange for picks, not the other way around. 100 draft picks in 10 seasons from '01-'11. [/QUOTE]

Yes, an almost unprecedented situation occurs and arguably the best QB in the league gets his pick of the litter to go to another team. He chose the Broncos over every other team because they were loaded with talent, much like many of his Colts teams he played on before.

What's the point here? Are we seriously going to extrapolate his four years in DEN and act like he easily would've had a more Belichick/Brady-like resumé if he'd had their FO for the bulk of his career?

And this "no possible evidence" thing... We're getting things tangled. This discussion didn't start with me saying Polian's way is the truth and the light. I have no problem acknowledging other teams' success with a different approach. It started with you, as you always do, saying that this type of method is "a good way to stay mediocre longer." Which is bullshit.

Yes, I compare them to the entire league. If your bar is to only compare teams to the 9 SB's in 18 years Patriots and you think that's realistic, then have fun. There's a lot more to that story.

Yes, the Steelers had a great run along with IND and NE. Roethlisberger is not a GOAT candidate, but as much as I hate him, he probably goes down as a top-10 guy.

The Steelers had a great run alongside IND and NE in the 2000's. And the Steelers, the Rooneys, and 22-year GM Kevin Colbert were notorious for being conservative. Just like Polian, they hyper-focused on the draft and home-grown players and used free agency sparingly.

And just like many Colts fans, many Steelers fans piss and moan about how "stingy" or "ultra-conservative" their team and GM are. I assume you don't like how the Steelers operated in the 2000's, either.

That's bullshit. You're trying to imply that Manning carried dogshit rosters to hollow 12-win seasons but couldn't compete with the actual top teams in the league. They competed against a 1st-place schedule and beat or at minimum were highly competitive with the best teams the league had in a given year.

And Manning wasn't there when the Buffalo Bills that Polian built 4-peated as AFC Champs. Also wasn't there when Polian built an expansion Carolina Panthers team that beat the the SB champs and made it to the NFC Championship in year 2.

Looks to me like those three franchises both were pretty conservative in their approach, but in different ways. NE would play it conservative by relying on the draft, with a few splash moves, but not many. They relied on a cheap and young defense, except for the few real studs.

New England was definitely more active in free agency than IND and PIT in the 2000's, but '07 skews the perception. And like I mentioned, people forget how much Belichick stockpiled picks. 100 in a ten year stretch... 10 picks per year by trading away his players.

IND and PIT, though, were fairly similar. Both highly focused on drafting and developing homegrown talent and leery of free agency.

I lost track of this pissing contest, but here's my take:

It's laughable that some of you are comparing Ballard to Polian.

Polian was obviously a great GM, but his teams did obviously underachieve when it came to championships. So I see rn's point that it would have been nice if Polian had gone for it more in FA.

I do think we need to realize that Polian was operating under much different salary cap rules back then. Most notably the rookie salary cap wasn't in place until '11, so he had to dedicate a much higher portion of the salary cap to the draft class. I would like to think that he would've been more aggressive in filling holes via FA and been able to keep some guys that really hurt losing (like David Thornton for example) had he been operating under today's salary cap rules.

Something that Polian was really good at was that he knew which positions were critical to success in the NFL and those were the positions he heavily invested in: QB, DE/pass rush, WR, OT. This realization is something that our current FO sorely lacks. For example the OL situation: no fucking way Polian hands out all pro LT money to a LG w/ back problems and then sticks a complete turd like Pryor next to him at LT (Chris may have done something like that but not Bill).

Something else that was really good about Polian is that he didn't get too hung up on physical traits. A lot of all time Colts greats like Freeney, Wayne, and Sanders wouldn't have been drafted by Ballard b/c they wouldn't have met his traits measuring stick.

I don't expect anybody else to read my long ass posts except RM. Main point from me is the #1 and #3 winningest teams in the 2000's, with 3 SB wins and 5 SB appearances, were IND and PIT and they had a similar philosophy. Saying it's a good way to stay mediocre is nonsense.

The Ballard/Polian comparison stops at that philosophy of valuing homegrown players and being leery of free agency. Which is where this discussion originated.

Other than that, Ballard is not in Polian's league. But that wasn't the discussion.

I know the Cheats likely wouldn't have done it, but I would've traded the 2010 1 for Seymour (he was traded after the 2009 NFL draft but before the 2009 season), and I think with Seymour the Colts beat the Saints that year. They were very close to it without him. They did get a 2011 1 from the Raiders for him, so maybe getting the pick a year earlier would've been more enticing? It certainly would've been a better use of the pick than drafting Jerry Hughes, and Seymour would've been the perfect 3-tech for Dungy's defense, similar to Buckner now. I think Polian had a thing against tall defensive lineman, though, so he probably didn't like Seymour because of his height. I don't remember a single DL from the Polian era that played a significant percentage of snaps that was 6'4" or taller.

LOL fair enough. Purely hypothetical, but I do think Polian would have been more aggressive in FA than Ballard has if he had been under the current salary cap rules. It's too bad that they weren't too b/c if he could have brought in some legitimate pass rush and a WR or 2 to play opposite Marvin while guys like Peyton and Edge were on their salary cap rookie deals then we may have been a juggernaut in the early 2000s.

IMO there is no sense being aggressive in free agency until you have your franchise QB.

We haven't had that. You're just wasting $$$ and players prime years chasing the fallacy that you can do anything meaningful without the long term QB in place.

It's hard to judge Ballard when he didn't have that key component to build around like Polian did.

Seymour was a monster. You're right, adding him to an undefeated team that was a sprained ankle away from a SB win could have been intriguing. Who knows? Butterfly effect.

Your first line is key. I don't know if they'd even entertain a phone call from Polian, but even if they would... they'd likely have to outbid other teams like the Raiders. So would you give up a 1st-rounder + more? Maybe.

Or Polian may not have been interested. I wouldn't know the cap situation back then, but he was already 30 and expensive.

So what's the point in bringing in QBs like Rivers, Wentz, and Ryan then? Using your logic then they've been a waste of cap dollars and in Wentz and Ryan's cases draft capitol as well.

I just looked at this. Originally I was going to just say that Ballard's 2018 would beat any of Polian's drafts (which it would, 2003 is Polian's best contender), but then I started comparing their draft histories, and I will confidently say that Ballard is better at drafting talent than Polian was, primarily due to Ballard's much greater level of success with Day 2 picks, which Polian had a notoriously bad track record with. I would say let's look at Ballard's best draft, but to do that, you'd have to first choose which is better between 2018 and 2020. For comparison sake:

**** = Made an All-Pro team
*** = Made a Pro Bowl team
** = Starter or starter level contributions
* = quality backup that positively impacted the team

2018
Quenton Nelson****
Shaquille Leonard****
Braden Smith**
Kemoko Turay
Tyquan Lewis*
Nyheim Hines*
Daurice Fountain
Jordan Wilkins
Deon Cain
Matthew Adams
Zaire Franklin**

2020
DeForest Buckner**** (via trade of the 13th overall pick to SF)
Michael Pittman Jr.**
Jonathan Taylor****
Julian Blackmon**
Jacob Eason
Danny Pinter*
Robert Windsor
Isaiah Rodgers**
Dezmon Patmon
Jordan Glasgow

Let's throw 2022 in for fun, because I see that class rivaling these two in a few years, which only speaks to Ballard's drafting acumen:

2022
Alec Pierce**
Jelani Woods*
Bernhard Raimann**
Nick Cross*
Eric Johnson
Andrew Ogletree
Curtis Brooks
Rodney Thomas II**

I would argue all three of the above classes are or have the potential to be better than Polian's best draft class, which IMO is 2003, but I'll post what I believe to be his 3 best draft classes for comparison sake:

2003
Dallas Clark****
Mike Doss**
Donald Strickland
Steve Scuillo
Robert Mathis****
Keyon Whiteside
Cato June***
Makoa Freitas

2006
Joseph Addai***
Tim Jennings***
Freddy Keiaho**
Michael Toudouze
Charlie Johnson**
Antoine Bethea***
T.J. Rushing*

2001
Reggie Wayne****
Idrees Bashir**
Cory Bird
Ryan Diem**
Raymond Walls
Jason Doering*
Rick DeMulling**

If you look at the results side by side, it's scary to think what Chris Ballard might be able to do with a franchise QB and a full array of draft picks every year. Time will tell if Ballard is the better GM, but so far he's outdueling a Hall of Famer in an area both consider to be paramount to team building.

After the Colts drafted edge, they were winning and drafting at the back end of future drafts, not near front. I give him credit for his work in the late round draft picks,

Good argument. Polian had a killer run of 1st-rounders and built up three franchises, and won EoY awards twice with the Bills, twice with the Panthers, and twice with the Colts. Plus he did it across eras (there were 12 rounds in the draft and no free agency when he was with the Bills, so it was two different monsters).

So that's where I was coming from. But wording probably too strong on my part. I am very happy to have Ballard.

----

Also just an aside, I thought '99 might make Polian's list with James, Mike Peterson, Brad Scioli, and Hunter Smith (I know he's just a punter), but I looked it up...

Mike Peterson never made a Pro Bowl his entire career? Even the year he was 2nd-Team All-Pro, no Pro Bowl. Even Hunter Smith never made a Pro Bowl which surprised me.

Ballard drafts well and certainly finds value a specific positions. Few, if any of us, have said otherwise. The problem is his roster construction. He has overvalued and spent too much draft capital and cap dollars at positions that aren't that critical for success, like OG and off ball LBs. And other than DE, which he's been horrible at drafting BTW, he has undervalued the CTQ positions by spending minimal draft capital and salary cap dollars at those positions. This is how things like having a LG making elite LT money is starting next to a complete turd at LT, or having a 1 man show at WR. How has that worked out the past 2 seasons?

Also, you do realize when Ballard hasn't had a full array of draft picks it's b/c he's traded them away right?

I considered 1999, 2002, 2004, and 2005 (which just illustrates how good Polian was consistently in the draft), but ultimately 2001 made the cut over those years because it had an All-Pro and likely Hall of Famer in Reggie Wayne, two long term quality OL starters in Ryan Diem and Rick DeMulling, another decent starter in Idrees Bashir, and a quality backup in Jason Doering. 4 starters beats 3, especially when one of those "starters" is a punter.

I would say Ballard's worst flaw is his evaluation of DE/ED talent, which is why I believe it is so important to retain Yannick Ngakoue. Given his weakness there, he should probably focus on filling that position through free agency or trade. I also agree with the overinvestment in non-premium positions, it's what prompted my idea of trading 4, Taylor, and Leonard for 1. That said, I don't think he has been unwilling to invest in the premium positions, he just hasn't really found them until recently. He did give Braden Smith one of the largest RT contracts in the league. He's probably going to extend MPJ. I imagine if they continue down good development paths the next few seasons, he'll extend Raimann and Pierce. As for QB, he hasn't had one to extend yet, not since Luck retired. That's why getting the choice guy this year (which IMO will be Stroud) is so important. If Ballard can't do that, it doesn't matter how good he is at everything else, unfortunately, because winning football in the modern NFL requires a franchise QB.

As for Ballard trading away picks, the only truly bad trade he's made involving picks is the Wentz trade, and that's primarily because the Colts didn't make the decision to mitigate their losses and only give up a 2 once they figured out Wentz wasn't the guy. The other time Ballard traded his 1, for DeForest Buckner, I'd argue Buckner is better than anyone the Colts could've gotten at 13.

Ballard had a better draft in 2022 than most of Polian's drafts without a first round pick.

The Colts didnt punt often enough to make it an issue. He was the fastest punter, ask Deon Sanders.

There was no point to sign Rivers or trade for Ryan if you weren’t going to couple it with going in on a 1-2 yr window. Well other than selling tickets I guess. I understand Wentz slightly more in that you can argue if it worked you had multiple seasons with him in the future. Not surprisingly I disagree with that philosophy, but I understand the logic at least. Rivers are Ryan were known short term options that were just place holders in the long build.

My lack of valuing the premium positions comment is mainly based on Ballard's lack of investment at WR (in 6 years the only real investment he's put into the position is 2 2nd round draft picks) and his handling of the LT situation which up to this point has been a disaster. Hopefully Raimann pans out and rights the ship there. But even if he does it was still at least a big short term fuck up that Ballard could have avoided.

Ballard also traded out of the 1st round in '19, which next to '17 is probably his worst draft. Agree on Buckner and Wentz trades. You just made it sound like Ballard's hands have been tied a bit b/c he hasn't had a full allotment of picks frequently, so I wanted to point out that it was his doing.

You could maybe make the argument for 2020, but you're definitely counting your chickens way before they've hatched for the '22 draft class in that statement.

Ballard's invested 3 2nd round picks in WR (Campbell, Pittman, Pierce), and it's starting to look like all 3 of them will be valuable contributors for the Colts moving forward, provided they re-sign Campbell, which I think they should.

After Raimann was a Top 10 OT in football for the second half of last season in his third year of playing football at any level, I doubt he's going to regress to being a bad player.

Also, interestingly, the '19 trade down that you brought up also serves to illustrate Ballard's weakness at evaluating DE talent. I wanted Montez Sweat that year, didn't think he'd be there at 26. I remember my heart leaping up when Sweat fell to 26, then being completely deflated when I saw the trade down with the Commies, who then drafted Sweat, who has been a quality starter and pass rusher for them. Ironically, that 34th pick that was acquired in the trade down was used to select Rock Ya-Sin, who was eventually traded for Yannick Ngakoue, so in the end, the Colts did end up with a pass rusher from that 26th pick.

I'm very confident that the Colts have 2 high quality starters from the 2022 draft going forward in Bernhard Raimann and Rodney Thomas II. A good Polian draft produced 3 starters, so for Ballard's 2022 draft to be better than a good Polian draft, and therefore my statement to be right, I need two of Alec Pierce, Jelani Woods, and Nick Cross to develop into at least decent starters, which I don't view as all that unlikely.

I forgot about Campbell. Still 3 2nd round picks in 6 years isn't much investment in such a critical position. I'm on the fence w/ re-signing Campbell. As long as he comes cheap we probably should, but Ballard needs to hedge and not just trust that he's going to stay healthy. I doubt he will though b/c Ballard doesn't really hedge his bets, which is a huge weakness of his.

Also, not sold on Pierce. He pretty much disappeared in the 2nd half of the season, but that could be the whole coaching dumpster fire at fault. Also, even when he was productive early in the season he wasn't getting much (if any) separation. I think he'll be ok, but it's just concerning IMO.

I tend to agree. He should progress and not regress, but Ballard needs to bring in quality depth just in case (again something that he's bad at). At the very least a decent swing OT to hedge injuries.

In hindsight we should have taken Sweat, but wasn't there a lot of concern w/ a heart condition that he had? If so then I don't think you can blame Ballard for passing on him there.

Still you're counting your chickens before the hatch. You may be right about the overall contributors, but I don't see any all pro, high end talent types in the draft. Most Polian drafts had at least 1 if not 2 of those type of players.

What I saw in the first half of the season was enough to give me hope that he'll be a good WR2 going forward, he was getting decent separation and winning contested catches then. Maybe the second half disappearance had something to do with the coaching change and/or dumpster fire level of play from the QB position? Might be something to go back and investigate, I know Campbell was consistently getting open and being missed by the QBs toward the end of the season.

How would you recommend Ballard hedge his bet on Campbell being the team's slot receiver next year?

A swing tackle is a great idea, and I'd love to see it, but a lot of times, guys who have success in those roles end up getting signed as starters to other teams because of the dearth of OL talent in the NFL generally.

He did have a heart condition, but 6'6" 260 DEs with some developed rush moves that run a 4.41 40 and a 7.00 3 cone just don't fall to 26. MPJ is a nice consolation prize, though.

There's some level of projection there, there has to be given they just completed their rookie season, but honestly, it wouldn't surprise me if any or all of Pierce, Woods, Raimann, and Cross made Pro Bowls or All-Pro teams. Not saying any of them are a lock by any means, just that they're talented enough to be there. I could also see Rodney Thomas II making a Pro Bowl at some point, though I'd put that one as even less likely. Of them, I'd put Raimann and Woods as the most likely to do it.

I don't know how you can project Cross to a Pro Bowl? He's shown nothing. Did you mean Thomas?

Not that it matters the Pro Bowl now a days, is a meaningless achievement.

Well they were a waste in every way. Two didn't show enough to build around and the other retired.

Had Wentz produced to near franchise QB status,
Irsay would've been knocking down Ballmer's door begging for more weapons.

There's a lot of projection there, and I'd put him as the least likely of the bunch currently, but writing off a safety entering his age 22 season with his physical gifts as a guy who won't contribute doesn't seem smart.

I agree. I think Pierce has a bright future, and that the coaching/QBs fiascos in the 2nd half of the season probably had a lot to do w/ him completely falling off. I didn't see him getting much separation, mostly contested catches in the first half of the season. But I did miss a couple of games for different reasons, so maybe I missed them there.

Spend a mid round draft pick or bring in a FA w/ a similar skill set. It doesn't have to be a big name. Just someone who can fill in when Campbell in all likelihood gets hurt again.

I know it's easier said than done, but Ballard needs to make this a priority. If he's unable to bring in quality FA depth then he needs to spend at least 1 day 2 pick on OT and probably another early day 3 pick on OG/OT. Even if he lands some depth in FA he should probably still spend some decent draft capital on our OL, since as last year painfully proved the unit is well overdue an influx of talent.

No doubt. In hindsight we should have picked Sweat. I was just saying that I don't think you can blame Ballard for not taking him due to the heart condition. And it's not like we were the only team to pass on him b/c he probably would have gone in the top 10 if not for the heart concerns.

I think Woods has the most upside and potential to be at the pro bowl/all pro level. Obviously he needs to become more consistent and our new coaching staff will have to incorporate him more than Frank did, but I can see it happening. Also, I think Thomas could make it to a pro bowl, since he seems like a good ball hawk.

I doubt Raimann will ever be in the pro bowl. Not that that means I don't think he'll work out, but for OL getting the pro bowl nod is more about reputation and incumbency than who actually had the best year. Q making the pro bowl this year is a perfect example of that.

Also, saying Cross has pro bowl potential at this point is a huge reach. I know he's a great athlete and young, but he was benched after 2 games and pretty much didn't see the field other than ST for the remainder of the season. Not saying we should give up on him, but as it stands now he's more likely to be a traits only bust rather than a pro bowler.

There were a couple of times I saw separation early in the year, but I'd have to go back and watch him specifically to really know beyond the flashes I remember seeing early in the season.

Certainly wouldn't be opposed to a mid round WR. Don't think you're going to find that in free agency.

Provided they're not giving up all of their draft capital moving up, I see this as a sound strategy. They probably need 2 IOL and 1 OT, but all backups, so some combination of free agency and the draft should accomplish this.

Oh he absolutely would've gone top 10 without the heart condition. I thought he was worth the risk at the time.

Jelani Woods's college tape looks like Rob Gronkowski put on a Virginia #0 uniform and started playing. So yes, I agree that he's the most likely.

Here's the thing about Raimann: last year was his third year of playing football at any level. He was a Top 10 OT for the second half of the season. Most players that reach the NFL are at least in their 8th year of playing football in their rookie season (4 high school, 3 college, 1 NFL). I fully believe the term exponential growth could apply here. He could become one of the best OTs in the NFL.

Some perspective: Nick Cross's age 21 season was his rookie season in the NFL. Antoine Bethea's age 21 season was his senior year in college. Bob Sanders's age 21 season was his junior year in college. Next year will be important, but he has time to improve, and development isn't linear.

I'm not saying Raimann isn't going to pan out. The 2nd half of the year definitely showed a ton of promise and as you pointed out with his lack of experience he should make significant strides. The point I was trying to make is that in a lot of if not most cases the best performing OLmen don't make the pro bowl/all pro teams (especially the pro bowl). For example AC had a very good career with the Colts but didn't make a single pro bowl or all pro team. If Raimann ends up having a similar career w/ the Colts we should (and most of us will) be very happy w/ that.

As for Cross, I full understand his youth and athleticism. But if I were asked to put $100 (or really any amount of money) on if he'll make a pro bowl or not I'd definitely put my money on no based on the current knowledge I have on him.

Tarik Glenn didnt get near the credit he deserved

Another great example. Big Tarik was one of the top LTs in the league for 8 years but was only named to 3 Pro Bowls.

Nor, IMO, did Castonzo.

Both held down one of the hardest positions in football, did it very well and kept their mouths shut while doing it. Both were great for most of a decade each.

Hopefully, Rain Man can be a third in that list of superior Colts left tackles.

Costanzo took a few years to develop and unfortunately Tarik was in a conference with Ogden and Roaf.

Tarik also got a bad and undeserved rap for false starts, that actually weren't false starts most of the time.

Tarik Glenn played alongside several other great OT's that overshadowed him until the record-breaking '04 season shined some light.

As far as the AFC Pro Bowl... Jonathan Ogden was always there. Tony Boselli was their early in Glenn's career. Walter Jones when SEA was an AFC team. When Jones and SEA went to the NFC, here comes Willie Roaf joining the Chiefs from the the Saints.

Then you had guys like Orlando Pace and Lincoln Kennedy that were more recognized even though they weren't competing for the same spot as Glenn.

pierce will never make a pro bowl. ever.

Stranger things have happened. Mike Doss being a starter, for example.