Quick thoughts on Dolphins-Colts

[VeveJones007]

Originally Posted by Oldcolt

Is anyone up for making a run at Le'veon Bell next off season? Good runner, great pass blocker and catcher. Had a rep for being good in locker room. Hard nose player that seems to fit in what we are trying to build around here. Would improve running and passing game. We keep our draft picks. Cost us a ton of money but then what are we saving it for if not an elite difference maker in his prime? For me, this is the kind of guy you throw money at.

Love him as a player, but don’t love that cap hit for a RB. Also, is anyone else scared off by the way his Steelers teammates talked about him and pillaged his locker this year?

[VeveJones007]

Originally Posted by Colt Classic

People keep throwing out the biggest of the big name free agents from last year. This team has lost 4 close games that came down to just a few plays. You don't need a $20 million free agent to swing 4 games that are that close, at least to the point where two of the four would become wins--and at that point, they would be fully in the driver's seat for the division. Forget Norwell, remember all the drops from the receivers over those close games? Sure, that's hopefully behind them now, but one more veteran receiver for 1 year, $6 million could've been useful when no one else could catch the ball. I've given the example of John Brown before, yet everyone is too busy citing Norwell as the only example since I guess he was linked to a bit of interest from the Colts. I don't care who wanted Norwell--that takes one Google search for "top free agents by position" to come to that brilliant idea that the Colts should have him on their want list.

I'll offer another option--trades. If you honestly looked at the depth and thought the WR position was good to go at the start of the year, great. It has turned into a strength, but again, those close games with the drops told a different story at the time. Kevin White on the Bears. Bears fans seem to think he's a bust, but who knows if it's just because he had a shaky Trubisky throwing to him last year. Maybe he does suck, but maybe he's better than Chester Rogers as your best option when another guy gets dinged.

Why would a decent receiver sign a one year prove-it deal like that with all the uncertainty about Luck? I would have loved that kind of deal you suggest, but ittakes two to tango. Indy was not a desirable destination in UFA last year. This year, on the other hand...

[Chaka]

Originally Posted by rm1369

Omaha, man it’s a lost cause. When the team is 1-5 it’s evidence of how far away the team is and proof a few vet free agents wouldn’t have helped. When the team is 6-5 and Ballard is surprised at where the team is it’s proof that his methods worked - even better than expected. You can’t win.

It’s amazing to me how well the mantra has stuck. I reread the off-season free agency thread a month or so ago and I couldn’t find one person saying the team should shun free agency because you had to build a core first, etc. Not one. But now it’s so ingrained that even suggesting that a few vet free agents would have amplified the good work Ballard has already done is basically blasphemy. It’s amazing that the team found 3 throw away free agents that have significantly helped when apparently no other vets could. Lucky I guess.

I’m amazed at some of the arguments. If Wilson turns in to a pro bowler would he have got there with a vet in front of him? That’s crazy to me considering Wilson fell on the depth chart because of his poor play after being basically gifted a spot. And that he attributes his recent better performance to things he’s learned from Mitchel! The exact type of vet that I believed the team needed more of. If Wilson had pro bowl corner potential and wasn’t unlocking it because a mediocre vet was in fromt of him then you have the wrong damn coaches or a player with a shitty mindset. Players learn a lot from being able to pick vets brains and see the work ethic, film study, and how they take care of their bodies. I find it amazing that that’s now seen as a negative. All because the mantra that’s been preached: build a culture thru the draft. I didn’t see one of you preaching it prior to free agency though.

WTF are you talking about? This isn't a "see, I told you so" discussion. This is a discussion about whether, with the benefit of knowing how things played out after 11 games, it was a good idea not to bring in a bunch of free agents last offseason. Please point me to the posts where I made the arguments you mention.

I was simply making the point that, looking back with the benefit of hindsight, pursuing the aggressive free agency course that you and others (Omaha) have advocated could have resulted in a much different roster makeup than we presently have. Then you wouldn't be complaining about the free agency approach, but would probably complain about the team's performance.

I used Norwell as an example. Signing him probably means that we don't pick Nelson. Great, I'm sure you say. Setting that issue aside, so then who do we pick instead? My personal guess is Roquan Smith, as the Colts were rumored to like him and, indeed, the Colts very next pick was a LB (Leonard). Smith's a good player, no question, but does that mean we don't take Leonard in the 2nd? So in this scenario it comes down to this:

1. Andrew Norwell+ Roquan Smith + 2nd Rounder
2. Quenton Nelson + Darius Leonard + $66.5 million in cap space (Norwell's contract)

What do you prefer? I much prefer the second group.

[Chaka]

Originally Posted by omahacolt

I am not going to name guys I wanted at this point. I don’t remember. And it doesn’t matter. It’s not my job. I don’t have all the information Ballard does.

And by the way, this is a cop out

[Chaka]

Originally Posted by FatDT

Except Ballard DIDN'T "avoid" big name players in FA. He just wouldn't pay them what they wanted, so they went elsewhere. This was not a rigid plan. He pursued multiple FAs (as many here have said previously in their defense of Ballard), but wasn't willing to pay top dollar.

Fair point, but not relevant to this particular discussion. Regardless of whether he did or did not pursue these players, the question is whether - knowing what we know now - was it better that he didn't?

[FatDT]

Originally Posted by Chaka

Fair point, but not relevant to this particular discussion. Regardless of whether he did or did not pursue these players, the question is whether - knowing what we know now - was it better that he didn't?

It’s absolutely a relevant response to those that pretend it was the team’s plan all along, in order to get the young players experience and establish a culture.

[Pez]

Originally Posted by FatDT

It’s absolutely a relevant response to those that pretend it was the team’s plan all along, in order to get the young players experience and establish a culture.

Ballard said this in March:

Financial discipline in this league you don’t see it in this league like you used to. I think it’s a good thing to have. Because what happens is these guys are re-tooling the roster every two years. You are signing all these free agents and then two years from now, you are seeing them all get cut and then they are back on the street again. We have to get some roster continuity with 10-to-12 players that are going to be Colts for a long time. Then you feel better about dipping into free agency and getting a guy. Not just good players, they need to be able to influence the locker room with their character. A culture needs to be built. A coach can do so much, but the players in that locker room build the culture that you want, with their work ethic, with the standards that they set. We have to get more players like that in our locker room.

I'm not sure anyone is pretending that this was his plan all along.

[Racehorse]

Originally Posted by Oldcolt

Is anyone up for making a run at Le'veon Bell next off season? Good runner, great pass blocker and catcher. Had a rep for being good in locker room. Hard nose player that seems to fit in what we are trying to build around here. Would improve running and passing game. We keep our draft picks. Cost us a ton of money but then what are we saving it for if not an elite difference maker in his prime? For me, this is the kind of guy you throw money at.

He seems to be hinting that he wants to come play in this offense, so I am warming to the idea of him coming here. However, it could be that he is enticing the team with the best chance of success who just also happens to be able to pay him an outrageous sum of money. I think he could be a missing piece for a SB team, but only if we get two or three defensive studs this off-season to go with him.

[FatDT]

Originally Posted by Pez

Ballard said this in March:




I'm not sure anyone is pretending that this was his plan all along.

Then why has Ballard pursued top-end free agents at all?

[omahacolt]

Originally Posted by Chaka

So you're "pretty sure" that most people were expecting the colts to be above .500 at this point? Really? Because I distinctly recall a lot more dire predictions, particularly when the Colts didn't sign the big name free agents that they were rumored to be interested in. I also recall several people, yourself included, openly complaining about Ballard's draft picks and the terrible roster he had assembled. Now you want to rewrite history to suggest that you expected this all along. Not so.

And I don't accept your premise that the Manning-led Colts failed to win more than one Super Bowl because they weren't spending in free agency. Please back up that statement with some facts because, honestly, your posts are pretty light on them. Talent was never the problem with those Colts - we had plenty back then. We won the division nearly every year, and set plenty of offensive records. But we lost a lot of playoff games we should have won, whether due to coaching, player performance or just plain bad luck. And before your Patriots envy gets out of control, remember who you're speaking about - they're convicted cheaters, so please don't cite to them as an example of model organization.

The idea that you go "all in" on free agency every year is short-sighted and limiting. This isn't FanDuel - you can have a long term plan. For the umpteenth time, I'll repeat again that the unused cap space this year is NOT LOST - it will still be there next year, and the next. The idea is to get the most out of your resources. Ballard's plan, as he has expressed it himself, is to let the team create a culture organically before adding big personalities/paychecks - particularly on defense. This plan is working. Not only are we outperforming this year, but we will have a built-in competitive advantage going forward for then next several years by virtue of our increased cap space.

But yet you endlessly complain about their failure to spend THIS year, and the Colts failure to sign these theoretical "good" players who would have improved the Colts without disturbing the progress they have already made. It's an easy and cheap complaint, but has no substance.

Check out the prediction thread. People thought this team would be 7-10 win range. Exactly where we will end up. So no, this isn’t surprising to anyone. And let’s stop pretending this is a great roster. It isn’t. Look at the teams we are playing. They aren’t that good.

Polian has issues at the dt spot year after year he couldn’t fix through the draft. He signed his own free agents to hefty deals. He couldn’t draft well enough to put together complete teams.

You go all in to win. That doesn’t mean you can’t also plan for the future. I am not calling for a max spend every year. Guys like Mitchell and Inman are a perfect example of guys I am talking about. They vastly improved our depth at least. Both should be starters. They aren’t impeding anyone’s progress.