Originally Posted by rm1369 (Post 62382)

If you have a link to that quote I’d love to see it. I’m not disputing he said it, just that I’ve never heard him say it. I’d disagree with it to an extent. Seems financially and competitively now would be a good time to add talent to the roster. All these holes can’t be filled in a draft. Which is why I say he is ok with a 3 yr rebuild. Posters seem to dispute that but Irsay doesn’t. Regardless, if he did say that it would at least give me hope he’ll eventually not limit himself to the draft to correct issues.

Originally Posted by rm1369 (Post 62382)

If you have a link to that quote I’d love to see it. I’m not disputing he said it, just that I’ve never heard him say it. I’d disagree with it to an extent. Seems financially and competitively now would be a good time to add talent to the roster. All these holes can’t be filled in a draft. Which is why I say he is ok with a 3 yr rebuild. Posters seem to dispute that but Irsay doesn’t. Regardless, if he did say that it would at least give me hope he’ll eventually not limit himself to the draft to correct issues.

Originally Posted by Chaka (Post 62281)

You make good and fair points. However, while you personally may not have been upset about the selection of James, I recall that draft vividly and the Colts nation was largely not happy. Recall that the Colts had just traded Marshall Faulk away, and Williams was being pumped by virtually every media outlet. James was far less well known (and maybe didn't have the track record of Williams, I can't recall right now and I'm too lazy to look it up - wasn't he a Junior?). This was in the time period that RBs were routinely taken in the top 5, and most draft projections had the Colts taking Williams. He was touted as a golden boy who played the game the right way. I recall concerns about the size of Williams hands, and the Colts liking James better because of his pass-catching skills. The Saints and Ditka bought into the William hype, the Colts did not.

My recollection of Freeney is a bit different. He was undersized and considered a reach, but he was picked somewhere in the early teens so there wasn't as much national attention paid to the pick. I recall reading that the Colts had the opportunity to trade down to the late teens (where Freeney was had been projected to be picked), but Polian ultimately decided not to do it because the were afraid someone else would have grabbed him. Again, the move was panned at the time, and ultimately the Colts were proven right.

You make a fair point that Ballard doesn't yet have the track record of Polian (very few do), but I'll simply respond by saying he doesn't have a Ditka track record either. Ballard's first draft looks promising and, as I think I've made clear in other posts, I like the guy's overall approach so I'm inclined to give him the benefit of the doubt. As in most endeavors, you don't get anywhere in the NFL by following the pack, and people who take a different approach can do great things when it turns out they're right - and I'll go on record as saying I think Ballard is right.

Originally Posted by Kray007 (Post 62427)

I sure do hope he doesn't have the same track record as Polian, because, when Peyton went down, the team was virtually devoid of talent.

Originally Posted by Kray007 (Post 62427)

I sure do hope he doesn't have the same track record as Polian, because, when Peyton went down, the team was virtually devoid of talent.

Originally Posted by Racehorse (Post 62398)

Here's a link to an article that has a few quotes, but not completely what I said:https://www.stampedeblue.com/2018/2/...olts-town-hall

http://www.colts.com/news/article-1/...3-5f89b2d75859

Originally Posted by Dam8610 (Post 62436)

That's not true. It was an aging team without its franchise QB. No team built to be successful based on the success of its franchise QB will do well in his absence.

Originally Posted by rm1369 (Post 62440)

I would like to think Ballard’s plan is what you said - build a foundation through the draft and then supplement it with free agency later. I still wouldn’t completely agree with it, but it would give me hope that Ballard isn’t going to ignore free agency to fill future roster holes. Unfortunately to me these quotes reinforce those fears.

Just a kind of related thought - everyone hears Ballard’s comment about the team being more than any one player and see’s it as an indication he plans to build a strong complete team (D, OL, etc) and not force Luck to be the savior. That’s hard to argue with. But what if another valid way to interpret that was that he’s not going to let the presence of Luck dictate how he builds the team. That he’s not going to change his 3 yr rebuild because it is wastes some of what should be Lucks prime years. Would you still agree with that? How can whether or not you have the single most important piece and the one that’s hardest to acquire not effect how you go about building a team? That’s a big part of what I disagree with.