Denver caught their rainbow

[ChaosTheory]

Originally Posted by rm1369

I state what I think. I've thought and stated Ballard's philosophy was bad since his second off-season. I've taken all kinds of slack from Ballard ball washers (admittedly less now that the shine is off a little), why do you think I wouldn't possibly have done the same with BP?

Man it’s really not difficult to understand. Hell, it’s not even particularly controversial or unique. I simply believe a good but more aggressive GM would have likely won less games but more SBs with Manning. I advocated for that method then as I do now with Ballard. I can understand someone disagreeing, but your lack of ability to even grasp the concept leaves me thinking you are just retarded.

1.) I might be retarded.

With that out of the way... that has nothing to do with comprehending your point. You're right, it's not controversial or unique. It sounds like every generic local radio guy's take. When you're finished, you might as well give me a "Real quick, I gotta tell you about Lawrence Family Plumbing, the only ones I trust for all my plumbing needs." A crowd that feels like they weren't asked to dance at prom while they watch cool stuff like Albert Haynesworth or Khalil Mack blockbuster deals happen to other more exciting teams. You're Ballard's ChoppedWood. You think his take on Reich is unique?

It's not that I don't believe you were criticizing during the Polian era (you must've missed the second half of that statement). I'm just trying to get you to spell it out instead of the vague, platitude-filled posts you typically make (e.g. "a good but more aggressive GM"). I think the nuance fucks up your argument.

It's not seeing the trees for the forest, which is what a guy like Dan Dakich does in praising Ryan Grigson over Ballard. Grigson had more wins, more playoff success, that's it, end of story. Ignoring or oblivious to the thousand other factors that led to those results for both.

So as for Polian... The New England dynasty and probably Pittsburgh are the only two teams in the entire league that could argue they had a better run in the 2000's than his Colts. Saying his methods would've been bested by some other aggressive GM (by the way, discounting his drafting prowess and the top-end talent it produced) is a coping mechanism. Because who could you name? That's why I think you're vague.

Or maybe I could say retarded... but I won't...