L'Jarius Sneed

[Dam8610]

Originally Posted by rm1369

Ballard is an above average drafter, but I don’t believe he knows how to actually win. Drafting talent and assembling a winning team are different things and I have seen exactly zero evidence he’s capable of the latter. If it weren’t for Irsay stepping in it is very likely AR would not be the Colts franchise QB. Without the shit show of Reich’s firing and the hiring of Saturday the team likely finishes middle of the pack again. Ballard’s history and his past comments say he wouldn’t have went and got AR. And I’m not positive the team ends up with Steichen. Does Ballard fire Reich? I don’t think so. I criticized Irsay heavily when things went down, but it’s clear he saw that the team needed something to change because Ballard was leading them no where. And Irsay was absolutely right. The team has hope now because of Irsay’s decision. Ballard made good choices when forced into the situation, but he didn’t see the big picture. Notice a trend? We’ll see how this off season ends, but it looks like it will go like it usually does - prioritizing future flexibility over solutions now, throw a bunch of young guys at a problem and hope. It has cost the team almost every year under Ballard. But at least the future cap looks good!

If they miss the playoffs again will you start to change your mind on Ballard’s ultra conservative approach? If they finish 3rd (or worse) in the division again? How many years or rebuilding become too many before you need a different approach? Or as long as he drafts a decent player or two, wins don’t matter? It’s easy to think that as long as he drafts well everything else will work out. But let’s remember the career of his greatest draft pick has already started, peaked, and pretty much ended. How many more years will DeFo remain a monster? How long does most RB careers last? How often is Nelson injured and how long does his back hold out? None of those are in Ballards control and it’s not his fault when they happen….but it will be his fault when this team never peaks with those guys because Ballard was always too worried about next year.

Honestly, I know it will be an unpopular opinion, especially for those who are very impatient now, but I think giving Ballard 2-3 years with a franchise QB in place is reasonable, and of course it also depends on what happens with Richardson. If he keeps getting injured, that's partially on Ballard for picking him over other options that were available, but if the team still has success, do you really want to get rid of the best drafting front office the organization has ever had? This team was 1 errant Gardner Minshew throw away from winning the division without AR. I could see this level of ire if they were coming off a 5-11 season, but the current situation is cause for optimism, not ire.

[ChoppedWood]

Originally Posted by Dam8610

Please demonstrate this "SUCKING as a GM" you refer to. His job is putting talent on the roster, and the roster was talented enough last year that it almost won the division with the backup QB starting 13 games, and it was the backup QB that cost them that chance in the end. He's also consistently pulled 2 or more starters out of every draft class, and quite frankly has been a better overall drafter than Bill Polian, who is a Hall of Famer and as a GM responsible for the most successful era of Colts football.

In Ballard's 7 seasons, the Colts have compiled a record of 54-60-1. They've made 2 playoff appearances, won 1 postseason game and captured 0 division titles.

Not sure by what standard the above is anything but suck, but okay, I am sure you have a hundred thousand qualifiers why the above can't be viewed as sucking.

Sorry, I do acknowledge that it was cloudy on some of those days and there were a couple where the weather was so bad a wind breaker was required. Definitely less than optimal conditions so I acknowledge that hardship he has had to work with. Poor guy.

Dude is a fucking tight wad who is constantly looking forward, looking to build for the following year. He pays the wrong damn positions big dollars.

[Dam8610]

Originally Posted by ChoppedWood

In Ballard's 7 seasons, the Colts have compiled a record of 54-60-1. They've made 2 playoff appearances, won 1 postseason game and captured 0 division titles.

Not sure by what standard the above is anything but suck, but okay, I am sure you have a hundred thousand qualifiers why the above can't be viewed as sucking.

Sorry, I do acknowledge that it was cloudy on some of those days and there were a couple where the weather was so bad a wind breaker was required. Definitely less than optimal conditions so I acknowledge that hardship he has had to work with. Poor guy.

Dude is a fucking tight wad who is constantly looking forward, looking to build for the following year. He pays the wrong damn positions big dollars.

Thank you for confirming that you're measuring with the wrong stick. The Colts have had a top 10-15 QB in exactly 2 of Ballard's 8 seasons. Both times, the team made the playoffs. Is the lack of overall team success frustrating? Sure, but the lack of success hasn't been for lack of talent on the roster. It's been because the QB position became an unexpected issue in year 3 of Ballard's tenure, and he's put together high quality rosters around that despite not having the answer at QB that came close to making the playoffs without a quality QB several times. If Richardson I'd the answer at QB, we're in for a run like the 2000s. That's worth giving Ballard the chance to get there.

[rm1369]

Originally Posted by Dam8610

Honestly, I know it will be an unpopular opinion, especially for those who are very impatient now, but I think giving Ballard 2-3 years with a franchise QB in place is reasonable, and of course it also depends on what happens with Richardson. If he keeps getting injured, that's partially on Ballard for picking him over other options that were available, but if the team still has success, do you really want to get rid of the best drafting front office the organization has ever had? This team was 1 errant Gardner Minshew throw away from winning the division without AR. I could see this level of ire if they were coming off a 5-11 season, but the current situation is cause for optimism, not ire.

The weird thing is, if the team fails because of AR I’m more likely to give Ballard more time. As stated, I don’t fully give Ballard credit for AR so I’m also not going to hold him fully responsible for AR either. He was a risky pick, but the right pick given the situation. So missing the playoffs next year isn’t an automatic “fire Ballard” for me at this point - assuming the issue is AR not developing or being injury prone and not the lack of support from the rest of the team. If they go into the season with a raw secondary lacking proven even replacement level talent at CB or safety, if they again throw a mess of rookies and unproven young guys at the problem then I’m done with Ballard. And honestly that’s regardless of outcome. Playoffs or no playoffs. And it may be the case if the pass rush falls off like I fear may happen. Reports were Ballard was after Hunter, offered more, and he chose Texans. I’ll give him some leeway while I also recognize his history says he ALWAYS only looks for bargains so I’m confident he didn’t put out an offer Hunter couldn’t resist. Maybe that’s “smart” but the lack of aggressiveness is part of the reason the team is where it’s at. It’s where that great salary cap position should be used - to stretch on a need. Any one player or situation can be written off, but with Ballard it’s a philosophy. One I believe has and will continue to hurt the team until he changes or he’s gone.

[Dam8610]

Originally Posted by rm1369

The weird thing is, if the team fails because of AR I’m more likely to give Ballard more time. As stated, I don’t fully give Ballard credit for AR so I’m also not going to hold him fully responsible for AR either. He was a risky pick, but the right pick given the situation. So missing the playoffs next year isn’t an automatic “fire Ballard” for me at this point - assuming the issue is AR not developing or being injury prone and not the lack of support from the rest of the team. If they go into the season with a raw secondary lacking proven even replacement level talent at CB or safety, if they again throw a mess of rookies and unproven young guys at the problem then I’m done with Ballard. And honestly that’s regardless of outcome. Playoffs or no playoffs. And it may be the case if the pass rush falls off like I fear may happen. Reports were Ballard was after Hunter, offered more, and he chose Texans. I’ll give him some leeway while I also recognize his history says he ALWAYS only looks for bargains so I’m confident he didn’t put out an offer Hunter couldn’t resist. Maybe that’s “smart” but the lack of aggressiveness is part of the reason the team is where it’s at. It’s where that great salary cap position should be used - to stretch on a need. Any one player or situation can be written off, but with Ballard it’s a philosophy. One I believe has and will continue to hurt the team until he changes or he’s gone.

To be a successful organization long term, you have to trust the players you draft to develop and become good players. Everyone is upset the Colts didn't get L'Jarius Sneed right now, the Chiefs drafted him with a 4th round pick, then developed him into a good player. Would it have been nice to get Sneed or Hunter? Yes, but if Brents, Jones, or Flowers doesn't develop into a good starter, it won't matter how much pass rush the Colts get or who the starter on the opposite side of them is. And if the Colts got Hunter, that would've been a 2 year stopgap solution, they still would've needed to find an alpha pass rusher in this draft or the next one. I'd suggest Mo Kamara if they're not willing to invest in Verse or Latu on Day 1. But either way, they will not get where they want to go with a Free Agency spending spree. That was Grigson's style, and it didn't work.

[ChoppedWood]

Originally Posted by Dam8610

Thank you for confirming that you're measuring with the wrong stick. The Colts have had a top 10-15 QB in exactly 2 of Ballard's 8 seasons. Both times, the team made the playoffs. Is the lack of overall team success frustrating? Sure, but the lack of success hasn't been for lack of talent on the roster. It's been because the QB position became an unexpected issue in year 3 of Ballard's tenure, and he's put together high quality rosters around that despite not having the answer at QB that came close to making the playoffs without a quality QB several times. If Richardson I'd the answer at QB, we're in for a run like the 2000s. That's worth giving Ballard the chance to get there.

Measuring by the wrong stick, that's a great one. Last I checked, every single team in the history of sports has been measured by wins and losses, by playoff appearances, and by championships played in and won.

You go ahead and use whatever fucking obtuse other measures for success you wish. I'm gonna go with the tried and true standard used for now hundreds of years.

[rm1369]

Originally Posted by Dam8610

To be a successful organization long term, you have to trust the players you draft to develop and become good players. Everyone is upset the Colts didn't get L'Jarius Sneed right now, the Chiefs drafted him with a 4th round pick, then developed him into a good player. Would it have been nice to get Sneed or Hunter? Yes, but if Brents, Jones, or Flowers doesn't develop into a good starter, it won't matter how much pass rush the Colts get or who the starter on the opposite side of them is. And if the Colts got Hunter, that would've been a 2 year stopgap solution, they still would've needed to find an alpha pass rusher in this draft or the next one. I'd suggest Mo Kamara if they're not willing to invest in Verse or Latu on Day 1. But either way, they will not get where they want to go with a Free Agency spending spree. That was Grigson's style, and it didn't work.

I’m not following your logic at all. Yes Hunter would be a two yr stop gap. So what? Two years is an eternity in the NFL. And it buys time to actually develop players. That’s the whole point. No one is denying that the primary source of talent for a team should be the draft. The question is what happens with your weaknesses in the meantime? You can either try to find viable stop gap solutions or gift positions to rookies and accept below average play while they learn. Ballard almost always chooses the latter. Yes it’s cheaper financially but it’s more costly in wins and losses. Rivers probably beats the Bills if Ballard doesn’t kick the can down the road at WR. And if he didn’t think that team could win then fine, but why the hell are you signing a 40 yr old QB for? Certainly not the future. It’s because Ballard doesn’t have a big picture view besides maintaining flexibility for the future. Next year is always more important than this year. It’s a strategy for mediocrity and so far it’s worked to perfection. Only Irsay’s intervention temporarily changed the course.

We’ll have to disagree on Grigson. I fucking hate the guy, but his use of free agency was the one thing he got right. He filled holes. Not that he was always right in his signings, but that’s not what sunk the team. The problem was he never was able to do the second part - draft the talent to eventually fill the positions long term. Ballard mostly can. We just have to wait 1-3 seasons with a gaping hole until the draft aligns with our needs enough to address them. And accept the losses along the way.

[Dam8610]

Originally Posted by ChoppedWood

Measuring by the wrong stick, that's a great one. Last I checked, every single team in the history of sports has been measured by wins and losses, by playoff appearances, and by championships played in and won.

You go ahead and use whatever fucking obtuse other measures for success you wish. I'm gonna go with the tried and true standard used for now hundreds of years.

By that standard, you'd have to say Grigson is a better GM than Ballard, which anyone with half a brain can see is wrong.

Originally Posted by rm1369

I’m not following your logic at all. Yes Hunter would be a two yr stop gap. So what? Two years is an eternity in the NFL. And it buys time to actually develop players. That’s the whole point. No one is denying that the primary source of talent for a team should be the draft. The question is what happens with your weaknesses in the meantime? You can either try to find viable stop gap solutions or gift positions to rookies and accept below average play while they learn. Ballard almost always chooses the latter. Yes it’s cheaper financially but it’s more costly in wins and losses. Rivers probably beats the Bills if Ballard doesn’t kick the can down the road at WR. And if he didn’t think that team could win then fine, but why the hell are you signing a 40 yr old QB for? Certainly not the future. It’s because Ballard doesn’t have a big picture view besides maintaining flexibility for the future. Next year is always more important than this year. It’s a strategy for mediocrity and so far it’s worked to perfection. Only Irsay’s intervention temporarily changed the course.

We’ll have to disagree on Grigson. I fucking hate the guy, but his use of free agency was the one thing he got right. He filled holes. Not that he was always right in his signings, but that’s not what sunk the team. The problem was he never was able to do the second part - draft the talent to eventually fill the positions long term. Ballard mostly can. We just have to wait 1-3 seasons with a gaping hole until the draft aligns with our needs enough to address them. And accept the losses along the way.

The problem with Grigson was that he couldn't draft at all, and he didn't do well in free agency, and that was a big part of what sunk his teams. Ballard can draft, better than most GMs in NFL history. As for last year, Ballard thought that last year would be a development year, so he drafted a secondary to develop. Some improvement in the secondary will come from second year breakouts, plus the Colts kept Kenny Moore. Will that solve everything in the secondary? No, but I'll feel a lot better about the secondary concerns if Blackmon is resigned, or maybe a Justin Simmons signing. That said, successful organizations become that way by drafting and developing players. It won't matter who they sign if they can't draft and develop the replacements.

[rm1369]

Originally Posted by Dam8610

Ballard can draft, better than most GMs in NFL history……..

That said, successful organizations become that way by drafting and developing players. It won't matter who they sign if they can't draft and develop the replacements.

I mostly agree with the second statement. However you are saying he can draft replacements and I largely agree. So why isn’t that the team’s philosophy? Why over his 8 years has he almost exclusively relied upon his drafting ability? He should be bringing in vets for the rookies to learn from, compete with, and to bring an acceptable level of play until the young guys develop. That is not the philosophy or strategy - unless he gets a huge bargain, then maybe. They used to claim it was because of the “culture” they wanted to develop and that has shown to be a failure The team has not developed some great winning culture. It’s been much closer to dysfunctional than good.

Originally Posted by Dam8610

As for last year, Ballard thought that last year would be a development year, so he drafted a secondary to develop.

Sure I could buy that for last year. Makes sense. Now explain lack of WR to me with Rivers. Explain the OL choices with Ryan. Explain having no DE on the roster with double digit sacks for their entire career with Wentz. Last year was not some situationally specific decision by Ballard, it was a continuation of the philosophy we’ve seen pretty much every year. That’s a big part of my issue with him. I’d love to see some larger, year specific decisions that make sense. We don’t see them. For lack of a better saying he “does what he does”. Every year. Whether the QB is Luck, Rivers, Wentz, or Ryan his words and actions have been the same. So far, no difference with AR. Pretty much every year. You can look at them in isolation and try to explain them away but the trend is obvious. And largely matches his words and stated philosophy.

[Hoopsdoc]

Originally Posted by YDFL Commish

Holy fuck no....he's not a better drafter than Polian. This is not even a di csussion.

Polian drafted Rob Morris, Anthony Gonzalez, and Donald Brown in the first round.

He was good but he certainly wasn’t perfect, as no GM is.

I’d argue that Ballard has been at least as good as Polian.

The fact that Polians very first draft pick was Peyton Manning papered over a lot of his later draft blunders.