I come to praise Chris Ballard, not to bury him.

[Oldcolt]

Dam, it doesn't matter how you get players but that isn't what I was pointing out. Buckner required almost zero evaluation. He was an established player who was flirting with all pro. That isn't who Ballard gets paid to evaluate. My point was he has evaluated and drafted very few perennial top 100 type impact defensive players over the past 9 years. All pros are hard to find and to draft. Somehow you think that gives Ballard a pass. I just don't get that. It is damn hard to find that GM that can do that but it doesn't mean we should be satisfied with ok. I sure hope new ownership isn't.

Oh and I don't give a shit who you think or don't think should have been all pro.

[Dam8610]

Originally Posted by Oldcolt

Dam, it doesn't matter how you get players but that isn't what I was pointing out. Buckner required almost zero evaluation. He was an established player who was flirting with all pro. That isn't who Ballard gets paid to evaluate. My point was he has evaluated and drafted very few perennial top 100 type impact defensive players over the past 9 years. All pros are hard to find and to draft. Somehow you think that gives Ballard a pass. I just don't get that. It is damn hard to find that GM that can do that but it doesn't mean we should be satisfied with ok. I sure hope new ownership isn't.

Oh and I don't give a shit who you think or don't think should have been all pro.

Ballard absolutely gets paid to evaluate NFL players as well as college players. His job is to assemble the most talented roster possible. By definition, that will include some acquisitions that are not draft picks. Trading for Buckner was a big risk as well. He gave up the 13th pick, and that was a home run in terms of value. Of course in hindsight it seems obvious that it was the right move, but Buckner could've come in and been terrible, and everyone would've said he never should've traded away such a valuable asset for Buckner. That's what everyone said about the Trent Richardson trade, and rightfully so, because Trent Richardson was awful. Once again, this highlights the difference good talent evaluation makes.

I understand that sometimes change is a necessary catalyst, but change for its own sake is how you become the Cleveland Browns or the New York Jets.

[Oldcolt]

Originally Posted by Dam8610

Ballard absolutely gets paid to evaluate NFL players as well as college players. His job is to assemble the most talented roster possible. By definition, that will include some acquisitions that are not draft picks. Trading for Buckner was a big risk as well. He gave up the 13th pick, and that was a home run in terms of value. Of course in hindsight it seems obvious that it was the right move, but Buckner could've come in and been terrible, and everyone would've said he never should've traded away such a valuable asset for Buckner. That's what everyone said about the Trent Richardson trade, and rightfully so, because Trent Richardson was awful. Once again, this highlights the difference good talent evaluation makes.

I understand that sometimes change is a necessary catalyst, but change for its own sake is how you become the Cleveland Browns or the New York Jets.

We have totally different memories of the Buckner trade. I remember everyone on this board as well as every single article praising this deal and pointing out that it was only possible because there were two stud tackles in SF and they couldn't pay both. There was only real the risk of injury. I do understand how valuable Ballard and apparently you feel that thirteenth pick was, especially after the stud Malik Hooker we got at 15. My point being that draft choice was a much bigger gamble than Buckner was (it turned out to be that other stud Tristan Wirfs was taken at 13). My larger point is that the primary and by far most important evaluation made is trying to project how college players will play in the NFL. That is still the basis for building teams. Of course you evaluate NFL players but that isn't where you make your money as a GM.

[apballin]

Originally Posted by Oldcolt

We have totally different memories of the Buckner trade. I remember everyone on this board as well as every single article praising this deal and pointing out that it was only possible because there were two stud tackles in SF and they couldn't pay both. There was only real the risk of injury. I do understand how valuable Ballard and apparently you feel that thirteenth pick was, especially after the stud Malik Hooker we got at 15. My point being that draft choice was a much bigger gamble than Buckner was (it turned out to be that other stud Tristan Wirfs was taken at 13). My larger point is that the primary and by far most important evaluation made is trying to project how college players will play in the NFL. That is still the basis for building teams. Of course you evaluate NFL players but that isn't where you make your money as a GM.

Anyone can evaluate these guys from birth til draft what nobody can account for or predict is what these guys will do once they get lottery ticket money.

[Dam8610]

Originally Posted by Oldcolt

We have totally different memories of the Buckner trade. I remember everyone on this board as well as every single article praising this deal and pointing out that it was only possible because there were two stud tackles in SF and they couldn't pay both. There was only real the risk of injury. I do understand how valuable Ballard and apparently you feel that thirteenth pick was, especially after the stud Malik Hooker we got at 15. My point being that draft choice was a much bigger gamble than Buckner was (it turned out to be that other stud Tristan Wirfs was taken at 13). My larger point is that the primary and by far most important evaluation made is trying to project how college players will play in the NFL. That is still the basis for building teams. Of course you evaluate NFL players but that isn't where you make your money as a GM.

The best GMs use all avenues of talent acquisition consistently to build the best possible roster. I know everyone here thought Ballard was "afraid" of free agency prior to this past offseason, but Ballard had up to that point used free agency to get the only good year of Eric Ebron's career, starting caliber pass rushers in Denico Autry and Justin Houston, a #1 corner in Stephone Gilmore, and if you count the waiver wire, used it to pick up players like Kenny Moore, Samuel Womack, Pierre Desir, Al-Quadin Muhammad, Zach Pascal, Mark Glowinski, etc., including Chad Muma this year. In order to not end up like Grigson blowing tons of free agent dollars on very little production, or to be able to make waiver wire acquisitions that can be valuable starters, a GM has to be able to effectively evaluate NFL talent. Ballard has higher than average success rates in every avenue of talent acquisition. If you're going to get rid of that, you should be certain that you're going to get someone who can do the job better.

In regard to the Buckner trade, I wasn't saying Buckner was considered a risky acquisition at the time, but similarly Trent Richardson wasn't considered a risky acquisition when he was acquired. Clearly those two trades went very differently.

[YDFL Commish]

Okay, I want to ask this question...What result from this season will get the Ballard haters off his ass?

Will 10-7, and 1 win in the playoffs do it?

Will a division title do it?

Will winning the opener, beating the Jags in Jacksonville, but missing the playoffs at 9-8 do it?

What are you're measurements of success, that will convince you that Ballard is the man for the job?

[Thorgrim]

I don’t think expecting a playoff win is unreasonable. This is taking into account injuries, bad calls, and some bad bounces that all teams must contend with. I also expect them to show up prepared to play and be competitive in every game. Even a playoff win followed by a shit-show would be unacceptable.

[Colts And Orioles]

Originally Posted by YDFL Commish

OK, I want to ask this question ...... what result from this season will get the Ballard haters off of his ass?

Will 10-7, and 1 win in the playoffs do it?

Will a division title do it?

Will winning the opener, beating the Jaguars in Jacksonville, but missing the playoffs at 9-8 do it?

What are you're measurements of success that will convince you that Ballard is the man for the job?

o


My guess would be that their criteria would be 14-3, an AFC Championship, and the Colts' first trip to the Super Bowl since 2009 ...... but then he'll be back hot-seat the following year if the Colts don't win it all in the 2026 season.

o

[Oldcolt]

Development of young players into impact players (like Latu), continued development of AR and our young players. A team that is coached well enough not to shoot themselves in foot. I don’t even ‘need’ playoffs. I just want to see enough progression that I have something to root for that has what looks like a positive future.

[IndyNorm]

Originally Posted by YDFL Commish

Okay, I want to ask this question...What result from this season will get the Ballard haters off his ass?

Will 10-7, and 1 win in the playoffs do it?

Will a division title do it?

Will winning the opener, beating the Jags in Jacksonville, but missing the playoffs at 9-8 do it?

What are you're measurements of success, that will convince you that Ballard is the man for the job?

For me it's not so much just this year, but IMO it's going to take a few years of sustained success to convince me that Ballard is the man for the job.

I do think a decent year this year at 10+ wins or at the very least the team shows clear signs of improvement should get him a stay of execution.

Something I'd really like to see this team do is not play down to the level of competition and certainly not shit the bed against really bad teams (@Jagoffs and NYG last year).